[Bitcoin-development] one-show signatures (Re: The relationship between Proof-of-Publication and Anti-Replay Oracles)
pete at petertodd.org
Sun Dec 21 18:51:26 UTC 2014
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 06:10:47PM +0000, Adam Back wrote:
> Yes you could for example define a new rule that two signatures
> (double-spend) authorises something - eg miners to take funds. (And
> this would work with existing ECDSA addresses & unrestricted R-value
> I wasnt really making a point other than an aside that it maybe is
> sort-of possible to do with math what you said was not possible where
> you said "This [preventing signing more than one message] is
> impossible to implement with math alone".
Introducing a bunch of clever ECDSA math doesn't change the fact that
the clever math isn't what is preventing double-spending, clever
economics is. Just like Bitcoin itself.
No sense getting people potentially confused by a bunch of complex
equations that aren't relevant to the more fundemental and much more
important principle that math alone can't prevent double-spending.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 650 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the bitcoin-dev