Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Add ref for why sighash_all is required
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
andrewtoth committed Jan 13, 2025
1 parent 9952599 commit 651ffdd
Showing 1 changed file with 1 addition and 1 deletion.
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion bip-PSBT-SP.mediawiki
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ If any output does not have PSBT_OUT_SCRIPT set, the Signer must not yet add a s
The Signer should additionally compute the silent payment addresses, optionally showing this data to the user instead of the computed segwit v1 addresses.

If a sighash type is provided and there are silent payment outputs present, the signer must fail if the sighash type is not SIGHASH_ALL.
If a sighash type is not provided and there are silent payment outputs present, the signer must sign using SIGHASH_ALL.
If a sighash type is not provided and there are silent payment outputs present, the signer must sign using SIGHASH_ALL.<ref name="why_use_sighash_all"> ''' Why use only SIGHASH_ALL?''' BIP352 allows signing with SIGHASH_NONE and SIGHASH_SINGLE. However, silent payment capable PSBTs compute the output scripts deterministically based on the number and position of silent payment codes with the same scan key. SIGHASH_NONE and SIGHASH_SINGLE allow changing the amount or position of silent payment codes with the same scan and spend keys, which would invalidate computed output scripts.</ref>

====Computing the DLEQ Proof====

Expand Down

0 comments on commit 651ffdd

Please sign in to comment.