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
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
|
Return-Path: <roconnor@blockstream.io>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CC4AFC8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 16 Jan 2018 08:39:51 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-io0-f170.google.com (mail-io0-f170.google.com
[209.85.223.170])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FBF314E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 16 Jan 2018 08:39:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-io0-f170.google.com with SMTP id f34so10689769ioi.13
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:39:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=blockstream.io; s=google;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=qlm921x/Gw2VzeuJlM6ww5VRcmahnkFv5kQePCkMYUk=;
b=Dvqf+pMxB6tQxsVOqcZ9MebZ4sXw27yx9iZi4WJEv90TBQGSBLGbsVZ5betkqvTcY7
K/Pv/5y100KbjaX9AV703Nuc6YveLO3PmUyTOb92znbcJlyBYTaQiznVzoZh+zslBMMZ
MfKgS5kRbL7vADXzmsEI6I4yTFn+KxyKORlOM=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=qlm921x/Gw2VzeuJlM6ww5VRcmahnkFv5kQePCkMYUk=;
b=dg6sD01j8aCdsVOD4e7CLcQnaXAiEkehivH6NtgPriF0UZb3CGKQFs/0lX5A/3iRtT
AwmUgoQbbuQpCZ7VcAdjP6UF1rQcI6slr3xy1WMGFJTZ+v0JeJekEdwE3qeXtSmWdzVB
ePBeP03jmBH68f5naPIAatH7v8i7x0vr8rkoJixZkDOCkHp+ZrvvHPU7Sn3/9U3a93ra
5rHKCSe5mll78wUMHMis5KoZ7Gy2VQ/79cY1lp8FmMwoZkfou6uP2XoEfTe3uKiZ3Dcj
jC3gM2pWpkOtuU7/3R7hXB/zzsDmJ7kRNF8cFDk9e/pZKqzpNgF8Ko2Em0ELVFB2kMRp
Zabg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxyteaG9xLV1qhVNxEWBBu6kmGBZh7OLL0DSt3jHKSXgBURZgDeXC2
/FmNs+7npRvIRPYWofnrSfZViP9igBsYKXdLIv7MSQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBos4rDVgkXx8GFBTDCtWFmB4mkQEJqDH89gT96zLtPR+5PKT/Na606z8ekchg6HJJ4672zpqfafj/BlD+bvlOE0=
X-Received: by 10.107.82.15 with SMTP id g15mr5553703iob.157.1516091989335;
Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:39:49 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.2.165.7 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:39:28 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <201801160415.55197.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <87608btgyd.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
<CAMZUoKn4noCEQR6eqf9hiZSMdk-3b8UHR1NrEFrKNoLSMzVjGQ@mail.gmail.com>
<87zi5ehat5.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <201801160415.55197.luke@dashjr.org>
From: "Russell O'Connor" <roconnor@blockstream.io>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 03:39:28 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMZUoKkb1zcw7N=_Gn3_0miuNVP_LKSYkbeA-U2Yt8+b2G+b7w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e08265de878b94b0562e0acf1"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Russell O'Connor <roconnor@blockstream.com>,
Kalle Alm <kalle.alm@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 117 Feedback
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 08:39:51 -0000
--089e08265de878b94b0562e0acf1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:15 PM, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 January 2018 1:06:14 AM Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > The rule AFAICT is "standard transactions must still work". This was
> > violated with low-S, but the transformation was arguably trivial.
> >
> > OTOH, use of altstack is completely standard, though in practice it's
> > unused and so only a theoretical concern.
>
> I'm not aware of a single standard/BIP that uses the altstack at all.
>
By "standard transaction" here, Rusty means that (P2SH or Segwit) scripts
that use the alt-stack pass the standardness checks and will be relayed by
recent Bitcoin Core software.
----
Regarding lowS: I think the more severe standardness change was the added
requirement that (some of the) pubkeys in a multisig must be parsable. I
have talked with people who cannot retrieve their funds now, when before
they could. However, like lowS, this was only a change to the standardness
rules and not a consensus change, so these funds are not necessarily
permanently lost. They can be retrieved with miner help.
I don't see how BIP 117, which is a change in consensus rules that could
cause permanent loss of otherwise well-secured funds (in addition to the
other issues raised about BIP 117), is even comparable to the previous
changes in only the standardness rules.
--089e08265de878b94b0562e0acf1
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:15 PM, Luke Dashjr <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a =
href=3D"mailto:luke@dashjr.org" target=3D"_blank">luke@dashjr.org</a>></=
span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8e=
x;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">On Tuesday =
16 January 2018 1:06:14 AM Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br></span><=
span class=3D"">> The rule AFAICT is "standard transactions must st=
ill work".=C2=A0 This was<br>
> violated with low-S, but the transformation was arguably trivial.<br>
><br>
> OTOH, use of altstack is completely standard, though in practice it=
9;s<br>
> unused and so only a theoretical concern.<br>
<br>
</span>I'm not aware of a single standard/BIP that uses the altstack at=
all.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>By "standard transaction&quo=
t; here, Rusty means that (P2SH or Segwit) scripts that use the alt-stack p=
ass the standardness checks and will be relayed by recent Bitcoin Core soft=
ware.</div><div><br></div><div>----</div><div><br></div><div>Regarding lowS=
:=C2=A0 I think the more severe standardness change was the added requireme=
nt that (some of the) pubkeys in a multisig must be parsable.=C2=A0 I have =
talked with people who cannot retrieve their funds now, when before they co=
uld.=C2=A0 However, like lowS, this was only a change to the standardness r=
ules and not a consensus change, so these funds are not necessarily permane=
ntly lost.=C2=A0 They can be retrieved with miner help.<br></div><div><br><=
/div><div>I don't see how BIP 117, which is a change in consensus rules=
that could cause permanent loss of otherwise well-secured funds (in additi=
on to the other issues raised about BIP 117), is even comparable to the pre=
vious changes in only the standardness rules.<br></div></div></div></div>
--089e08265de878b94b0562e0acf1--
|
