ref: default to ALL + ANYONECANPAY #67
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
coolaj86
force-pushed
the
ref-sighash-default
branch
from
b3fb213 to
00cd0a5
Compare
|
Let's discuss this. I want to make sure I understand the decision and tradeoff here. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Although legacy software typically sends ALL, ALL+ANYONECANPAY is "required" for Coin Join, and more importantly, it doesn't leak unnecessary information about the transaction characteristics.
Namely, it doesn't dictate that the transaction must have been a single-wallet transaction. Since multi-wallet transactions are supported, and single wallets can sign the same way a multi-wallet process would, there doesn't seem to be any reason to leak that characteristic information.
Possible Negative Consequence: If a generous party decides to pick up your tab and pay the bills for you, and you were looking specifically at the txid rather than the addresses, you might be expecting one transaction id, but instead see another.