2

What malleability means is that you can create a transaction that is identical in its meaning (same inputs, same outputs) but with a different TXID. That is problematic for 2nd layer protocols where transactions build onto each other but aren't necessarily published to chain. But a "malleated" transaction is still a double spend. And it appears newer ...


1

Yes. Many of the malleability sources listed in BIP 62 still exist today. Most (if not all) are not standard, i.e. most nodes will not relay transactions that exploit them, but they are not consensus rules. So a miner can still perform malleability attacks.


1

Yes, you are correct. Joseph Poon and Tadje Dryja in their Lightning Network whitepaper proposed the SIGHASH_NOINPUT flag to prevent transaction malleability flaw hampering the creation of commitment transaction prior to funding transaction. However, with the deployment of SegWit in 2017, NOINPUT was not longer needed as signatures are not part of the txid ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible