Peter Todd [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2016-08-16 📝 Original message:On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at ...

📅 Original date posted:2016-08-16
📝 Original message:On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 08:27:54PM -0400, Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Okay.
>
> I'm not really opposed to this BIP, but I am worried that fighting script
> malleability is a battle that can never be won; even leaving one avenue of
> malleability open is probably just as bad as having many avenues of
> malleability, so it just doesn't seem worthwhile to me.

At least some types of malleability are less harmful than others: changing a
few bits with some weird ECC transformation isn't as likely to cause problems
as being able to append arbitrary data to a transaction's input script. And of
course, we do prevent the latter with the cleanstack rule - consensus enforced
in segwit.

--
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160816/3a991698/attachment.sig>;