Unenforceable fee obligations in multiparty protocols with Taproot inputs



Summary:

In an email exchange between Michael Folkson and Andrew Poelstra, the former brought up a potential bug in Taproot, where the same Tapleaf could be repeated multiple times in the same Taproot at different Taplevels. According to Poelstra, if this is indeed possible, it was unintended and could have been fixed by changing the Merkle structure without any efficiency tradeoff. Therefore, he believes it is reasonable to call it a "bug". Folkson suggested a partial protection remedy that would prevent spending from a valid P2TR address if a repeated Tapleaf hash was used to prove that a spending path was embedded in a Taproot tree. However, he also cautioned against pushing too hard to find bugs in the Taproot design.


Updated on: 2023-06-16T15:26:23.699508+00:00