From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 626262BCF for ; Thu, 2 May 2019 00:10:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-40133.protonmail.ch (mail-40133.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.133]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6810587 for ; Thu, 2 May 2019 00:10:41 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 02 May 2019 00:10:37 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=default; t=1556755838; bh=ATzdbQe6bFldymX8x8pzmBFXITun0nQnPbqMvTwPEU0=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From; b=YD2lwxkaMzCVuLMuFkxQvQcnjCU8QRGXMZAYvVqTO9yYAh1qoI84CYyEwGjKecd7V n5A5INyd1DPcFxdV/26p00rvuQsvTe34AigpaP7afIB3/wUzyVmK4uaNt3H3tt7/h7 pee9Pfgw6zvDZw6O4ygIrgE6LbnB8L5jrpaK+G44= To: Aymeric Vitte From: ZmnSCPxj Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1019ea57-7240-2dc7-8357-970223278e3d@gmail.com> References: <21346b3c-dad5-c666-9234-8916aa5a56e4@gmail.com> <201904290301.43459.luke@dashjr.org> <56b67b57-dc11-183a-1f4e-5a8c296b64cc@gmail.com> <1019ea57-7240-2dc7-8357-970223278e3d@gmail.com> Feedback-ID: el4j0RWPRERue64lIQeq9Y2FP-mdB86tFqjmrJyEPR9VAtMovPEo9tvgA0CrTsSHJeeyPXqnoAu6DN-R04uJUg==:Ext:ProtonMail MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 02 May 2019 23:19:41 +0000 Cc: "bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] IsStandard X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 May 2019 00:10:42 -0000 Good morning Aymeric, Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 Original Me= ssage =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 On Tuesday, April 30, 2019 5:43 PM, Aymeric Vitte = wrote: > I must badly explain my point (or just wondering things that do not > exist finally), the question is indeed whether nodes will relay non > usual transactions or not and how to know what they will accept or not: > > - my modified multisig 2 of 3: I did put OP_2 out of the usual redeem > script, the redeem script still matches scriptpubkey and scriptsig wi= ll > execute succesfully, that's a normal legacy P2SH or segwit P2WSH > > - bch segwit recovery: it's a p2sh transaction without any signature > verification, as far as I remember there was a story that it could no= t > propagate in the network (even taking the risk to be stolen) and that > people had to contact a (honest) miner > > - sha bounties: same as above, p2sh transactions without signatures > > etc > > Will all of those transactions propagate normally? And then the rule = is > just that it matches the P2PKH, P2WPKH, P2SH, or P2WSH templates > whatever scripts you put inside? P2PKH and P2WPKH cannot have custom script. However, yes, any custom script can be wrapped in P2SH and P2WSH and it wil= l be propagated. The P2SH/P2WSH hides the details of your custom script so cannot be filtere= d based on your custom script. Do realize that once a claim on your modified x-of-3 is propagated your `re= deemScript` is known and someone can attempt to RBF (or coordinate with a m= iner) with a modified `witness` stack or `scriptSig` to claim your UTXO. (I do not know if `OP_CHECKMULTISIG` supports 0-of-3 but at least one of yo= ur signatories could make it a 1-of-3 and bribe a miner to get it claimed) I cannot answer for BCH; arguably that is off-topic here. The old SHA bounty transactions were propagated in the days before `isStand= ard` I think. Either that or they were put in by miners. An SHA bounty can still be propagated today if they are wrapped in a P2SH o= r P2WSH, but you have to publish the `redeemScript` yourself in some other = method. Or bribe a miner if the transaction is not time-sensitive (for an SHA bount= y, unlikely to be time-sensitive). Regards, ZmnSCPxj