summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/c2/f8ee1fa5d1b938a4c5141cdcd63d1ce06438b5
blob: c74c76c9f6b6ec98c73abec3ab3d11bbd33822a3 (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
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <gavinandresen@gmail.com>) id 1RIgwo-00025v-1p
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 25 Oct 2011 13:21:42 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.161.47 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.161.47; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-fx0-f47.google.com; 
Received: from mail-fx0-f47.google.com ([209.85.161.47])
	by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1RIgwi-0003dW-Ji
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 25 Oct 2011 13:21:41 +0000
Received: by faas16 with SMTP id s16so669424faa.34
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Tue, 25 Oct 2011 06:21:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.1.137 with SMTP id 9mr1943171faf.19.1319548890339; Tue, 25
	Oct 2011 06:21:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.152.24.229 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 06:21:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP1ic4RXFzoqf66MGv=rJe3MgWxVi5nnk2VKkMc4VMCDyw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANEZrP1ic4RXFzoqf66MGv=rJe3MgWxVi5nnk2VKkMc4VMCDyw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 09:21:30 -0400
Message-ID: <CABsx9T3WKv3RLWT+Q6s7cCLzDL3sVRCWfmPiKcSp=_Re05m+zQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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
	(gavinandresen[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	0.0 T_FRT_ADULT2           BODY: ReplaceTags: Adult
	-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
	-0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1RIgwi-0003dW-Ji
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Detecting OP_EVAL scriptPubKeys that are
	to you
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: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 13:21:42 -0000

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
> scriptPubKeys that use OP_EVAL contain a hash of a script. If I
> understand correctly, that means to detect a transaction in a block
> that is relevant to your wallet, that means you need to pre-calculate
> every possible hash that might appear.

You could do it that way...  but that would be inefficient.

You give the hash to whoever is paying you, and store the hash -->
script  mapping when you do that (assuming you're not using a
deterministic wallet; if you are, you probably just increment a
counter in the wallet).

The only use case I can think of where you'd want to check for every
possible hash is if you lose your wallet, you have a wallet backup
that has your private keys in it, but DOES NOT have the hash -->
script mapping(s).

For use cases involving other people, that's probably not a problem--
you could ask them to tell you what public keys are involved, and then
add them back in to the wallet (the RPC interface I settled on for
m-of-n txns is an "addmultisigaddress" that takes the "m" and an array
of "n" public keys, creates the script, adds the hash-->script mapping
to the wallet, and returns the hash).

For use cases where all the keys belong to you... either a good,
automatic, in-the-cloud-backup or the equivalent of "-rescan" is
needed to recover in case the mappings are lost.

-- 
--
Gavin Andresen