đź“… Original date posted:2014-02-12
đź“ť Original message:On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Alex Morcos <morcos at gmail.com> wrote:
> I apologize if this has been discussed many times before.
It has been, but there are probably many people like you who have not
bothered researching who may also be curious.
> As a long term solution to malleable transactions, wouldn't it be possible
> to modify the signatures to be of the entire transaction. Why do you have
> to zero out the inputs? I can see that this would be a hard fork, and maybe
> it would be somewhat tricky to extract signatures first (since you can sign
> everything except the signatures), but it would seem to me that this is an
> important enough change to consider making.
Because doing so would be both unnecessary and ineffective.
Unnecessary because we can very likely eliminate malleability without
changing what is signed. It will take time, but we have been
incrementally moving towards that, e.g. v0.8 made many kinds of
non-canonical encoding non-standard.
Ineffective— at least as you describe it— because the signatures
_themselves_ are malleable.
Gregory Maxwell [ARCHIVE] /
npub1f2…crwet
2023-06-07 17:13:24
in reply to nevent1q…cekk
Author Public Key
npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwetPublished at
2023-06-07 17:13:24Event JSON
{
"id": "2a600dc9bbc62e3359e09abcad7cf4310e7ee106039116f7f6f5e03f04e77f4a",
"pubkey": "4aa6cf9aa5c8e98f401dac603c6a10207509b6a07317676e9d6615f3d7103d73",
"created_at": 1686150804,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"76969a008b621e54c247029127aebdfbea1794fb79dd58e07b32a76157512d29",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"4a69a05d237817e9bacf48691d21e020d1fdfc5b92a13296721324f20899cd36",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"78aa6925095b629d95a9e79aed6ed9da0973239bc6eedf11af42240f0e1d755c"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-02-12\n📝 Original message:On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Alex Morcos \u003cmorcos at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e I apologize if this has been discussed many times before.\n\nIt has been, but there are probably many people like you who have not\nbothered researching who may also be curious.\n\n\u003e As a long term solution to malleable transactions, wouldn't it be possible\n\u003e to modify the signatures to be of the entire transaction. Why do you have\n\u003e to zero out the inputs? I can see that this would be a hard fork, and maybe\n\u003e it would be somewhat tricky to extract signatures first (since you can sign\n\u003e everything except the signatures), but it would seem to me that this is an\n\u003e important enough change to consider making.\n\nBecause doing so would be both unnecessary and ineffective.\n\nUnnecessary because we can very likely eliminate malleability without\nchanging what is signed. It will take time, but we have been\nincrementally moving towards that, e.g. v0.8 made many kinds of\nnon-canonical encoding non-standard.\n\nIneffective— at least as you describe it— because the signatures\n_themselves_ are malleable.",
"sig": "a771c2df2f85ee1fa77601bf006065a4c71fc84608f464866322d3bf0c305168195427437a156c1d40d12eb38c1bc467ba32ac7fef1f5281e4e01fe5cfb6e24c"
}