Author: Emin Gün Sirer 2015-12-30 20:22:43
Published on: 2015-12-30T20:22:43+00:00
In an email conversation between Peter Todd and egs, the concept of transaction malleability and its impact on Bitcoin-United was discussed. Bitcoin-United relies on a notion of transaction equivalence that doesn't involve the transaction hash at all, so it should be immune to malleability issues and compatible with segwit. In this system, two transactions are equal if they "consume the same inputs and result in the same outputs, not counting the miner fee". Simple pay-to-pubkey-hash and pay-to-script-hash transactions are straightforward. Multikey transactions are evaluated for equivalency by their inputs and outputs. It is allowable for a 2-out-of-3 payment to be signed by one set of two keys on Dum and another set of two keys on Dee, as long as the transaction consumes the same coins and produces the same outputs. The email acknowledges that transaction malleability can quickly sabotage naive notions of this idea, but using the transaction hash alone would create a mess.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T02:54:25.812452+00:00