Author: Olaoluwa Osuntokun 2022-10-19 02:40:13
Published on: 2022-10-19T02:40:13+00:00
During a recent discussion, Hiroki Gondo raised concerns about the verification of asset provenance in Taro's specifications. He pointed out that there is a possibility of asset inflation if the UTXO does not change in a transaction and an illicit copy of it is created in the asset tree of another output. Laolu Osuntokun acknowledged the issue and mentioned that a "no-op" state transition is assumed in the current spec, which they aim to remedy. The necessary proofs for a valid state transition are detailed in bip-taro-proof-file.md.Gondo shared his thoughts on unchanging UTXO inclusion proofs in input and output asset trees, suggesting it may not be practical to generate these proofs for every unchanging UTXO present in the input asset tree when a transaction occurs. Instead, a constraint should be set that no part of the asset tree except explicitly changed UTXOs should change.Meanwhile, Olaoluwa Osuntokun announced the Taro protocol, using the Taproot script tree to commit extra asset structured meta data based on a hybrid merkle tree called MS-SMT. Taro supports issuance of normal and collectible assets on the Bitcoin chain and allows efficient proofs of non-existence. The protocol also has a scripting system, which is a recursive instance of the Bitcoin Script Taproot VM. In addition, Taro supports integration with the Lightning Network (BOLTs), allowing for multi-hop transfers of Taro assets. The BIPs for the Taro protocol can be found on GitHub.In response to concerns about verifying the provenance of asset UTXOs, Laolu suggested orienting the proofs at the taproot output level. This would remove redundant data and generate a proof for a single leaf. They also discussed optimizing the proof file format and proposed presenting a single proof for all non-modified assets.
Updated on: 2023-05-22T18:49:36.507359+00:00