Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A83C5E48 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2015 06:54:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from outmail148099.authsmtp.net (outmail148099.authsmtp.net [62.13.148.99]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07361A4 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2015 06:54:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-c237.authsmtp.com (mail-c237.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.237]) by punt18.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t816sk2o021365; Tue, 1 Sep 2015 07:54:46 +0100 (BST) Received: from muck (030-098.web.ny.np1.net [64.61.30.98] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=128) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t816sgVg033471 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 1 Sep 2015 07:54:44 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 02:54:42 -0400 From: Peter Todd To: Bryan Bishop Message-ID: <20150901065441.GH30364@muck> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="aF3LVLvitz/VQU3c" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Server-Quench: 541601b5-5076-11e5-9f76-002590a135d3 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aAdMdgMUC1AEAgsB AmMbW1NeVVl7XWY7 bQ5PawRDYUpQVg11 VUBOXVMcUA1pB19W YEkeURp2cAQIfHx1 ZwhnWnFdXEUocFt4 QklSCGwHMGJ9YTYY Vl1YdwFReQMbfxxA PlMxNiYHcQ5VPz4z GA41ejw8IwAXEyRS WB1FN18MQEsUVjky DwgYECsuGlAeQzR2 NwYhMlkHEUpZP1U1 LVoqEWk5HD87MS08 V11cGCJCTwAA X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1024:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 64.61.30.98/587 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Short review of previously-proposed exotic SIGHASH types X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2015 06:54:49 -0000 --aF3LVLvitz/VQU3c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 01:56:34PM -0500, Bryan Bishop via bitcoin-dev wrot= e: > Here is a short review of previously-proposed and exotic SIGHASH types. >=20 > SIGHASH_MULTIPLE > Similarly, petertodd has asked for a SIGHASH_DONT_SIGN_TXID before to > make OP_CODESEPARATOR more useful. There's also my "meta sighash" idea of using code to build up the signature with OP_CODESEPARATOR: http://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg07= 384.html --=20 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 000000000000000010b552c5f5c18705ccb1b21c550c08872089f89076840d6d --aF3LVLvitz/VQU3c Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGrBAEBCACVBQJV5UuvXhSAAAAAABUAQGJsb2NraGFzaEBiaXRjb2luLm9yZzAw MDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAxMGI1NTJjNWY1YzE4NzA1Y2NiMWIyMWM1NTBjMDg4NzIw ODlmODkwNzY4NDBkNmQvFIAAAAAAFQARcGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3JncGV0 ZUBwZXRlcnRvZC5vcmcACgkQwIXyHOf0udwwJwf9Eg3S6bbEYYYJkp/REvVvjH6r x/SzX/Hw9bGer4Cco9pZIMJ4AZm3NC0L59pfM0DdLBe2N02jja1OMHlWTKq3F5MG sozbPwLOGlipQD3X2E7PeQkhCVQzYVmhmK0WftnAcXxu5Lhx9DC6ed8W+ANCU97s GudsietADfY287oyNljqmH82r+B7/Jmlwk/nUFXOSJ85qm8tIP4VdmoaBjGe6x12 +NMZnoonD4gRJNL6glacb97P+dvzlQVSz6y8Yyi6RYub9OJIAzDJ3R/9CUIMXaYW FTCuYeVDpYCqZGjEpCUtotd88e3HHvzn4zBHpayVw5ohx+BgWTi5DSpjTiiC5w== =TSkY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --aF3LVLvitz/VQU3c--