Does this mean that if A sends some bitcoins to B under a KYC multisig then B could update the KYC rules before sending to C? But those rules couldn’t be updated by B under KYC implementation through recursive covenants?
Basically which partie(s) have the authorization to update the rules under a multisig implementation?
LogicallyMinded
npub1s0…2rqf5
2024-08-09 12:33:24
in reply to nevent1q…2upm
Author Public Key
npub1s0fs9dwztm2rukm42vh6df4a5gwykclf75tgyeuc75t0cs2eh8rsu2rqf5Published at
2024-08-09 12:33:24Event JSON
{
"id": "f85709ca19570ced20d785580feb648cb02b090f9365c56aef82e587d8ec102b",
"pubkey": "83d302b5c25ed43e5b75532fa6a6bda21c4b63e9f516826798f516fc4159b9c7",
"created_at": 1723206804,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"c00d3ddf32b69d6d499396cb8faf9a49be1d428054cfa0872027acb3f91ae65f",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"e64de4871e97a03482945a1b83e3272500ca3a2ec22eadf4631906684ca13b18",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"52b4a076bcbbbdc3a1aefa3735816cf74993b1b8db202b01c883c58be7fad8bd"
]
],
"content": "Does this mean that if A sends some bitcoins to B under a KYC multisig then B could update the KYC rules before sending to C? But those rules couldn’t be updated by B under KYC implementation through recursive covenants? \n\nBasically which partie(s) have the authorization to update the rules under a multisig implementation?",
"sig": "be4e27cc34f68c3ed81182bcbdc5bc424c9c8b82e7c0c44c2a93e4c3ee4ebfe2c726b409d34f56da37ceb226765acd8b527a1a75838b45496a82a3f62d2dc005"
}