Christian Decker [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2018-05-03 📝 Original message: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj at ...
📅 Original date posted:2018-05-03
📝 Original message:
ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj at protonmail.com> writes:
> Ha, no, looking at the detailed `SIGHASH_NOINPUT` spec, `hashPrevouts`, which normally commits to the other inputs, is blanked, so we do not commit to them either. This means that `SIGHASH_NOINPUT` implicitly has a `SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY`.
>
> (the BIP `SIGHASH_NOINPUT` in the eltoo pdf does not mention `hashSequence`, but it seems you managed to add that to your github BIP repository)
Yeah, Russell O'Connor pointed that difference out and I saw no point in
committing to the hashSequence, so I amended both the paper and the
BIP. The paper will get updated in a few days with the typos people have
found, but I thought that the BIP discussion was more urgent to keep up
to date, so I pushed that directly :-)
📝 Original message:
ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj at protonmail.com> writes:
> Ha, no, looking at the detailed `SIGHASH_NOINPUT` spec, `hashPrevouts`, which normally commits to the other inputs, is blanked, so we do not commit to them either. This means that `SIGHASH_NOINPUT` implicitly has a `SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY`.
>
> (the BIP `SIGHASH_NOINPUT` in the eltoo pdf does not mention `hashSequence`, but it seems you managed to add that to your github BIP repository)
Yeah, Russell O'Connor pointed that difference out and I saw no point in
committing to the hashSequence, so I amended both the paper and the
BIP. The paper will get updated in a few days with the typos people have
found, but I thought that the BIP discussion was more urgent to keep up
to date, so I pushed that directly :-)