LBANK INFO CRYPTOCURRENCY

I'm researching how RGB uses Taproot commitments (Tapret, LNPBP-12) and ran a transfer experiment on testnet: 64a14551...c20b6b . The RGB client output shows the state anchored at tapret1st:64a14551...c20b6b:1 — a standard P2TR output on-chain. My understanding is that Tapret inserts an unspendable 64-byte OP_RETURN leaf into the script tree at depth 1, shifting existing scripts one level deeper. This changes the Merkle root, which changes the output key (P2TR address) via the BIP-341 tweak formula. Two questions: If Script_A was originally at depth 1 (single-leaf, empty Merkle path in the control block), after Tapret insertion it moves to depth 2. Does the original control block become invalid? Does the spender need to reconstruct it with the Tapret leaf hash included in the Merkle path? Since the Merkle root changes with every new Tapret commitment, does RGB always derive a fresh P2TR address for each state transition — even if the internal key P remains the same? ...

When spending a Taproot script-path output with SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT (BIP118), I want to understand what exactly is committed to regarding the script tree. Specifically: if two UTXOs have the same executed leaf (same TapLeaf hash) but different TapTree structures (different Merkle paths), will the same APO signature validate against both? I constructed a multi-round Eltoo chain on Inquisition signet, and observed that the APO signature can still be reused across rounds and successfully spend the output. I also confirmed that the same APO signature can spend two different UTXOs with identical scripts and amounts ( tx1 , tx2 ). This suggests that the signature commits to the TapLeaf hash, but not the full Merkle path — and I’d like to confirm whether this is the correct interpretation. from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/8RLqVjy via IFTTT

How come Bitcoin community is not acting on this huge threat? They keep saying it is a FUD instead of getting together and coming up with ideas. Without proper roadmap Bitcoin will be eliminated within next 4 years! https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2026/03/28/watch-out-bitcoin-devs-google-says-post-quantum-migration-needs-to-happen-by-2029 from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/ZDH2Nzc via IFTTT

I'm looking for a web-based wallet, web3 service or exchange that uses their own, non-bip39 wordlist. My backup phrase contains the words ministry, goodbye, distribute, and formal - these are not written down incorrectly, since this is an actual screenshot with the full recovery phrase. The only issue is that I don't remember which service I used this for. I signed up for quite a few back in the day and typically made screenshots rather than write down the words. Unfortunately, this particular screenshot does not contain the name of the service or the url... Any help would be appreciated! from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/1UwgueD via IFTTT

With OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK (CSFS), signatures are verified against an explicit message rather than the transaction sighash. This seems to allow the same (sig, message) pair to be reused across different UTXOs, unless something binds the message to a specific context. Some discussions (e.g. by Jeremy Rubin https://rubin.io/bitcoin/2024/12/02/csfs-ctv-rekey-symmetry/ ) mention re-keying or laddering constructions to mitigate this. My question is: How exactly do CSFS laddering or re-keying schemes prevent cross-UTXO replay in practice? What is the binding mechanism — is it based on chaining commitments, updating keys per step, or something else? from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/NYzps2H via IFTTT

I’ve been testing simple opcode combinations — CHECKSIG, CSFS, IK+CSFS....trying to get a feel for what each one actually binds. It feels like the challenge is less about expressiveness, and more about choosing the right kind of binding. I’m wondering: Do developers see this as its own discipline — not Ethereum-style contracts, but something like designing Bitcoin’s contracts within constraints? Does that map to a distinct kind of engineering role over time? Or is this still just considered script work? from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/7xwDKoX via IFTTT