From: "Michael Grønager" <gronager@ceptacle•com>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] multisig, op_eval and lock_time/sequence...
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 21:31:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E390E6EB-BE00-4F96-A4FB-05C39E2036BB@ceptacle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T3ESoZ21h_V0a8PZAN4MS+KRZ8eVjKc47p9wgJmH0jt-g@mail.gmail.com>
Crossing posts ;)
I like your idea! - It adds a pricetag to distributing a signature - and - as you mention it will be part of the standard. It is only up to the clients if they want to support it or not, but it does give you 0-conf world wide instantaneous anonymously distribution of half-baked transactions...
However, the parties will anyway need to know at least about each others public keys up front and hence the 0-conf might not be that important... Left is, as you said, some anonymity (not much extra though)...
/M
On 09/11/2011, at 21:02, Gavin Andresen wrote:
>> I don't think partially-signed transactions belong on the main Bitcoin
>> P2P network, mostly because I don't see any way of preventing somebody
>> from endlessly spamming bogus, will-never-be-completed partial
>> transactions just to be annoying.
>
> ... of course I write that and then start thinking about ways you
> COULD use the P2P network to distribute signatures, maybe by
> broadcasting (and paying fees for) complete transactions that contain
> extra signatures for the transaction that you want to sign.
>
> Here's a half-baked idea that might be brilliant or stupid:
>
> + Start with an escrow transaction, with 3 public keys. I own one of the keys.
> + I broadcast a 'fee-only' transaction that pays 0 bitcoins to the key
> I own. But I add extra data to the scriptSig; something like:
>
> scriptSig: <escrow_signature> <serialized_escrow_transaction> <sig> <pubkey>
> scriptPubKey: ...standard DUP HASH160 <pubkeyhash> ...etc
> nValue: 0
>
> The other parties to the escrow transaction could monitor the
> block-chain for transactions to my <pubkeyhash>, and get the signature
> and proposed "spend the funds in escrow" transaction from the
> scriptSig.
>
> .......
>
> "But won't that gunk up the block chain with more data?"
>
> Yup. But the parties to the transaction will have to pay for the
> extra data they're including.
>
> And everything in the scriptSigs can, theoretically, be forgotten (or
> never sent) to most nodes on the network once the transaction is spent
> and is buried deep enough in the block chain. (a nValue=0 transaction
> can be considered 'immediately spent').
>
> "Can you really put arbitrary stuff in the scriptSig?"
>
> Yup. The IsStandard() check today allows up to 200 bytes, which
> wouldn't be enough for an extra signature and <serialized
> transaction>.
>
> The standard <sig> <pubkey> is about 150 bytes; part of the
> multi-signature proposal will be increasing that to 500 bytes to
> accomodate 3-signatures transactions. A simple 1-input-1-output
> <serialized transaction> would be around 50 bytes or so.
>
> "Wouldn't it be cheaper/better to NOT use the block chain to
> distribute signatures?"
>
> Yup. The only advantage I see is it might be more anonymous to use the
> blockchain instead of directly connecting to, and finding out the IP
> address of, the parties involved in the transaction.
>
>
> --
> --
> Gavin Andresen
Michael Gronager, PhD
Owner Ceptacle / NDGF Director, NORDUnet A/S
Jens Juels Gade 33
2100 Copenhagen E
Mobile: +45 31 62 14 01
E-mail: gronager@ceptacle•com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-09 20:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-09 10:22 Michael Grønager
2011-11-09 14:43 ` Alan Reiner
2011-11-09 15:22 ` Alan Reiner
2011-11-09 19:13 ` Gavin Andresen
2011-11-09 20:02 ` Gavin Andresen
2011-11-09 20:31 ` Michael Grønager [this message]
2011-11-09 21:18 ` Gavin Andresen
2011-11-09 21:32 ` Joel Joonatan Kaartinen
2011-11-09 22:13 ` theymos
2011-11-09 20:03 ` Michael Grønager
2011-11-10 3:00 ` Alan Reiner
2011-11-10 9:55 ` Michael Grønager
2011-11-10 12:56 ` Alan Reiner
2011-11-12 16:58 ` Mike Hearn
2011-11-12 17:10 ` Alan Reiner
2011-11-12 17:16 ` Mike Hearn
2011-11-12 17:25 ` Alan Reiner
2011-11-12 17:38 ` Mike Hearn
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=E390E6EB-BE00-4F96-A4FB-05C39E2036BB@ceptacle.com \
--to=gronager@ceptacle$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=gavinandresen@gmail$(echo .)com \
/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