From rusty at rustcorp.com.au Tue Jul 3 04:56:53 2018 From: rusty at rustcorp.com.au (Rusty Russell) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 14:26:53 +0930 Subject: [Lightning-dev] [bitcoin-dev] BIP sighash_noinput In-Reply-To: References: <871sewirni.fsf@gmail.com> Message-ID: <87y3esvrvu.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev writes: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 4:29 PM, Christian Decker via bitcoin-dev > wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I'd like to pick up the discussion from a few months ago, and propose a new >> sighash flag, `SIGHASH_NOINPUT`, that removes the commitment to the previous > > I know it seems kind of silly, but I think it's somewhat important > that the formal name of this flag is something like > "SIGHASH_REPLAY_VULNERABLE" or likewise or at least > "SIGHASH_WEAK_REPLAYABLE". I agree with the DO_NOT_WANT-style naming. REUSE_VULNERABLE seems to capture it: the word VULNERABLE should scare people away (or at least cause them to google further). Thanks, Rusty.