Exploring Bitcoin: signing bare MULTISIG input [2018]Exploring Bitcoin: signing bare MULTISIG input [2018]
https://medium.com/@bitaps.com/exploring-bitcoin-signing-bare-multisig-input-bf0771384893
This article is a detailed description of how bare MULTISIG output works in bitcoin transactions and the step-by-step algorithm for signing this type of output inside transaction input. In the enclosed part is an example of a signing bare MULTISIG input using the Python.
The problem is not only bare multisig.
If you banned bare multisig, they can do the same with hash values. In both cases (a EC pubkey, a hash function output, there is no structure you can enforce [*], and no way for you to know if the creator has a preimage for what they're publishing. So they can embed data in it.
It's pretty strange how many otherwise very technically knowledgeable people think that we can stop this with some new standardness rule or whatever. We basically can't, unless we do something very drastic to what Bitcoin even is. (Demurrage? )
[*] Apart from the fact that only approx 50% of random 256 bit strings are valid x-coords on the curve, for the former
I guess I should clarify that it's not like there's zero "value" in using bare multisig vs say data embedded in a pubkey-hash standard output here. There's some few bytes of savings by using one output instead of multiple; and from the point of view of coding some jpeg-tracking thing it's always easier to track one output instead of many.
But just talking in general, at the highest level, you can't stop this by disabling one output type
If you want to configure your node to stop the propagation of these transactions to other nodes, set this to
0:https://m.stacker.news/8178
ie open your bitcoin.conf file, type in
permitbaremultisig=0
save the file restart core.
I know it’s viewed as a spam attack, but it does clog up the mempool and prevent people from making on-chain transactions at a reasonable fee.
In theory, the attackers will run out of funds eventually and it will stop. But here’s a thought I had: yes you can’t just print Bitcoin like you print fiat. But you can buy Bitcoin with printed fiat in various ways, giving you more Bitcoin to fund these attacks. It can’t go on forever, given the hard cap of supply, the fact that buying pressure would raise the fiat price, etc. but it can certainly drive normies to L2 by making on-chain prohibitive.
Just my 2 sats
Been thinking about this a lot in the last few weeks. While it can't go on forever, "spam" like this could certainly last long enough to make things difficult. On the bright side tho, I think this is where builders really earn their market share. The best tools and solutions arise out of necessity, not convenience.
I agree completely!
yep.
plebs are a particular, if loose-knit, group of bitcoiners. and it's important for plebs not to get their ranks (as in rank & file) forked by chaotic shit like this. stay level headed. don't accept bullshit code changes from the core devs.
we can pay attention, keep (and revisit regularly) a journal, and leverage the tools we have already: community, communications (stacker news, the telegram channels, nostr, matrix, etc...) & our mempools
there was a massive spam attack (& hard fork discussion) which preceded the last halvening. the spam stopped almost immediately after the halvening.
i'm anticipating some news that encourages a fast change UASF or hard-fork, and I already don't want to participate.
Honestly didn't know this, shows you how long I've been around lol
Certainly feels like that's where it's going
welcome_to_the_party_pal.gif
remain calm... i think that's gonna be my mantra for 2024.
Why do people keep saying this is worse? At least they are showing their true colors; they don't have to pretend anymore that ordinals are "good for bitcoin" or "artful" or whatever BS. Of course, the attackers would be better off keeping their bitcoin instead of wasting it like this, but apparently they have decided to die killing.
We are in the "then they attack you" phase. This is just the beginning. Expect worse attacks coming.
One thing I'm not clear on: Is there any economic incentive behind this behavior (such as being used to mint BRC-20s and NFTs)? Or is it simply an expensive troll?
from what I've read and if I haven't misunderstood, it's a spam expensive troll
Thanks for bringing this discussion, I would like to understand better too.
deleted by author
Taking a look, thanks
Bare Multisig Outputs - What's Going On ? => #352806
Economic incentive? You can convince data-hoarding OCD morons that the UTXO set is more "permanent" than any witness data that can get pruned.
mikeinspace is a moron
Always has been. This clown was always just part of the illogically contrarian troll crowd.
It’s bold to state this is the worst case scenario. Things can always get worse…
“Forever” seems a little dramatic. Worst case, wouldn’t pruned node software just maintain a bad list to purge?
Doesn’t this ultimately just lead to some minor software improvements while costing the griever funds to attack?
I guess this is why my miner is getting more sats than usual
Do they still have to pay for all that bloat?
Blockchain animal spirits.