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 220FAEED for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 00:27:37 +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 AF78F829 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 00:27:36 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2019 00:27:32 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=default; t=1565224054; bh=oEuhL+yx/8X0MszC7gqkv2Ka/1ljVqOLVTjrcv4kYHs=; h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Feedback-ID: From; b=ePSQbMDckmEzUDzWdM2odxEJeXIzZYdJH8AAzU3totLLBoGvS5/jE9aCSny1zMwBN 2bWhXPltp16gPFVG/KEtdw+cbZ2RQmL75lhG7Jq8vhcLlS/TaPXMdeIuxvWS8q/9Vi qcxuDOG7dMQlKdbeHhDRvg5ufNjI9ORa3GNNv/lE= To: Bryan Bishop , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion From: ZmnSCPxj Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin vaults with anti-theft recovery/clawback mechanisms 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, 08 Aug 2019 00:27:37 -0000 Good morning Bryan, > - Re-vaulting transaction. This is where the magic happens. The re-vaul= ting > transaction is signed during transaction tree setup, before construct= ing the > delayed-spend transaction for the parent vault. The re-vaulting trans= action is > broadcasted when someone wants to prevent a coin withdrawal during th= e public > observation delay period. The re-vaulting transaction spends the dela= yed-spend > transaction outputs. It has a single output with a script created by = running > the entire vault setup function again. Hence, when the re-vaulting tr= ansaction > is confirmed, all of the coins go back into a new identically-configu= red vault > instead of being relinquished through the delayed-spend transaction t= imeout for > hot wallet key signing. As transactions need to be signed in reverse order, it seems to me that the= re is a practical limit in the number of times a vault can be used. Basically, the number of times we run the vault setup function is the limit= on number of re-vaultings possible. Is my understanding correct? Regards, ZmnSCPxj