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
This commit is contained in:
David A. Harding 2015-04-01 09:07:02 -04:00
parent 936cfd6388
commit 2c1615e75b
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: 4B29C30FF29EC4B7

View file

@ -255,13 +255,13 @@ problems with it).
{% autocrossref %} {% autocrossref %}
Pubkey scripts are created by spenders who have little interest in the Pubkey scripts are created by spenders who have little interest what
long-term security or usefulness of the particular satoshis they're that script does. Receivers do care about the script conditions and, if
currently spending. Receivers do care about the conditions imposed on they want, they can ask spenders to use a particular pubkey script.
the satoshis by the pubkey script and, if they want, they can ask Unfortunately, custom pubkey scripts are less convenient than short
spenders to use a particular pubkey script. Unfortunately, custom Bitcoin addresses and there was no standard way to communicate them
pubkey scripts are less convenient than short Bitcoin addresses and more between programs prior to widespread implementation of the BIP70 Payment
difficult to secure than P2PKH pubkey hashes. Protocol discussed later.
To solve these problems, pay-to-script-hash To solve these problems, pay-to-script-hash
([P2SH][]{:#term-p2sh}{:.term}) transactions were created in 2012 to let ([P2SH][]{:#term-p2sh}{:.term}) transactions were created in 2012 to let