Author: fred savage 2018-07-04 18:08:43
Published on: 2018-07-04T18:08:43+00:00
The discussion in this email chain is regarding the use of the SIGHASH_NOINPUT flag for Bitcoin transactions. Gregory Maxwell suggests that the flag should be named "SIGHASH_REPLAY_VULNERABLE" or "SIGHASH_WEAK_REPLAYABLE" because it poses a risk for traditional applications where a third party might pay to an address a second time, and should only be used in special protocols which make that kind of mistake unlikely. However, Luke Dashjr disagrees, stating that address reuse is undefined behavior and nobody should assume it is safe or works. He intends to possibly use SIGHASH_NOINPUT for ordinary Bitcoin transactions in a wallet he is writing, which explicitly does not support address reuse.
Updated on: 2023-06-13T01:48:13.777166+00:00