This BIP specifies proposed changes to the Bitcoin transaction validity rules to restrict signatures to using low S values.
BIP 146: Low S values signatures #433
pull jl2012 wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from jl2012:biplows changing 1 files +60 −0-
jl2012 commented at 9:47 AM on August 16, 2016: contributor
- luke-jr added the label New BIP on Aug 16, 2016
- luke-jr added the label Needs number assignment on Aug 16, 2016
- jl2012 force-pushed on Aug 16, 2016
- jl2012 force-pushed on Aug 16, 2016
-
Add new BIP: Low S values signatures b004187f14
- jl2012 force-pushed on Aug 16, 2016
-
jl2012 commented at 6:18 PM on August 16, 2016: contributor
@luke-jr Addressed comments of https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-August/013007.html
- luke-jr renamed this:
Add new BIP: Low S values signatures
BIP 146: Low S values signatures
on Aug 16, 2016 - luke-jr removed the label Needs number assignment on Aug 16, 2016
- luke-jr merged this on Aug 16, 2016
- luke-jr closed this on Aug 16, 2016
- greenaddress cross-referenced this on Aug 17, 2016 from issue Bugfixes for signature verification with native secp256k1 library by paulminer
-
ysangkok commented at 12:21 AM on March 1, 2020: contributor
@jl2012 I understand that this has been implemented only as a standardness rule? So that means the Deployment section is obsolete. Do you think it would make sense to update the BIP? It is confusing now, because certain parts apply, but it would be confusing to mark it final since it is vague about deployment.
