📅 Original date posted:2015-11-06
📝 Original message:I assume this proposal is implemented at the same time as BIP62. As long
as OP_IF/OP_NOTIF interprets the argument as a number, zero-padded
number and negative zero are already prohibited in BIP62
Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-11-06 04:37 寫到:
> I meant not to use the OP_PUSH opcodes to do the push.
>
> Does OP_0 give a zero length byte array?
>
> Would this script return true?
>
> OP_0
>
> OP_PUSHDATA1 (length = 1, data = 0)
>
> OP_EQUAL
>
> The easiest definition is that OP_0 and OP_1 must be used to push the
> data and not any other push opcodes.
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Oleg Andreev <oleganza at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> One and zero should be defined as arrays of length one.
>> Otherwise, it is still possible to mutate the transaction by
>> changing the length of the array.
>>>
>>> They should also be minimally encoded but that is covered by
>> previous rules.
>>
>> These two lines contradict each other. Minimally-encoded "zero" is
>> an array of length zero, not one. I'd suggest defining this
>> explicitly here as "IF/NOTIF argument must be either zero-length
>> array or a single byte 0x01".
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
jl2012 at xbt.hk [ARCHIVE] /
npub1kc…wjfw4
2023-06-07 17:44:18
in reply to nevent1q…w03y
Author Public Key
npub1kc0zulxt7j4a0ayhzhrz7jk84y7tm4026qcky7w97hlfkxxap24qnwjfw4Published at
2023-06-07 17:44:18Event JSON
{
"id": "d410210872721acd051b2ef003bb1cef61e1acd8b7d2fca589f5d224ef3a9090",
"pubkey": "b61e2e7ccbf4abd7f49715c62f4ac7a93cbdd5ead0316279c5f5fe9b18dd0aaa",
"created_at": 1686159858,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"8bea40c9aca13fd590801b4ac87b57a3fa19ab1b40338c62d08701cf4269e071",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"0c63fc285c5ebf0baa98f48e0c0b127652d1e0c6da987f94d1ed664b8d4eff3b",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"46986f86b97cc97829a031b03209644d134b939d0163375467f0b1363e0d875e"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-11-06\n📝 Original message:I assume this proposal is implemented at the same time as BIP62. As long \nas OP_IF/OP_NOTIF interprets the argument as a number, zero-padded \nnumber and negative zero are already prohibited in BIP62\n\nTier Nolan via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-11-06 04:37 寫到:\n\u003e I meant not to use the OP_PUSH opcodes to do the push.\n\u003e \n\u003e Does OP_0 give a zero length byte array?\n\u003e \n\u003e Would this script return true?\n\u003e \n\u003e OP_0\n\u003e \n\u003e OP_PUSHDATA1 (length = 1, data = 0)\n\u003e \n\u003e OP_EQUAL\n\u003e \n\u003e The easiest definition is that OP_0 and OP_1 must be used to push the\n\u003e data and not any other push opcodes.\n\u003e \n\u003e On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Oleg Andreev \u003coleganza at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e\u003e\u003e One and zero should be defined as arrays of length one.\n\u003e\u003e Otherwise, it is still possible to mutate the transaction by\n\u003e\u003e changing the length of the array.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e\u003e They should also be minimally encoded but that is covered by\n\u003e\u003e previous rules.\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e These two lines contradict each other. Minimally-encoded \"zero\" is\n\u003e\u003e an array of length zero, not one. I'd suggest defining this\n\u003e\u003e explicitly here as \"IF/NOTIF argument must be either zero-length\n\u003e\u003e array or a single byte 0x01\".\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev",
"sig": "2c3468aaf2c849c80c238f32f2b4920fa29ff2c7f9861b4f3c09564144794602407e42e48219a179e796bbef65da9d7bc46c3a7aa556a430baacf222d1dccd1c"
}