[bitcoin-dev] We can trivially fix quadratic CHECKSIG with a simple soft-fork modifying just SignatureHash()
j at toom.im
Tue Dec 29 12:42:55 UTC 2015
That sounds like a rather unlikely scenario. Unless you have a specific reason to suspect that might be the case, I think we don't need to worry about it too much. If we announce the intention to perform such a soft fork a couple of months before the soft fork becomes active, and if nobody complains about it destroying their secret stash, then I think that's fair enough and we could proceed.
On Dec 28, 2015, at 11:47 PM, jl2012 via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Do we need to consider that someone may have a timelocked big tx, with private key lost?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
More information about the bitcoin-dev