search

stacks-network / stacks-core

The Stacks blockchain implementation
https://docs.stacks.co
GNU General Public License v3.0
3.01k stars 670 forks source link

Modify `SignerCommand::Sign` type to not sign blocks with taproot #4519

Open hstove opened 8 months ago

hstove commented 8 months ago

Right now, the SignCommand::Sign type takes a block and a is_taproot boolean flag. The newly added SignerDB doesn't differentiate between taproot or schnoor block signatures, which can lead to issues. We either need to update SignerDB to add the is_taproot flag, or just remove the ability for these block signature commands to use taproot. My understanding is that the latter is better, because we won't be using taproot signatures to sign blocks.

xoloki commented 8 months ago

Nakamoto will not sign with taproot, but sBTC will.

It seems more forward looking to fix signer DB to support this.

hstove commented 8 months ago

Yeah I do follow that reasoning, but when signing for sBTC, will the type need a block field? Am I wrong that it would make more sense to have types like SignCommand::SignBlock(block) and SignCommand::SignTx(tx)?

netrome commented 8 months ago

Yeah I do follow that reasoning, but when signing for sBTC, will the type need a block field? Am I wrong that it would make more sense to have types like SignCommand::SignBlock(block) and SignCommand::SignTx(tx)?

Yeah I think that makes more sense. In sBTC we'll sign BTC transactions and not Stacks blocks as the Nakamoto signer does.