Why is `SIGHASH_ALL` allowed in taproot when `SIGHASH_DEFAULT` is more efficient?

The existence of SIGHASH_DEFAULT makes SIGHASH_ALL redundant for Taproot, since both produce the same behavior — except SIGHASH_DEFAULT saves a byte by being implicit.

Given Bitcoin’s usual focus on minimizing blockspace usage (e.g. x-only pubkeys, minimal ScriptSig rules), why isn’t there a consensus or policy rule to disallow or discourage SIGHASH_ALL in Taproot signatures?

I’m not suggesting it’s a bad design choice — I just want to understand the rationale behind allowing the redundant form.



from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/3HkUf0R
via IFTTT

Popular posts from this blog

Bitcoin Mining Could Be Strengthening The Ruble, Russian Central Bank Says

Crypto Exec Warns Tokenization Is Moving Faster Than Expected

Bitwise Clients Pour $69M Into Solana as Bulls Fight to Reclaim $200 Resistance Zone