Is it true that any UTXO's that are unspent prefork of BCH AUG 2017, has a risk of a replay attack? Say I have 1 BTC in my wallet which has never moved since 2016. Now I load that private key into BCH wallet and now I have 1 BCH. I make a transaction on BCH to a vendor, but now he takes that same transaction and broadcasts it on BTC chain. Now I lost my BTC too. Is this correct?
asked Feb 9, 2021 at 16:49
-
1Wasn't this already answered in bitcoin.stackexchange.com/q/102397/5406?– Murch ♦Commented Feb 9, 2021 at 17:17
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
No, BCH and BTC transactions were never replayable to the other network. Starting with the very first BCH block, all BCH transactions were required to use a different SIGHASH_FORKID than used in BTC. This mandatory replay-protection causes BCH transactions to appear invalid to BTC clients, and vice versa, BTC transactions to appear invalid to BCH clients. However, (pre-segwit) addresses remained compatible between the two network, which caused some user confusion.
I assume that the fact that the replay protection was always mandatory may have been lost on some observers, because BCH's replay protection was only made mandatory a couple days before BCH forked off, so a lot of the prior discussion and worries became obsolete last minute. Alternatively, the source of this worry may have been confused by BSV forking off from BCH without any replay-protection whatsoever.
