search

Bitcoin-com / bitbox-sdk

BITBOX SDK for Bitcoin Cash
https://developer.bitcoin.com/bitbox
MIT License
89 stars 62 forks source link

SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY (0x80) is an invalid hashType #165

Open lightswarm124 opened 4 years ago

lightswarm124 commented 4 years ago

transactionBuilder.sign( 0, alice_keypair, redeemScript, transactionBuilder.hashTypes.SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY, originalAmount );

returns the following error:

error: Error: Invalid hashType 192 at ECSignature.toScriptSignature (/home/lightswarm/project/bitcoinbay/atomicBCH/node_modules/bitcoincashjs-lib/src/ecsignature.js:95:51) at /home/lightswarm/project/bitcoinbay/atomicBCH/node_modules/bitcoincashjs-lib/src/transaction_builder.js:722:37 at Array.some () at TransactionBuilder.sign (/home/lightswarm/project/bitcoinbay/atomicBCH/node_modules/bitcoincashjs-lib/src/transaction_builder.js:713:30) at TransactionBuilder.sign (/home/lightswarm/project/bitcoinbay/atomicBCH/node_modules/bitbox-sdk/lib/TransactionBuilder.js:80:26) at run (/home/lightswarm/project/bitcoinbay/atomicBCH/src/index.js:57:24) at processTicksAndRejections (internal/process/task_queues.js:93:5)

It seems that 0x80 ANYONECANPAY needs to append one of SIGHASH ALL/ONE/NONE. The following hashType values work:

christroutner commented 4 years ago

@lightswarm124 could you provide an example script that generates the error?

bitbox-sdk v8.11.2 includes a new Script.encode2() function that I think will fix this issue.

I believe the error you're seeing is because the TransactionBuilder is calling Script.encode which is mangling to OP code. If you provide an example that generates the error your seeing, I'd like to play with it and see where I should make the Transaction Builder call the new encode2 function.

christroutner commented 4 years ago

The example you give jives with this part of the code.

Looks like that list should be expanded so that users don't need to OR values to get the value they're expecting.

lightswarm124 commented 4 years ago

The example you give jives with this part of the code.

Looks like that list should be expanded so that users don't need to OR values to get the value they're expecting.

I'm not sure where this list lives, but I think it may be part of the overall network consensus. One quick-fix would be to add the value of the other hashtypes into ANYONECANPAY (0x80 + 0x*)