Non-equivocation bond. By forcing users to use a specific nonce.
🤔
Discussion
This something op CAT enable. Allegedly. Idk what these bonds are but suppose it's time to learn.
Can you give an example of where you'd want to do this and for which it wouldnt create a risk?
Idk what non-equivocation bonds are yet. Im just public note taking from a second pass through nostr:npub1qdcakl75gd7wv0nqmmwrz09ddm5tzl7xj8lq2gclng2qzd8up5yqjpzclt
nostr:npub1az9xj85cmxv8e9j9y80lvqp97crsqdu2fpu3srwthd99qfu9qsgstam8y8 nostr:npub1emdtsxly9m68m00x206t574jttp65vk0c2m89ms038q047yz7ylqcac9aw or nostr:npub1mxrssnzg8y9zjr6a9g6xqwhxfa23xlvmftluakxqatsrp6ez9gjssu0htc may be able to answer that?
If you re-use a nonce for two different signatures with the same key, it leaks the key.
Imagine a UTXO is encumbered with a script that says “you have to use 7” as the nonce.
If you can spend that UTXO and you sign more than one transaction spending it, you leak your private key.
Lots of interesting applications (especially in multi party settings) where you can make it costly for someone to sign two conflicting transactions
Ooooo. So it's a cryptographic way to enforce spending into a narrow scope. Does that help with zero conf or similar?