summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/52/1d943ec05d79311ca04ade661a3cdbb6db7627
blob: 4099e0c3aa488f3d6db7b55a9c66a88e6b84ee70 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>) id 1WDdVJ-00040E-Qx
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Wed, 12 Feb 2014 17:21:45 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.223.177 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.223.177; envelope-from=pieter.wuille@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ie0-f177.google.com; 
Received: from mail-ie0-f177.google.com ([209.85.223.177])
	by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1WDdVJ-0002Jw-2o
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Wed, 12 Feb 2014 17:21:45 +0000
Received: by mail-ie0-f177.google.com with SMTP id rp18so977678iec.22
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Wed, 12 Feb 2014 09:21:39 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.42.97.193 with SMTP id p1mr26401977icn.32.1392225699802;
	Wed, 12 Feb 2014 09:21:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.50.100.10 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 09:21:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAJHLa0P0M+DZ-NUzfwp7up==RXYOD8ZpRKEXckfTY5cMTUaSZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBgPG+2AMbEHSRQNFn6FikbRzxkWduj5MSZLz-O6Wh940w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140210030048.GB31925@savin>
	<CAH2=CKzNGN7mpe1NLtsLRNSszSD2ZNwjoAsaH40EvGtA5ezDeQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJHLa0P0M+DZ-NUzfwp7up==RXYOD8ZpRKEXckfTY5cMTUaSZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 18:21:39 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBhvYu3Z8DGiNLAYQi_y9QJAEZdajXWeTWrHZgBX_QricA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
	sender-domain
	0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(pieter.wuille[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
	author's domain
	0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
	not necessarily valid
	-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1WDdVJ-0002Jw-2o
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [RFC] [BIP proposal] Dealing with
	malleability
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 17:21:46 -0000

It's also not necessary for wallet software - it's really just for
human consumption.

A wallet can easily detect inputs being respent in another
transaction. You don't need a static hash for that (which wouldn't
need with all hash types, non-malleability double spends, ...).

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Rune Kj=E6r Svendsen
> <runesvend@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Instead of trying to remove the possibility of transaction
>> malleability, would it make sense to define a new, "canonical
>> transaction hash/ID" (cTxID),
>
> Yes, that is one proposal:  https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commits/normt=
xid
>
> But it is not a complete solution for all transaction types.
>
> --
> Jeff Garzik
> Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
> BitPay, Inc.      https://bitpay.com/
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
> Android apps run on BlackBerry 10
> Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps.
> Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more.
> Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience.  Start now.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=3D124407151&iu=3D/4140/ostg=
.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development