Hi Bitcoin Developers,

I have been following the conversation in BIP 322 thread: https://groups.google.com/g/bitcoindev/c/RCi1Exs0ZvQ/m/vp6Xo36aBwAJ and did some research about all the undesirable things we can do with proposed opcodes.

I think its possible to create a worse protocol in which withdrawal is done to a personally identifying string. It can only be claimed by the user if they generate a public key and get it certified by an identity verifier.

```

(pushes from scriptsig:  certsig, bpubkey, txsig, 0)
IF                      (certsig, bpubkey, txsig)
  <recovery_pubkey>     -skip-
  CHECKSIGVERIFY        -skip-
  <recovery_time>       -skip-
  CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY   -skip-
ELSE
  OVER                  (certsig, bpubkey, txsig, bpubkey)
  CHECKSIGVERIFY        (certsig, bpubkey,)
  SHA256                (certsig, SHA256(bpubkey),)
  <id>                  (certsig, SHA256(bpubkey), id)
  CAT                   (certsig, SHA256(bpubkey)|id)
  <tpubkey>             (certsig, SHA256(bpubkey)|id, tpubkey)
  CHECKDATASIG          (1)
ENDIF
```

CHECKDATASIG would be replaced by CHECKSIGFROMSTACK if testing on signet.

Here's the link to read more about it: https://gist.github.com/markblundeberg/bd28871548108fc66d958018b1bde085

/dev/fd0

floppy disk guy

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/439a982d-d9c1-4749-bcb6-59cc30add099n%40googlegroups.com.