pull down to refresh

How did they use op_cat when bitcoin core nodes don’t know how to deal with that op code on the stack?

reply

Here is rijndaels answer in a comment on the post:

“ The hex value that used to be OP_CAT is defined to be an OP_SUCCESS in taproot, meaning that if its in a script, the script is valid. But, since it used to be OP_CAT, software like the mempool-space parser parses it as OP_CAT. BIP-420 picks that value to be OP_CAT, so if CAT were active today, this would be a valid tramsaction. To un-upgraded nodes (like… almost all of them), it is still a valid transaction because it doesnt see CAT, it sees SUCCESS. This is how we can add CAT as a softfork. Upgraded nodes will see 0x7e and interpret it as CAT. Unupgraded nodes will see it as SUCCESS. ”

reply
reply

Likely a backend deal with mara

reply

It doesn’t matter how much you pay the miners, the nodes won’t verify an invalid transaction.

reply
reply

Where is the trick?

reply

Did you see the 4mb jpg?

Looks like a trick to me

reply

Can be considered a trick, but it’s still a valid tx

reply
reply

Its a valid transaction

reply

Yeah I know I was saying not a backend deal with Mara because nodes wouldn’t verify it if invalid

reply
reply

It’s a repeat of the bigger block debate

reply

What do you mean?

reply

The nodes wouldn't validate the bigger blocks that hard forked into BCH

The blocksize war of 2017

reply

I know what the blocksize war is. I’m curious as to why you say this transaction is similar? Because this transaction is valid.

reply

I didn't say the transaction was similar

What is similar is that nodes won't verify an invalid transaction even if miners do

deleted by author

Mempool has it labeled as 'Seen in Mempool'

reply

This isn’t “OP_CAT” at all, they just put the OP_SUCCESS value in a script. This is kinda misleading BS

reply
reply

its so hard isnt it

interesting

reply