Unenforceable fee obligations in multiparty protocols with Taproot inputs



Summary:

A bug has been identified in Taproot that allows the same Tapleaf to be repeated multiple times in the same Taproot, potentially at different Taplevels incurring different Tapfee rates. However, it is not considered a bug unless there's a remedy for the bug that wasn't included in the Taproot design. It is suggested that proving a spending path exists within a Taproot tree only requires a subset of the Tapleaf hashes. Michael points out that there seems to be a push to find "bugs" and "accidental blowups" in the Taproot design currently, and if any exist, they should be highlighted and discussed. The nearest to a possible inferior design decision thus far is x-only pubkeys in BIP340. It is recommended to know the entire Taptree when interacting with someone's Tapspend to countermeasure this issue.


Updated on: 2023-06-16T15:25:52.710073+00:00