đź“… Original date posted:2012-03-05
đź“ť Original message:Sounds interesting, however, even after a couple of days, I cannot see how you maintain protection against double spend using OP_CHECKEXPSIG. It is not until you redeem the OP_CHECKEXPSIG transaction that you reveal which former transactions that was involved?
I guess I am missing a point here?
/M
On 02/03/2012, at 20:57, Watson Ladd wrote:
> Dear all,
> I am proposing a new opcode for the purposes of anonymous
> transactions. This new opcode enables scripts to be given proof that
> the receiver can carry out or has carried out a previous transaction.
> I'm currently working on a paper that discusses using this opcode for
> anonymous transactions.
>
> Name: OP_CHECKEXPSIG
> Stack before: <sig><pk><hash>
> Stack after: T/F, where is true if sig is a ECDSA signature under pk
> for the hash hash. (Hash is the hash of a message).
> Uses: Preexisting digital cash techniques relied on keeping track of a
> list of turned in notes to forbid double spending. Using
> OP_CHECKEXPSIG we can instead pass the script that gives the nth note
> value proof that the notes {1,...n-1} were turned in and are distinct.
> This enables a coupling of the strong double spend protection of
> Bitcoin with traditional digital cash's strong anonymity.
>
> Sincerely,
> Watson Ladd
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
> Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing
> also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
> http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Michael Gronager, PhD
Director, Ceptacle
Jens Juels Gade 33
2100 Copenhagen E
Mobile: +45 31 45 14 01
E-mail: gronager at ceptacle.com
Web: http://www.ceptacle.com/
Michael Grønager [ARCHIVE] /
npub15f…xlq6h
2023-06-07 03:11:35
in reply to nevent1q…d0xd
Author Public Key
npub15fmnxm546tg2sv0l7elusrvqsgezdzdg3m0flpml5fr2qf3f5slskxlq6hPublished at
2023-06-07 03:11:35Event JSON
{
"id": "dd4bb4a8e53b69dc6e65cc88f02141ca4c6596bdfc00a86c55694ac8c2b36d13",
"pubkey": "a277336e95d2d0a831fff67fc80d8082322689a88ede9f877fa246a02629a43f",
"created_at": 1686107495,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"5a857429232c8a36bb1e76148eeb2509b7c891458a6ae01c53d1cdd23f34dde1",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a23dbf6c6cc83e14cc3df4e56cc71845f611908084cfe620e83e40c06ccdd3d0"
]
],
"content": "đź“… Original date posted:2012-03-05\nđź“ť Original message:Sounds interesting, however, even after a couple of days, I cannot see how you maintain protection against double spend using OP_CHECKEXPSIG. It is not until you redeem the OP_CHECKEXPSIG transaction that you reveal which former transactions that was involved?\n\nI guess I am missing a point here?\n\n/M\n\n\n\n\n \nOn 02/03/2012, at 20:57, Watson Ladd wrote:\n\n\u003e Dear all,\n\u003e I am proposing a new opcode for the purposes of anonymous\n\u003e transactions. This new opcode enables scripts to be given proof that\n\u003e the receiver can carry out or has carried out a previous transaction.\n\u003e I'm currently working on a paper that discusses using this opcode for\n\u003e anonymous transactions.\n\u003e \n\u003e Name: OP_CHECKEXPSIG\n\u003e Stack before: \u003csig\u003e\u003cpk\u003e\u003chash\u003e\n\u003e Stack after: T/F, where is true if sig is a ECDSA signature under pk\n\u003e for the hash hash. (Hash is the hash of a message).\n\u003e Uses: Preexisting digital cash techniques relied on keeping track of a\n\u003e list of turned in notes to forbid double spending. Using\n\u003e OP_CHECKEXPSIG we can instead pass the script that gives the nth note\n\u003e value proof that the notes {1,...n-1} were turned in and are distinct.\n\u003e This enables a coupling of the strong double spend protection of\n\u003e Bitcoin with traditional digital cash's strong anonymity.\n\u003e \n\u003e Sincerely,\n\u003e Watson Ladd\n\u003e \n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e Virtualization \u0026 Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning\n\u003e Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing \n\u003e also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.\n\u003e http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\nMichael Gronager, PhD\nDirector, Ceptacle\nJens Juels Gade 33\n2100 Copenhagen E\nMobile: +45 31 45 14 01\nE-mail: gronager at ceptacle.com\nWeb: http://www.ceptacle.com/",
"sig": "4f2235b2256b3957be39e897116348e7b9404c6eb43eafd360b2f283ec8f71143081486f954123e16c4015373f2ef3a7dc7da4e0ce39b38d5dc49a02742a2867"
}