From: Jeremy <jlrubin@mit•edu>
To: Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph•org>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Graftroot: Private and efficient surrogate scripts under the taproot assumption
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 23:29:58 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAD5xwhiqcHjy2bFcCzNue+M92z3_QHZra801c6Kx7OBf=68sRw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgSVHfh2++JLCTOWVmMiwfqSkGgj4O+HR4wTYTXaZr6n9Q@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1627 bytes --]
This might be unpopular because of bad re-org behavior, but I believe the
utility of this construction can be improved if we introduce functionality
that makes a script invalid after a certain time (correct me if I'm wrong,
I believe all current timelocks are valid after a certain time and invalid
before, this is the inverse).
Then you can exclude old delegates by timing/block height arguments, or
even pre-sign delegates for different periods of time (e.g., if this
happens in the next 100 blocks require y, before the next 1000 blocks but
after the first 100 require z, etc).
--
@JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
<https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:56 PM, Ryan Grant <bitcoin-dev@rgrant•org> wrote:
> > Am I reading correctly that this allows unilateral key rotation (to a
> > previously unknown key), without invalidating the interests of other
> > parties in the existing multisig (or even requiring any on-chain
> > transaction), at the cost of storing the signed delegation?
>
> Yes, though I'd avoid the word rotation because as you note it doesn't
> invalidate the interests of any key, the original setup remains able
> to sign. You could allow a new key of yours (plus everyone else) to
> sign, assuming the other parties agree... but the old one could also
> still sign.
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2983 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-09 7:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-05 5:58 Gregory Maxwell
2018-02-05 15:56 ` Ryan Grant
2018-02-05 19:58 ` Gregory Maxwell
2018-02-09 7:29 ` Jeremy [this message]
2018-02-09 7:42 ` Jeremy
2018-02-22 12:19 ` Ryan Grant
2018-02-22 19:44 ` Daniel Edgecumbe
2018-02-24 18:58 ` Gregory Maxwell
2018-06-30 11:49 ` Sjors Provoost
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAD5xwhiqcHjy2bFcCzNue+M92z3_QHZra801c6Kx7OBf=68sRw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jlrubin@mit$(echo .)edu \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=greg@xiph$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox