Episode #125 of the Stack Overflow podcast is here. We talk Tilde Club and mechanical keyboards. Listen now

New answers tagged

1

Not if you just do leading zeroes or just lowest value when interpreting as a very large integer. To make things easier, let's just assume that you use compact signatures which are just the signature's R and s values concatenated with each other instead of other signature formats which have additional surrounding formatting bytes that would interfere with a ...


0

@andrew provided helpful information that a major difference between "Sign Message" and "Sign Transaction" is that "Sign Message" internally prepends a custom string to the textual message being signed. Also, his answer addresses the case when you do all steps of the TX creation and signing. I tried to keep my initial question generic, but now I see that ...


2

The current signature scheme that bitcoin is using (ECDSA) doesn't support signature aggregation, so you will have to sign each input and provide one signature per input (assuming it requires only one signature) and your transaction size will grow accordingly. sell 5000 pcs coffee every day for $1 each Then you might want to look into Lightning Network....


10

Schnorr signatures will not replace ECDSA. Schnorr signature verification is expected to be implemented with the Taproot soft-fork using SegWit witness version 1. This means only outputs that are locked in v1 SegWit version are expected to produce a valid Schnorr signatures. ECDSA will continue to be used for spending current non-SegWit and v0 SegWit ...


2

Is the difference that for "Sign Message", first a digest is created, which is then signed, while for "Sign Transaction" (in the meaning written above), the input is already a digest, so it shouldn't be hashed again? No. It has nothing to do with the hashing. Furthermore, the input is not already a digest, it must be hashed before signing. Both the message ...


Top 50 recent answers are included