Even if the difference is apparent outside the signed data (in the output). Signing the data explicitly is more secure.
ie. if some sort of vulnerability / way to break this system for 1-of-1 multisig is found, someone who signed a single sig xpub whitelist will not be exposed.
В Sat, 29 Jun 2019 09:19:41 +0900
Jonathan Underwood <junderwood@bitcoinbank.co.jp> пишет:
> > Other note: you have 'unused' value of 1 for `m` in your scheme, why
> > not require m=1 for single-sig case, and use 0 as indicator that
> > there are a serlal number following it?
> >
>
> 0x00 is single sig, aka, OP_CHECKSIG
>
> 0x01 is multisig, aka, 1-of-3, 1-of-2 OP_CHECKMULTISIG
This informatin is available in per-output redeem/witness script,
signer will be able to distinguish between multisig/single-sig by
looking at this script. I think it only need to know the total number
of keys participating in the signing, and check that this number
matches the particulars of redeem/witness script.