summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/a2/9d088794c9c708fb77d6f1f88c51e448e18fd9
blob: cbf688bffe5fbc1ddc01d2d90710dd01389ff3ff (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
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <etotheipi@gmail.com>) id 1YEhBK-0004Bk-1Z
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:34:02 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.216.177 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.216.177; envelope-from=etotheipi@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-qc0-f177.google.com; 
Received: from mail-qc0-f177.google.com ([209.85.216.177])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1YEhBJ-0002GE-6e
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:34:01 +0000
Received: by mail-qc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id p6so7081362qcv.8
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Fri, 23 Jan 2015 08:33:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.140.19.78 with SMTP id 72mr1257867qgg.48.1422030835301;
	Fri, 23 Jan 2015 08:33:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.28] (c-69-143-204-74.hsd1.md.comcast.net.
	[69.143.204.74])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 11sm1858330qgt.41.2015.01.23.08.33.54
	(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
	Fri, 23 Jan 2015 08:33:54 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <54C277F2.7010905@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 11:33:54 -0500
From: Alan Reiner <etotheipi@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64;
	rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
References: <CAJna-HjwMRff_+7BvcR2YME9f2yUQPvfKOGZ1qq9d0nOGqORkg@mail.gmail.com>	<54C267A1.8090208@gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgQSAj=YHhtvy=MY9GvbEZNxtLUwzfrdPnSQBUKZYdj4oA@mail.gmail.com>
	<54C2766F.6030200@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <54C2766F.6030200@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-)
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
	(etotheipi[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	-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
	0.3 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
X-Headers-End: 1YEhBJ-0002GE-6e
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] SIGHASH_WITHINPUTVALUE
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: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:34:02 -0000


On 01/23/2015 11:27 AM, Alan Reiner wrote:
>
> I am happy to entertain other ideas that achieve our goals here, but I'm
> fairly confident that the new SIGHASH type is the only way that would
> allow devices like Trezor to truly simplify their design (and still work
> securely on 100% of funds contained by the wallet).
>
 
Self-correction ... I didn't mean it's the "only way", I mean it's by
far the easiest, simplest, least-intrusive way that achieves the
properties we need for this to be useful.