sighash_taproot algorithm fixes #66
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
12 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #65
I've found 2 distinct bugs in the implementation of the SigMsg function from BIP-341.
The first, when the sighash includes ANYONECANPAY the spec says the first chunk of data must be
outpoint (36): the COutPoint of this input (32-byte hash + 4-byte little-endian). However Embit was serializing the whole input using theTransactionInput.write_to()method, which includes more fields than just the outpoint and results in 41 bytes of data instead of 36.Second, when SIGHASH_SINGLE is used the spec says to include
sha_single_output (32): the SHA256 of the corresponding output in CTxOut format. In this case Embit was including the serialization of the output itself, not its SHA256 digest.With these two changes I'm able to spend non-SIGHASH_DEFAULT Taproot transactions made from PSBTs signed with Embit.
I'd like help adding the unit test that reproduces the issue, as for now I can't follow test_taproot.py. I was able to verify that the test suite is currently not covering these execution branches, though: