From 2c1615e75b89cf78df16d9213b3fd6da5f89cc1b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "David A. Harding" Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2015 09:07:02 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Dev Docs: Remove security confusion from P2SH intro Somebody thought the paragraph being revised in this commit implied that P2SH was implemented because P2PKH had security problems: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/q/36695/21052 --- _includes/guide_transactions.md | 14 +++++++------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/_includes/guide_transactions.md b/_includes/guide_transactions.md index 281f9d31..e15f79ee 100644 --- a/_includes/guide_transactions.md +++ b/_includes/guide_transactions.md @@ -255,13 +255,13 @@ problems with it). {% autocrossref %} -Pubkey scripts are created by spenders who have little interest in the -long-term security or usefulness of the particular satoshis they're -currently spending. Receivers do care about the conditions imposed on -the satoshis by the pubkey script and, if they want, they can ask -spenders to use a particular pubkey script. Unfortunately, custom -pubkey scripts are less convenient than short Bitcoin addresses and more -difficult to secure than P2PKH pubkey hashes. +Pubkey scripts are created by spenders who have little interest what +that script does. Receivers do care about the script conditions and, if +they want, they can ask spenders to use a particular pubkey script. +Unfortunately, custom pubkey scripts are less convenient than short +Bitcoin addresses and there was no standard way to communicate them +between programs prior to widespread implementation of the BIP70 Payment +Protocol discussed later. To solve these problems, pay-to-script-hash ([P2SH][]{:#term-p2sh}{:.term}) transactions were created in 2012 to let