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-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <stephencalebmorse@gmail.com>) id 1YfvzG-0008Jl-71
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:50:10 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.212.174 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.212.174;
envelope-from=stephencalebmorse@gmail.com;
helo=mail-wi0-f174.google.com;
Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com ([209.85.212.174])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YfvzE-0001qP-PX
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 08 Apr 2015 19:50:10 +0000
Received: by widdi4 with SMTP id di4so67734999wid.0
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Wed, 08 Apr 2015 12:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.19.197 with SMTP id h5mr52399457wje.109.1428522602816;
Wed, 08 Apr 2015 12:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.151.197 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Apr 2015 12:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 15:50:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CABHVRKTNFoLm9LEO=ctT_UP9zW7QOMQzVXitKC=PAzj=HG9OHg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Stephen Morse <stephencalebmorse@gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d4e064b6a5705133bd678
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
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
(stephencalebmorse[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-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: 1YfvzE-0001qP-PX
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Build your own nHashType
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, 08 Apr 2015 19:50:10 -0000
--047d7b5d4e064b6a5705133bd678
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Seeking feedback on a proposal that will allow a transaction signer to
explicitly specify what is to be serialized for the signature hash. The
basic idea is to make the nHashType general enough that we won't need a new
sighash flag every time a new use case comes up.
If implemented into bitcoin (via a soft fork), this would make malleability
almost a non-issue (the TXID referenced by inputs just need to be updated
previous TX changes) and would enable hardware wallets to securely sign
without needing to download/process each transaction it spends from.
Please let me know your thoughts.
https://github.com/scmorse/bitcoin-misc/blob/master/sighash_proposal.md
--047d7b5d4e064b6a5705133bd678
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Seeking feedback on a proposal that will allow a transacti=
on signer to explicitly specify what is to be serialized for the signature =
hash. The basic idea is to make the nHashType general enough that we won=
9;t need a new sighash flag every time a new use case comes up.=C2=A0<div><=
br></div><div>If implemented into bitcoin (via a soft fork), this would mak=
e malleability almost a non-issue (the TXID referenced by inputs just need =
to be updated previous TX changes) and would enable hardware wallets to sec=
urely sign without needing to download/process each transaction it spends f=
rom.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>Please let me know your thoughts.<div><=
br></div><div><a href=3D"https://github.com/scmorse/bitcoin-misc/blob/maste=
r/sighash_proposal.md">https://github.com/scmorse/bitcoin-misc/blob/master/=
sighash_proposal.md</a><br></div></div></div>
--047d7b5d4e064b6a5705133bd678--
|
