Posted by andrewtoth
Jun 14, 2024/23:45 UTC
The discussion around the use of SIGHASH_ALL in conjunction with ANYONECANPAY inputs within Bitcoin transactions raises several technical considerations. The primary concern is whether an input marked with ANYONECANPAY, when paired with SIGHASH_ALL, presents a vulnerability or not. The theoretical scenario posited involves a fully signed transaction that includes at least one ANYONECANPAY input, which covers the amount of the inputs it signs for, even when combined with SIGHASH_ALL. The issue identified is the potential for an external party to modify such a transaction by removing other inputs and rebroadcasting it. Since the modified transaction would still fulfill the necessary conditions for validity, there's a risk that the outputs originally intended as silent payments could become invalidated through this process. This situation underscores a nuanced aspect of Bitcoin's transaction mechanism, highlighting the complexities involved in ensuring transaction integrity while providing flexibility in signing options.
TLDR
We’ll email you summaries of the latest discussions from authoritative bitcoin sources, like bitcoin-dev, lightning-dev, and Delving Bitcoin.
We'd love to hear your feedback on this project?
Give Feedback