Author: Peter Todd 2018-06-06 00:43:26
Published on: 2018-06-06T00:43:26+00:00
In a discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, Chris Stewart enquired about the possibility of expanding to SIGHASH_NONE. He was curious if there is a current use case for SIGHASH_NONE that would suffer from it being non-standard. Peter Todd replied that SIGHASH_NONE is important because it's the only way that multisig signers can relinquish the need for them to sign without giving up the private key. He also mentioned that the SIGHASH_SINGLE bug can be used in similar ways too.
Updated on: 2023-06-13T03:12:30.271120+00:00