Author: Tomas 2017-11-10 12:27:35
Published on: 2017-11-10T12:27:35+00:00
Tomas van der Wansem from bitcrust has raised some questions regarding the proposal to use SIGHASH_NOINPUT on the bitcoin-dev mailing list. He first asks if LN's problem of malleated transactions is limited to the punishment transaction, which is the only one that spends an unconfirmed transaction. He wants to know if LN could function with (roughly) the same design without SegWit if SIGHASH_NOINPUT would be in place. Secondly, it was argued on the mailing list that SIGHASH_NOINPUT is important to prevent excessive recreation and routing of punishment transaction to 3rd party monitoring services. Tomas wants to know if this is still important or if other solutions have presented themselves.
Updated on: 2023-05-24T02:49:36.421743+00:00