Answer quote:

P2TR now is a spiritual successor of P2PK: it locks funds directly to a key and only requires a signature to spend the funds.

If P2TR UTXOs are guarded by Schnorr signatures and P2PKH ones are guarded by ECDSA plus a later RIPEMD160 stage, my question is: do we pay cheaper fees for less security in P2TR rather than using P2PKH, even though using P2TR is obviously currently reasonable (specially for short lived UTXOs)?

... abstracting from the rest of advantages of taproot, like improved privacy for everyone...


1 Answer 1


No, there isn't less (weaker) cryptographic security in P2TR- than P2PKH-type of UTXO (or locking script). As a matter of fact, there are improvements and (useless) complexity removed (to some extent). There is a lot of information about it in the Bitcoin Explained podcast (e.g. episode 2) by Sjors Provoost and Aaron van Wirdum.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.