From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TPdsH-0006nm-RQ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 18:34:17 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.210.175 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.175; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-ia0-f175.google.com; Received: from mail-ia0-f175.google.com ([209.85.210.175]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1TPdsH-0003jq-8F for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 18:34:17 +0000 Received: by mail-ia0-f175.google.com with SMTP id b35so1160042iac.34 for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 11:34:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.208.106 with SMTP id md10mr5060822igc.5.1350758051977; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 11:34:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.171.73 with HTTP; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 11:34:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 14:34:11 -0400 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: Pieter Wuille Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 0.3 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-Headers-End: 1TPdsH-0003jq-8F Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Public key and signature malleability X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 18:34:18 -0000 On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Pieter Wuille wrote: > What do you think about these rules? If people want these rules, > nothing would happen for now - just start try to find software that > doesn't produce complying data. In a second step, these could be > enabled as check similar to IsStandard() - making it hard for them to > get into blocks, but still be accepted when they aren't standard. > Finally, when no significant amount of non-standard transactions are > seen anymore, we can write a BIP and start enforcing this as a network > rule. I strongly support heading down this path. Malleability has produced a steady trickle of surprising outcomes. In addition to the problems we already know about and expect there may be additional security or DOS problems that arise from allowing these.