summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/c8/02c90a27ff188852941738819a40dfb579a877
blob: e1c9e6f39e0e2d2a00ca9cee1ac25884a677256e (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
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 <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1YbGlo-0006hG-Fq
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Thu, 26 Mar 2015 23:01:00 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.213.181 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.213.181; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ig0-f181.google.com; 
Received: from mail-ig0-f181.google.com ([209.85.213.181])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1YbGlk-000561-7N
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Thu, 26 Mar 2015 23:01:00 +0000
Received: by ignm3 with SMTP id m3so22237874ign.0
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Thu, 26 Mar 2015 16:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.27.143 with SMTP id b137mr24869437iob.76.1427410850984; 
	Thu, 26 Mar 2015 16:00:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.6.133 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 16:00:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5514881A.5010006@sky-ip.org>
References: <55121611.1030104@thinlink.com>
	<CAAS2fgRzskGcHjEhJLnyu-VMTR49i-Wo9TbOOqkHqEasxuO71A@mail.gmail.com>
	<551301F0.9020806@thinlink.com>
	<CAAS2fgQMW+Htqu0wonL7r-ZN_t0evRayDCGRMKYzRUaCm6wxjw@mail.gmail.com>
	<55146E2C.9020105@thinlink.com>
	<CAAS2fgSSOQi4uL95S=GUdXGKZK_y4aNTUoOqkkaLFvzAVPnRig@mail.gmail.com>
	<551479A3.9010104@thinlink.com>
	<CAAS2fgSgXdpbT3iqnu_B4j-twAixFBLN9zt=Qid62FrNSkwVdA@mail.gmail.com>
	<5514881A.5010006@sky-ip.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 23:00:50 +0000
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgQAWWKsm-TdKBExMjRG5Kjsp_5FZ69pTZ+vmi-avoM8pw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: s7r@sky-ip.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
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
	(gmaxwell[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
X-Headers-End: 1YbGlk-000561-7N
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Address Expiration to Prevent Reuse
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: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 23:01:00 -0000

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:28 PM, s7r <s7r@sky-ip.org> wrote:
> This should not be enforced by default.

No one suggested _anything_ like that. Please save the concern for
someplace its actually applicable.

> I know it's not recommended to use the same pubkey more than once, but
> the protocol was not designed this way.

For a point of pedantry, the protocol actually was designed that way
and in the initial versions of the software there was actually no user
exposed mechanism to reuse a scriptPubkey no matter how hard you
tried.