Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Wdle7-0001jp-RO for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 19:18:51 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([192.3.11.21]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1Wdle6-0002eH-T5 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 19:18:51 +0000 Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:5:265:be5f:f4ff:febf:4f76]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7AF4B10802BC for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 19:19:21 +0000 (UTC) From: "Luke-Jr" To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 19:18:43 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.6-gentoo; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201404251918.44282.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.7 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1Wdle6-0002eH-T5 Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP - Hash Locked Transaction X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 19:18:52 -0000 This one looks entirely useless (it cannot be made secure), and the assertion that it is necessary for atomic cross-chain transfers seems unfounded and probably wrong... Luke On Friday, April 25, 2014 6:49:37 PM Tier Nolan wrote: > As part of the atomic cross chain system, outputs need to be hash locked. > > https://github.com/TierNolan/bips/blob/bip4x/bip-0045.mediawiki > > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=193281.msg2224949#msg2224949 > > A user needs to provide x corresponding to hash(x) in order to spend an > output. > > Under the protocol, one of the participants is required to provide the > secret number in order to spend an output. Once they do that, the other > participant can use the secret number to spend an output on the other > chain. This provides a mechanism to link the 2 chains together (in > addition to lock times). Once the first output is spent, that commits the > transfer. > > This is half of the scripting operations required to implement the > protocol. > > The proposal is to make this an adder on to the other standard > transactions. It does a check that the hash matches, and then runs the > standard transaction as normal. > > Adding the prefix to a P2SH transactions wouldn't work, since the template > wouldn't match. > > A script of this form could be embedded into a P2SH output. > > I think that is ok, since embedding the "password" in the hashed script > gets all the benefits. > > If there is agreement, I can code up the reference implementation as a PR.