Timeline for What prevents a miner to change the locking scripts of an unconfirmed transaction
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 10, 2018 at 8:54 | comment | added | Pieter Wuille | Here is a specification for the signature hashing scheme used in witness v0 spends: github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/… | |
| Jan 10, 2018 at 8:17 | comment | added | Eddy | I have just got to understand what really happens. Nevertheless Blockchains are currently poorly documented. I'm really thankful for the time you dedicate in explaining these technologies. | |
| Jan 10, 2018 at 8:03 | comment | added | Pieter Wuille | What does TXO stand for? You can say that what is signed is the entire transaction (all inputs, all outputs), excluding the signatures themselves. | |
| Jan 10, 2018 at 8:00 | comment | added | Eddy | "But conceptually, you can say that most signatures effectively sign the entire spending transaction” Does that mean the signed data is the SHA 256 (TXOs) ? If so we might have a transaction with identical TXOs which might end up giving the same message digest. | |
| Jan 10, 2018 at 7:48 | comment | added | Pieter Wuille | But conceptually, you can say that most signatures effectively sign the entire spending transaction. | |
| Jan 10, 2018 at 7:48 | comment | added | Pieter Wuille | The search term for that is the "sighash". It's a hash of a (modified version of) the spending transaction. It's modified because the signature would need to sign itself if it was included. BIP143 changes the sighash scheme. | |
| Jan 10, 2018 at 7:39 | comment | added | Eddy | Then my question is what is really signed in a bitcoin unlocking script. I was doing some research on the bitcoin script. And for a P2PKH TX, the stack pre final state is a pubkey, a signature and OP_CHECKVERIFY, No mention of which data was signed or to be verified. | |
| Jan 10, 2018 at 7:33 | history | answered | Pieter Wuille | CC BY-SA 3.0 |