Skip to main content
Bitcoin

Return to Question

added 167 characters in body
Source Link
nick carraway
nick carraway
  • 243
  • 1
  • 12

Say I am building a transaction in private:

  1. Input 1 is signed with SIGHASH_SINGLE ( | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY)
  2. Input 2 is signed with SIGHASH_NONE | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY

SIGHASH_NONE implies that Input 2 will only spend if Input 1 is included in the transaction. Am I able to communicate this privately-signed transaction in such a way that Input 1 is also locked on the condition that Input 2 is included?

For example, I send this partially-signed transaction, with both signatures, to a person I do not trust.

Are they able to spend Input 1 (the SIGHASH_SINGLE) in another transaction without Input 2 included?

What can I do to lock these two inputs together, with one of the inputs also being locked to an output, while still allowing people to add inputs to the transaction?

Say I am building a transaction in private:

  1. Input 1 is signed with SIGHASH_SINGLE ( | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY)
  2. Input 2 is signed with SIGHASH_NONE | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY

SIGHASH_NONE implies that Input 2 will only spend if Input 1 is included in the transaction. Am I able to communicate this privately-signed transaction in such a way that Input 1 is also locked on the condition that Input 2 is included?

For example, I send this partially-signed transaction, with both signatures, to a person I do not trust.

Are they able to spend Input 1 (the SIGHASH_SINGLE) in another transaction without Input 2 included?

What can I do to lock these two inputs together, with one of the inputs also being locked to an output, while still allowing people to add inputs to the transaction?

Say I am building a transaction in private:

  1. Input 1 is signed with SIGHASH_SINGLE ( | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY)
  2. Input 2 is signed with SIGHASH_NONE | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY

SIGHASH_NONE implies that Input 2 will only spend if Input 1 is included in the transaction. Am I able to communicate this privately-signed transaction in such a way that Input 1 is also locked on the condition that Input 2 is included?

For example, I send this partially-signed transaction, with both signatures, to a person I do not trust.

Are they able to spend Input 1 (the SIGHASH_SINGLE) in another transaction without Input 2 included?

What can I do to lock these two inputs together, with one of the inputs also being locked to an output, while still allowing people to add inputs to the transaction?

added 167 characters in body
Source Link
nick carraway
nick carraway
  • 243
  • 1
  • 12

Say I am building a transaction in private:

  1. Input 1 is signed with SIGHASH_NONESIGHASH_SINGLE ( | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY)
  2. Input 2 is signed with SIGHASH_SINGLE (SIGHASH_NONE | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY)

SIGHASH_NONE implies that Input 12 will only spend if Input 21 is included in the transaction. Am I able to communicate this privately-signed transaction in such a way that Input 21 is also locked on the condition that Input 12 is included?

For example, I send this partially-signed transaction, with both signatures, to a person I do not trust.

Are they able to spend Input 21 (the SIGHASH_SINGLE) in another transaction without Input 12 included?

What can I do to lock these two inputs together, with one of the inputs also being locked to an output, while still allowing people to add inputs to the transaction?

Say I am building a transaction in private:

  1. Input 1 is signed with SIGHASH_NONE | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY
  2. Input 2 is signed with SIGHASH_SINGLE ( | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY)

SIGHASH_NONE implies that Input 1 will only spend if Input 2 is included in the transaction. Am I able to communicate this privately-signed transaction in such a way that Input 2 is also locked on the condition that Input 1 is included?

For example, I send this partially-signed transaction, with both signatures, to a person I do not trust.

Are they able to spend Input 2 (the SIGHASH_SINGLE) in another transaction without Input 1 included?

Say I am building a transaction in private:

  1. Input 1 is signed with SIGHASH_SINGLE ( | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY)
  2. Input 2 is signed with SIGHASH_NONE | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY

SIGHASH_NONE implies that Input 2 will only spend if Input 1 is included in the transaction. Am I able to communicate this privately-signed transaction in such a way that Input 1 is also locked on the condition that Input 2 is included?

For example, I send this partially-signed transaction, with both signatures, to a person I do not trust.

Are they able to spend Input 1 (the SIGHASH_SINGLE) in another transaction without Input 2 included?

What can I do to lock these two inputs together, with one of the inputs also being locked to an output, while still allowing people to add inputs to the transaction?

added 22 characters in body
Source Link
nick carraway
nick carraway
  • 243
  • 1
  • 12

Say I am building a transaction in private:

  1. Input 1 is signed with SIGHASH_SINGLE (SIGHASH_NONE | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY)
  2. Input 2 is signed with SIGHASH_NONESIGHASH_SINGLE ( | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY)

SIGHASH_NONE implies that Input 21 will only spend if Input 12 is included in the transaction. Am I able to communicate this privately-signed transaction in such a way that Input 12 is also locked on the condition that Input 21 is included?

For example, I send this partially-signed transaction, with both signatures, to a person I do not trust.

Are they able to spend Input 12 (the SIGHASH_SINGLE) in another transaction without Input 21 included?

Say I am building a transaction in private:

  1. Input 1 is signed with SIGHASH_SINGLE ( | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY)
  2. Input 2 is signed with SIGHASH_NONE | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY

SIGHASH_NONE implies that Input 2 will only spend if Input 1 is included in the transaction. Am I able to communicate this privately-signed transaction in such a way that Input 1 is also locked on the condition that Input 2 is included?

For example, I send this partially-signed transaction, with both signatures, to a person I do not trust.

Are they able to spend Input 1 in another transaction without Input 2 included?

Say I am building a transaction in private:

  1. Input 1 is signed with SIGHASH_NONE | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY
  2. Input 2 is signed with SIGHASH_SINGLE ( | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY)

SIGHASH_NONE implies that Input 1 will only spend if Input 2 is included in the transaction. Am I able to communicate this privately-signed transaction in such a way that Input 2 is also locked on the condition that Input 1 is included?

For example, I send this partially-signed transaction, with both signatures, to a person I do not trust.

Are they able to spend Input 2 (the SIGHASH_SINGLE) in another transaction without Input 1 included?

Source Link
nick carraway
nick carraway
  • 243
  • 1
  • 12