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
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 220FAEED
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 8 Aug 2019 00:27:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-40133.protonmail.ch (mail-40133.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.133])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF78F829
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 8 Aug 2019 00:27:36 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2019 00:27:32 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=default; t=1565224054;
bh=oEuhL+yx/8X0MszC7gqkv2Ka/1ljVqOLVTjrcv4kYHs=;
h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Feedback-ID:
From;
b=ePSQbMDckmEzUDzWdM2odxEJeXIzZYdJH8AAzU3totLLBoGvS5/jE9aCSny1zMwBN
2bWhXPltp16gPFVG/KEtdw+cbZ2RQmL75lhG7Jq8vhcLlS/TaPXMdeIuxvWS8q/9Vi
qcxuDOG7dMQlKdbeHhDRvg5ufNjI9ORa3GNNv/lE=
To: Bryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <japBRkZAIadJ9g0xOFbixrzJv4hk67ONKrjO6QuWARaeMtdIhNb7rDT_8NroxDCIVKFTjcAqukSt4sApPsJ0U9ori3bkCKmEW_jJMcXWMqc=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABaSBawe_oF_zoso2RQBX+7OWDoCwC7T2MeKSX9fYRUQaY_xmg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABaSBawe_oF_zoso2RQBX+7OWDoCwC7T2MeKSX9fYRUQaY_xmg@mail.gmail.com>
Feedback-ID: el4j0RWPRERue64lIQeq9Y2FP-mdB86tFqjmrJyEPR9VAtMovPEo9tvgA0CrTsSHJeeyPXqnoAu6DN-R04uJUg==:Ext:ProtonMail
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL,
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
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin vaults with anti-theft recovery/clawback
mechanisms
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: Thu, 08 Aug 2019 00:27:37 -0000
Good morning Bryan,
> - Re-vaulting transaction. This is where the magic happens. The re-vaul=
ting
> transaction is signed during transaction tree setup, before construct=
ing the
> delayed-spend transaction for the parent vault. The re-vaulting trans=
action is
> broadcasted when someone wants to prevent a coin withdrawal during th=
e public
> observation delay period. The re-vaulting transaction spends the dela=
yed-spend
> transaction outputs. It has a single output with a script created by =
running
> the entire vault setup function again. Hence, when the re-vaulting tr=
ansaction
> is confirmed, all of the coins go back into a new identically-configu=
red vault
> instead of being relinquished through the delayed-spend transaction t=
imeout for
> hot wallet key signing.
As transactions need to be signed in reverse order, it seems to me that the=
re is a practical limit in the number of times a vault can be used.
Basically, the number of times we run the vault setup function is the limit=
on number of re-vaultings possible.
Is my understanding correct?
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
