{ "number": 32247, "repo": "bitcoin/bitcoin", "url": "https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32247", "title": "BIP-348 (OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK) (regtest only)", "author": "jamesob", "author_association": "CONTRIBUTOR", "created_at": "2025-04-10T19:41:43Z", "updated_at": "2026-06-30T17:13:52Z", "age_days": 524, "draft": true, "labels": [ "Consensus", "Needs rebase", "Needs Conceptual Review" ], "milestone": null, "base": "master", "head_sha": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "head_ref": "2025-04-csfs", "head_repo": "jamesob/bitcoin", "head_history": [ { "t": "2025-04-11T15:07:58Z", "sha": "cb0c9f6389abc1d24b4fb8b80eaaa539acd81f92" }, { "t": "2025-04-26T14:21:44Z", "sha": "7e7b3784dd3857fa504b56fa762166e9846a0955" }, { "t": "2025-04-30T23:55:50Z", "sha": "8c000e7f38e7454dbf7d3502b1e4fec3581f1cc6" }, { "t": "2025-05-12T15:54:14Z", "sha": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd" } ], "additions": 296, "deletions": 12, "changed_files": 20, "commit_count": 3, "size_bucket": "M", "mergeable_state": "dirty", "bot": { "drahtbot": { "present": true, "reviews": { "concept_ack": [ { "login": "jonatack", "url": "https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32247#issuecomment-2797253857" }, { "login": "shahsb", "url": "https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32247#issuecomment-2811995385" }, { "login": "yuvicc", "url": "https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32247#issuecomment-2901612231" }, { "login": "delta1", "url": "https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32247#issuecomment-2955583380" }, { "login": "pinheadmz", "url": "https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32247#issuecomment-2960013289" } ], "stale_ack": [ { "login": "JeremyRubin", "url": "https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32247#issuecomment-2812906642" } ] }, "conflicts": [ { "number": 32998, "title": "Bump SCRIPT_VERIFY flags to 64 bit", "author": "ajtowns" }, { "number": 32473, "title": "Introduce per-txin sighash midstate cache for legacy/p2sh/segwitv0 scripts", "author": "sipa" }, { "number": 32453, "title": "[Policy] Discourage Unsigned Annexes", "author": "JeremyRubin" }, { "number": 31989, "title": "BIP-119 (OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY) (regtest only)", "author": "jamesob" }, { "number": 29843, "title": "policy: Allow non-standard scripts with -acceptnonstdtxn=1 (test nets only)", "author": "ajtowns" }, { "number": 29247, "title": "CAT in Tapscript (BIP-347)", "author": "arminsabouri" }, { "number": 26201, "title": "Remove Taproot activation height", "author": "Sjors" } ] } }, "acks_parsed": { "jonatack": { "kind": "concept_ack", "hash": null, "t": "2025-04-11T15:34:58Z", "stale": false }, "shahsb": { "kind": "concept_ack", "hash": null, "t": "2025-04-17T07:04:51Z", "stale": false }, "JeremyRubin": { "kind": "ack", "hash": null, "t": "2025-04-17T13:25:51Z", "stale": true }, "yuvicc": { "kind": "concept_ack", "hash": null, "t": "2025-05-22T15:14:16Z", "stale": false }, "delta1": { "kind": "concept_ack", "hash": null, "t": "2025-06-09T11:59:06Z", "stale": false } }, "acks_tally": { "ack": 0, "stale_ack": 1, "concept_ack": 4, "approach_ack": 0, "nack": 0, "concept_nack": 0, "approach_nack": 0 }, "reviews": { "approved": 0, "changes_requested": 0, "distinct_reviewers": [ "1440000bytes", "JeremyRubin", "benthecarman", "delta1", "instagibbs", "jonatack", "pinheadmz", "shahsb", "yuvicc" ] }, "signals": { "needs_rebase": true, "ci_failed": false, "mergeable_state": "dirty", "last_author_activity": "2025-05-12T15:54:14Z", "last_reviewer_activity": "2025-07-30T17:57:29Z", "last_reviewer": "benthecarman", "author_silent_days": 493, "waiting_on_author_days": 413, "days_since_update": 78 }, "refs": { "mentioned": [ 31989 ], "depends_on": [], "fixes": [], "linked_issues": [], "references": [ { "number": 31989, "type": "pull", "state": "open", "merged": false, "merged_at": null, "title": "BIP-119 (OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY) (regtest only)" } ], "conflicts": [ 32998, 32473, 32453, 31989, 29843, 29247, 26201 ] }, "stack": { "shares_commits_with": [], "based_on": [], "base_for": [] }, "review_paths": [ "src/pubkey.cpp", "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "src/script/interpreter.h" ], "body": "This implements [BIP-348 (`OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK`)](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0348.md), but only specifies a regtest deployment. There is no effective policy change, since the SCRIPT_VERIFY_* flags (as used) result in the same OP_SUCCESS-like behavior.\n\nThis change can be composed with other opcode specifications (e.g. CTV, see #31989) and bundled into the same deployment (yet to be specified).\n\nI encourage more general, conceptual discussion to happen on [Delving Bitcoin](https://delvingbitcoin.org/) and not on this pull request.\n\nSome related discussion on Delving Bitcoin here:\n- https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/ctv-csfs-can-we-reach-consensus-on-a-first-step-towards-covenants/\n\nSee also:\n- https://bitcoinops.org/en/topics/op_checksigfromstack/", "commits": [ { "sha": "15d7aa5391cf3bd4070c1167410d7c895e6045b7", "date": "2025-05-12T15:38:55Z", "message": "Implement OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK\n\nSome code and ideas from Elements by stevenroose, and sanket1729\nPorting help from moonsettler.\n\nTests added to the transaction tests framework.\n\nCo-authored-by: James O'Beirne " }, { "sha": "765a674603e67af81600e9af0de355f21874253e", "date": "2025-05-12T15:39:00Z", "message": "consensus: add a CSFS deployment for regtest only" }, { "sha": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "date": "2025-05-12T15:52:51Z", "message": "test: add BIP-348 coverage to feature_taproot" } ], "timeline": [ { "t": "2025-04-11T15:07:58Z", "kind": "force_push", "who": "jamesob", "commit": "cb0c9f6389abc1d24b4fb8b80eaaa539acd81f92" }, { "t": "2025-04-11T15:34:58Z", "kind": "comment", "who": "jonatack", "assoc": "MEMBER", "text": "Concept ACK" }, { "t": "2025-04-16T01:37:11Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/script/interpreter.h", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": null, "text": "should maybe use bits 24 and 25" }, { "t": "2025-04-16T01:45:31Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/pubkey.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": null, "text": "i think it might be better to introduce a new function, VerifySchnorrArbitrary here, that way any existing use is identical API. Or use multi dispatch." }, { "t": "2025-04-16T01:46:03Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": null, "text": "usually we return via set_error, right?\n\nor I guess EvalCheckSigFromStack sets it for us -- maybe worth a comment." }, { "t": "2025-04-16T01:57:17Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/pubkey.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": null, "text": "needs to be asserting that msg.size() > 0" }, { "t": "2025-04-16T01:57:34Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/pubkey.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": 2045857460, "text": "secp256k1_schnorrsig_verify will assert otherwise" }, { "t": "2025-04-16T02:00:40Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/pubkey.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": 2045857460, "text": "nvm misread the ARGCHECK --> it's only checked that if msg is NULL, then length must be 0, which... makes sense!" }, { "t": "2025-04-16T02:07:52Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": null, "text": "should we just update the BIP for this to just be the internalkey? At the very least, there isn't a hard reason I can think of to burn this keytype (other than checksig keytype parity)\n\nwe'd still be bound to the bytes per sigop restrictions, and it seems harmless to allow?\n\ncc @instagibbs @reardencode" }, { "t": "2025-04-16T02:09:26Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": null, "text": "code wise, it shouldn't matter, but I'd set success = false here anyways?" }, { "t": "2025-04-16T02:10:21Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": null, "text": "same -- it doesn't matter, but I'd set success = false." }, { "t": "2025-04-16T02:30:00Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": null, "text": "on L354 we do set success variable, and according to current BIP text, we should be setting success =true explicitly in this case." }, { "t": "2025-04-16T02:30:51Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": 2045891004, "text": "further, wer'e erronenously setting success=false for unknown key types, so definitely have to fix that!" }, { "t": "2025-04-16T03:09:11Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": 2045891004, "text": "thought about this more; we do want success=false in all cases when sig = null, i was wrong" }, { "t": "2025-04-16T18:41:27Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "instagibbs", "assoc": "MEMBER", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": 2045867908, "text": "https://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/CAD5xwhi6DYVm3sONub0x4s=Ef0TupA4j4KxY616RnacXr1GsLA@mail.gmail.com/\n\nI think I agree with 2022-you; separate opcode for key is cleaner and strictly better. Leaving it undefined might be fine?" }, { "t": "2025-04-16T19:56:15Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": 2045867908, "text": "I'm fine with that -- if we want INTERNALKEY it can be it's own opcode later on.\n\nfollow up would be: does symmetry with CHECKSIG mean we should make OP_0 permanently a non-key? v.s. preserving the upgrade path?" }, { "t": "2025-04-17T07:04:12Z", "kind": "review", "who": "shahsb", "assoc": "NONE", "state": "COMMENTED", "commit": "cb0c9f6389abc1d24b4fb8b80eaaa539acd81f92", "text": "I agree with @JeremyRubin comments..!" }, { "t": "2025-04-17T07:04:51Z", "kind": "comment", "who": "shahsb", "assoc": "NONE", "text": "Concept ACK" }, { "t": "2025-04-17T13:25:51Z", "kind": "comment", "who": "JeremyRubin", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "text": "cr ACK [cb0c9f6](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32247/commits/cb0c9f6389abc1d24b4fb8b80eaaa539acd81f92)\n\nThis matches the BIP's semantics, and the implementation is reasonable. Minor nits above to reduce possibility of behavior changes for other users of Schnorr APIs." }, { "t": "2025-04-17T19:47:01Z", "kind": "comment", "who": "instagibbs", "assoc": "MEMBER", "text": "I spent a bit of time writing tests (reading directly from the BIP) for feature_taproot.py: https://github.com/instagibbs/bitcoin/tree/2025-04-bip348_tests\n\nThis should hopefully give some nice coverage of border conditions, including sigops budget and maybe inspired people to add more if they want to contribute in a positive way.\n\nhttps://github.com/instagibbs/bitcoin/tree/2025-03-bip348-inq-28 this was an alternative implementation of the core logic, but I think it matches here" }, { "t": "2025-04-26T14:21:44Z", "kind": "force_push", "who": "jamesob", "commit": "7e7b3784dd3857fa504b56fa762166e9846a0955" }, { "t": "2025-04-26T14:23:58Z", "kind": "comment", "who": "jamesob", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "text": "Thanks @instagibbs; I've compressed your test changes into a single commit and added that here." }, { "t": "2025-04-30T23:55:50Z", "kind": "force_push", "who": "jamesob", "commit": "8c000e7f38e7454dbf7d3502b1e4fec3581f1cc6" }, { "t": "2025-05-12T15:54:14Z", "kind": "force_push", "who": "jamesob", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd" }, { "t": "2025-05-22T15:14:16Z", "kind": "comment", "who": "yuvicc", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "text": "Concept ACK" }, { "t": "2025-06-09T11:59:06Z", "kind": "comment", "who": "delta1", "assoc": "NONE", "text": "Concept ACK" }, { "t": "2025-06-10T17:04:26Z", "kind": "comment", "who": "pinheadmz", "assoc": "MEMBER", "text": "In an effort to keep pull requests focused on technical discussion, I invite all contributors of conceptual review to post here:\n\nhttps://github.com/bitcoin-core/meta/discussions/28\n\nPlease try to keep pull request comments focused on the code changes, and move all other comments including \"concept N/ACK\" to the discussion page." }, { "t": "2025-06-22T07:13:15Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "1440000bytes", "assoc": "NONE", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": null, "text": "Why tapscript only?" }, { "t": "2025-06-22T07:56:03Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "benthecarman", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": 2160245851, "text": "https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0348.md" }, { "t": "2025-06-22T08:33:02Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "1440000bytes", "assoc": "NONE", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": 2160245851, "text": "I couldn't find anything in the BIP but there was some discussion in the pull request and mailing list:\n\nhttps://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1535#issuecomment-2111195930\n\nhttps://groups.google.com/u/2/g/bitcoindev/c/usHmnXDuJQc/m/PbSGqDjIAgAJ\n\nI think it shouldn't be restricted to taproot. It could be used for several things and not just LN SYMMETRY." }, { "t": "2025-07-30T17:57:29Z", "kind": "review_comment", "who": "benthecarman", "assoc": "CONTRIBUTOR", "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "commit": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "in_reply_to": null, "text": "nit: this is between EvalChecksigPreTapscript and EvalChecksigTapscript which can be a little confusing/annoying" } ], "labels_log": [ { "t": "2025-04-11T09:23:42Z", "action": "labeled", "label": "Consensus", "who": "laanwj" }, { "t": "2025-04-29T00:52:12Z", "action": "labeled", "label": "CI failed", "who": "DrahtBot" }, { "t": "2025-04-29T22:58:35Z", "action": "labeled", "label": "Needs rebase", "who": "DrahtBot" }, { "t": "2025-05-01T00:34:17Z", "action": "unlabeled", "label": "Needs rebase", "who": "DrahtBot" }, { "t": "2025-05-01T01:14:13Z", "action": "unlabeled", "label": "CI failed", "who": "DrahtBot" }, { "t": "2025-05-06T23:17:53Z", "action": "labeled", "label": "Needs rebase", "who": "DrahtBot" }, { "t": "2025-05-12T16:41:27Z", "action": "unlabeled", "label": "Needs rebase", "who": "DrahtBot" }, { "t": "2025-06-10T12:56:08Z", "action": "labeled", "label": "Needs Conceptual Review", "who": "glozow" }, { "t": "2025-08-11T11:28:31Z", "action": "labeled", "label": "Needs rebase", "who": "DrahtBot" } ], "state_log": [ { "t": "2025-10-22T15:58:00Z", "kind": "convert_to_draft", "who": "achow101" } ], "text_chars": 4667, "text_tokens_estimate": 1166, "changed_paths": [ "src/consensus/params.h", "src/deploymentinfo.cpp", "src/kernel/chainparams.cpp", "src/policy/policy.h", "src/pubkey.cpp", "src/pubkey.h", "src/rpc/blockchain.cpp", "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "src/script/interpreter.h", "src/script/script.cpp", "src/script/script.h", "src/test/data/tx_invalid.json", "src/test/data/tx_valid.json", "src/test/transaction_tests.cpp", "src/test/versionbits_tests.cpp", "src/validation.cpp", "test/functional/feature_taproot.py", "test/functional/rpc_blockchain.py", "test/functional/test_framework/key.py", "test/functional/test_framework/script.py" ], "files": [ { "path": "src/consensus/params.h", "add": 1, "del": 0 }, { "path": "src/deploymentinfo.cpp", "add": 4, "del": 0 }, { "path": "src/kernel/chainparams.cpp", "add": 5, "del": 0 }, { "path": "src/policy/policy.h", "add": 2, "del": 1 }, { "path": "src/pubkey.cpp", "add": 3, "del": 2 }, { "path": "src/pubkey.h", "add": 2, "del": 1 }, { "path": "src/rpc/blockchain.cpp", "add": 4, "del": 0 }, { "path": "src/script/interpreter.cpp", "add": 92, "del": 3 }, { "path": "src/script/interpreter.h", "add": 6, "del": 0 }, { "path": "src/script/script.cpp", "add": 3, "del": 0 }, { "path": "src/script/script.h", "add": 1, "del": 0 }, { "path": "src/test/data/tx_invalid.json", "add": 8, "del": 0 }, { "path": "src/test/data/tx_valid.json", "add": 29, "del": 0 }, { "path": "src/test/transaction_tests.cpp", "add": 2, "del": 0 }, { "path": "src/test/versionbits_tests.cpp", "add": 6, "del": 0 }, { "path": "src/validation.cpp", "add": 12, "del": 1 }, { "path": "test/functional/feature_taproot.py", "add": 85, "del": 1 }, { "path": "test/functional/rpc_blockchain.py", "add": 13, "del": 0 }, { "path": "test/functional/test_framework/key.py", "add": 0, "del": 1 }, { "path": "test/functional/test_framework/script.py", "add": 18, "del": 2 } ], "test_lines": 165, "git": { "head": "ae64dcebe115d0708ea9d0ad444ec9df98fbd7cd", "head_matches_backup": true, "base": "3edf400b1020d7b88402ebc0e758b1fad2e7a781", "commits": [ { "sha": "15d7aa5391", "subject": "Implement OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK", "files": 12, "add": 169, "del": 8 }, { "sha": "765a674603", "subject": "consensus: add a CSFS deployment for regtest only", "files": 8, "add": 45, "del": 4 }, { "sha": "ae64dcebe1", "subject": "test: add BIP-348 coverage to feature_taproot", "files": 3, "add": 86, "del": 4 } ], "patch_truncated": false }, "input_hash": "909be6080fab6992", "extracted_at": "2026-09-17T16:15:31+00:00" }