📅 Original date posted:2015-07-04
📝 Original message:On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 12:33 AM, Justus Ranvier <
justus at openbitcoinprivacyproject.org> wrote:
> I think the problem is tractable if some reasonable assumptions are made
> about the ability of SPV clients to perform validity checks that don't
> involve any state outside a single transaction (or block):
>
> https://gist.github.com/justusranvier/451616fa4697b5f25f60
>
>
I agree, it is definitely tractable.
If Bitcoin was being designed from scratch, it could be made even easier.
As things stand, the extra commitment information needs to be added to
extra trees, which themselves need to be checked.
The "prover", in your example, should ideally store additional meta-data
along with each block.
If P2SH was made mandatory, then much of the transaction validation could
be performed on the transaction alone.
Both the signature and the public key would be included in the spending
transaction.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150705/c335ce43/attachment-0001.html>;
Tier Nolan [ARCHIVE] /
npub1g6…sl5wd
2023-06-07 15:41:40
in reply to nevent1q…04f5
Author Public Key
npub1g6vxlp4e0nyhs2dqxxcryztyf5f5hyuaq93nw4r87zcnv0sdsa0qqsl5wdPublished at
2023-06-07 15:41:40Event JSON
{
"id": "6d79e77d60423050a1c76f9feb2a71b31d82cdf2ff84ed16c4cfd2df1a3f2449",
"pubkey": "46986f86b97cc97829a031b03209644d134b939d0163375467f0b1363e0d875e",
"created_at": 1686152500,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"b4b48e548f28c73730b217f080be671f078fe0ae13a4f41bdbadad9ec30c2e41",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"1fb206b869f9da3068037df080296587f5f40479af61bd990d1cebb31f376352",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"b2b39b6f2c86908d3da9f500193abd5757b21cac328f838800a48c4d557c10dd"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-07-04\n📝 Original message:On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 12:33 AM, Justus Ranvier \u003c\njustus at openbitcoinprivacyproject.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e I think the problem is tractable if some reasonable assumptions are made\n\u003e about the ability of SPV clients to perform validity checks that don't\n\u003e involve any state outside a single transaction (or block):\n\u003e\n\u003e https://gist.github.com/justusranvier/451616fa4697b5f25f60\n\u003e\n\u003e\nI agree, it is definitely tractable.\n\nIf Bitcoin was being designed from scratch, it could be made even easier.\n\nAs things stand, the extra commitment information needs to be added to\nextra trees, which themselves need to be checked.\n\nThe \"prover\", in your example, should ideally store additional meta-data\nalong with each block.\n\nIf P2SH was made mandatory, then much of the transaction validation could\nbe performed on the transaction alone.\n\nBoth the signature and the public key would be included in the spending\ntransaction.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150705/c335ce43/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "5f22dfb3ae6bb1e4cc522e53393ed794838e6c98b5717bc9761139bde21b85dfbcdca0bc58d29a9b05ca24f793afc1f1621cd84023f655a865edbf76046e44fd"
}