1 2016-08-09 02:17:53 <p2me> are there any signature rules besides high-s value i need to take care of? i'm still getting 50/50 success when pushing my tx's, with the only thing changing is the nonce
 2 2016-08-09 13:03:11 <Testfile> hello?
 3 2016-08-09 13:05:44 <jonasschnelli> hi
 4 2016-08-09 13:06:25 <Testfile> eyy this place isnt completly deserted
 5 2016-08-09 16:58:39 <arubi> thanks for the clarification jl2012
 6 2016-08-09 17:02:51 <p2me> thanks for the help yesterday arubi. was still getting errors after i fixed the high s-value stuff, had to fix DER encoding issues with the r value too. all good now though, ty
 7 2016-08-09 17:04:22 <arubi> ah no problem.  guess you needed to push 21 bytes as 0x00<R> ?
 8 2016-08-09 17:04:54 <arubi> (for r > 0x7f...)
 9 2016-08-09 17:05:49 <p2me> yeah 2's complement stuff, was being decoded as negative when the most significant bit was 1
10 2016-08-09 17:05:59 <arubi> mhm. exactly
11 2016-08-09 17:07:03 <p2me> that's the motivation for low s value then? saving 1 byte?
12 2016-08-09 17:07:28 <arubi> it's malleability, a high s is just as valid as the low s for a signature
13 2016-08-09 17:07:49 <arubi> but it creates transaction malleability, and it's exploitable by a 3rd party too
14 2016-08-09 17:08:31 <arubi> just change s values for txs that you hear about, that changes the txid and keeps the signature valid
15 2016-08-09 17:10:45 <p2me> oh makes sense. so malleability fix which happens to save 1 byte too
16 2016-08-09 17:11:02 <arubi> half the time :)
17 2016-08-09 18:04:01 <btcdrak> is anyone herr making segwit txs on testnet?
18 2016-08-09 19:45:03 <p2me> if you send coin to a script (hash) without any checksig op codes that's essentially open to theft, correct?
19 2016-08-09 19:45:17 <p2me> when you go to redeem it at least
20 2016-08-09 19:46:21 <p2me> like those "hash puzzle" examples
21 2016-08-09 19:47:55 <arubi> it's basically anyone-can-spend
22 2016-08-09 19:52:22 <p2me> ok. so any "real world" scripts you could think of, will have at least 1 checksig ya?
23 2016-08-09 19:56:13 <arubi> even a checksig isn't enough.  the hash must be some identification of the public key
24 2016-08-09 19:56:50 <arubi> you could have 'hash <data> <drop> checksig', any public key is good and anyone can spend after the preimage is known
25 2016-08-09 19:57:56 <arubi> not only that, but you don't need a private key at all to redeem something like that ^
26 2016-08-09 20:04:53 <p2me> ok i think i follow. i'm right to say the script will contain AT LEAST a checksig op code, but what is actually important a proper digital sig scheme. anything with symmetric information is anyone-can-spend
27 2016-08-09 20:06:06 <arubi> yea, afaik
28 2016-08-09 20:06:59 <p2me> alright cool