From pete at petertodd.org Mon Jul 9 09:41:39 2018 From: pete at petertodd.org (Peter Todd) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2018 05:41:39 -0400 Subject: [Lightning-dev] [bitcoin-dev] BIP sighash_noinput In-Reply-To: References: <871sewirni.fsf@gmail.com> <87y3esvrvu.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <20180703052100.gtjdverh5irfokrp@petertodd.org> Message-ID: <20180709094139.wip4xqecjdjkqmjn@petertodd.org> On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 11:45:22PM +0000, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 5:21 AM, Peter Todd wrote: > > The problem with that name is `SIGHASH_REUSE_VULNERABLE` tells you nothing > > about what the flag actually does. > > I believe that making the signature replayable is 1:1 with omitting > the identification of the specific coin being spent from it. I think you have a good point there. But that's not the only way that reuse could be a vulnerability: consider hash-based signatures. I'm happy with adding a suffix or prefix to the term SIGHASH_NOINPUT, e.g. SIGHASH_NOINPUT_UNSAFE to re-use Rust terminology. -- https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: