Maleable transactions

Post Reply
virtual_master
Posts: 541
Joined: Mon May 20, 2013 12:03 pm
Contact:

Maleable transactions

Post by virtual_master » Mon Feb 10, 2014 4:56 pm

Maleable transactions(as addressed by MtGox)
This is today the most heated discussion topic by cryptocoiners so I would like to post some related topic links and eventually discuss how far is Namecoin affected by this so called Bitcoin design 'flaw'.
If there is not a design flaw but more a MtGox excuse, and especially Namecoin is not affected at all then maybe it is the wrong category.
Some related links:
https://www.mtgox.com/press_release_20140210.html
http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/2014/02/ ... -responds/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2096060/ ... fraud.html
http://bitcoinmagazine.com/10093/transa ... test-woes/
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=458074.0
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comment ... ox/cf99yac
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comment ... _at_mtgox/
https://gist.github.com/sipa/8907691
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_Malleability

Litecoiners as I see even try to use this situation to propagate their own coins over BTC giving the impression as LTC would be better but recognizing in their own forum that if Bitcoin is affected then Litecoin also.
http://namecoinia.org/
Calendars for free to print: 2014 Calendar in JPG | 2014 Calendar in PDF Protect the Environment with Namecoin: 2014 Calendar in JPG | 2014 Calendar in PDF
BTC: 15KXVQv7UGtUoTe5VNWXT1bMz46MXuePba | NMC: NABFA31b3x7CvhKMxcipUqA3TnKsNfCC7S

phelix
Posts: 1631
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 6:59 am

Re: Maleable transactions

Post by phelix » Tue Feb 11, 2014 10:49 pm

I see this as a low priority issue for normal users. Exchanges need to check their code but if they did it right they should be safe. Let's see what Bitcoin devs come up with if anything.
nx.bit - some namecoin stats
nf.bit - shortcut to this forum

khal
Site Admin
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 5:09 pm
os: linux

Re: Maleable transactions

Post by khal » Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:55 am

phelix wrote:I see this as a low priority issue for normal users. Exchanges need to check their code but if they did it right they should be safe. Let's see what Bitcoin devs come up with if anything.
The only solution envisaged is to refuse tx with bad formatted signatures. That is what was planned for bitcoin, but before doing that all bitcoin softwares must use the correct way to sign (some bitcoin dev look in the blockchain to follow this since several months/years).
As this is not a critical issue, I guess the bitcoin devs won't force the hardfork (instead, merchants should detect this and recognize good/bad signatures as the same).
NamecoinID: id/khal
GPG : 9CC5B92E965D69A9
NMC: N1KHAL5C1CRzy58NdJwp1tbLze3XrkFxx9
BTC: 1KHAL8bUjnkMRMg9yd2dNrYnJgZGH8Nj6T

Register Namecoin domains with BTC
My bitcoin Identity - Send messages to bitcoin users
Charity Ad - Make a good deed without paying a cent

biolizard89
Posts: 1998
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 6:25 am
os: linux

Re: Maleable transactions

Post by biolizard89 » Wed Feb 19, 2014 5:24 am

Transaction malleability destroys an idea I had for allowing names in cold storage to automatically renew. I was planning to have a chain of unconfirmed renew transactions which could be broadcast/mined every 24000 blocks or so, but that relies on txid's not being maliciously changeable. So, I think malleability should definitely be eliminated. I think the Bitcoin devs agree; they're just trying to do it right rather than doing a half-assed rushed job.
Jeremy Rand, Lead Namecoin Application Engineer
NameID: id/jeremy
DyName: Dynamic DNS update client for .bit domains.

Donations: BTC 1EcUWRa9H6ZuWPkF3BDj6k4k1vCgv41ab8 ; NMC NFqbaS7ReiQ9MBmsowwcDSmp4iDznjmEh5

Post Reply