Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RIeTI-0000uH-T7 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:43:04 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.175; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-wy0-f175.google.com; Received: from mail-wy0-f175.google.com ([74.125.82.175]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1RIeTD-0006NC-6q for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:43:04 +0000 Received: by wyg19 with SMTP id 19so445981wyg.34 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 03:42:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.163.202 with SMTP id a52mr10229180wel.91.1319539373077; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 03:42:53 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.216.10.148 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 03:42:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <44190.134.106.52.172.1319535941.squirrel@webmail.uni-osnabrueck.de> References: <44190.134.106.52.172.1319535941.squirrel@webmail.uni-osnabrueck.de> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 12:42:53 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: XSob3ICsXIbnn1fsJMYkrzUF13s Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Jan Vornberger Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) 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 (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 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 0.5 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-Headers-End: 1RIeTD-0006NC-6q Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Determine input addresses of a transaction X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:43:05 -0000 > Interesting suggestion! So if I understand correctly, would be > the signature generated from signing the transaction with the key of a > green address? Sure. Or just "a key". It wouldn't have to be an actual key used in the block chain. > Sounds good - I guess I never thought in this direction, as I always > assumed doing anything 'non-standard' with the scripting language would > create a number of knock-on problems. It won't break the IsStandard checks, if that's what you mean. You can put any data you like into a scriptSig. In practice only data is useful, there's no purpose in having an actual script there (or at least, I wasn't able to find one yet). > 1) Get something working reasonable fast to detect current green address > style transactions. It's fine if it is a little bit of a hack, as long as > it's safe, since I don't expect it to be merged with mainline anyway at > this point. You could easily change the bitcoin code to detect such transactions - just look for scriptSigs that have 3 items instead of two, where the 3rd item is the right size to be a signature. > Criticism ranging from 'unnecessary, as > 0-confirmation transactions are fairly safe today' to 'encourages too much > centralization and therefore evil' Heh, if that's a reference to my feedback, I definitely wouldn't describe such a feature as "evil", that's rather strong :-)