Author: ZmnSCPxj 2019-12-19 10:00:09
Published on: 2019-12-19T10:00:09+00:00
ZmnSCPxj, a contributor to the Bitcoin ecosystem, believes that enabling `OP_CAT` is too powerful and must not be enabled. Even enforcing RBF will not help against the Finney attack specifically. If the amount in the single-show-signature UTXO being double-spent is greater than the expected block reward, it could encourage competing miners to mine an alternate block instead of building on the block made by the Finney attacker. All miners will then compete on that block and the Finney attack is promoted from an attack on a single target to an attack on the entire Bitcoin ecosystem. Additionally, there was a discussion about a script-path spend with a specific script involving `OP_SWAP OP_DUP OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_SWAP OP_CHECKSIG`. ZmnSCPxj suggested using `OP_SWAP OP_CHECKSPLITSIG` instead since `R` is constrained to be fixed anyway. They also proposed that `OP_CHECKSPLITSIG` be given `OP_CHECKSPLITSIG`, so that a fixed-`R` single-show signature is just `OP_CHECKSPLITSIG`.
Updated on: 2023-06-02T22:27:47.220213+00:00