Author: Tao Effect 2017-07-12 22:43:31
Published on: 2017-07-12T22:43:31+00:00
The email thread discusses the Drivechain specification and the security model of P2SH and SegWit. The disagreement between Greg Slepak and CryptAxe is about step 4 in the Drivechain specification, which suggests a waiting period for everyone to ensure that the same WT^ is in both the Bitcoin coinbase and the Sidechain header. Greg questions whether the use of anyone-can-pay in Drivechain is the same as in P2SH and SegWit. He cites Pieter Wuille's email suggesting disagreement and his understanding that P2SH transactions contain all the necessary information within themselves for full nodes to act as a check on miners mishandling the anyone-can-spend nature of P2SH transactions, but this does not seem to be the case with WT^ transactions. If the security of WT^ transactions could be brought up to actually be in line with the security of P2SH and SegWit transactions, then Greg would object less to it.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T02:09:55.667571+00:00