Author: Peter Todd 2018-07-03 05:21:00
Published on: 2018-07-03T05:21:00+00:00
In a recent email exchange on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, Christian Decker proposed a new sighash flag, 'SIGHASH_NOINPUT', which would remove the commitment to the previous transaction output from a transaction's hash. Gregory Maxwell suggested that the flag be named something like 'SIGHASH_REPLAY_VULNERABLE' or 'SIGHASH_WEAK_REPLAYABLE,' to highlight potential security concerns. Rusty Russell agreed with this naming convention, suggesting 'SIGHASH_REUSE_VULNERABLE.' However, there was a concern that this name wouldn't accurately reflect what the flag does. The discussion ended with a question about what future flags would be named if they were also replay vulnerable.
Updated on: 2023-05-25T00:22:09.430986+00:00