Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#3974

  1. A proposed alternative was a hard fork update allowing more storage size in a block, such as Bitcoin Cash.

  2. Segwit also solved the issue of transaction malleability.

  3. Segwit allows for second layer protocols which lead to the lightening network.

  4. No one is forced to use Segwit as it is a soft fork update.

1 Like
#3975
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit : The proposed alternative was to increase the block size limit.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue : It fixed a bug in the code that removed the risk of transaction malleability by removing the signature from the transaction data. It also introduced the concept of block weight. It created the capability where blocks sent over the network is capped at 4MB, with the base transaction block size remaining 1MB, where the 4MB block size would include the segregated witness data.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected : Segwit supported the development of second layer protocols like Lightning network. This was achieved through taking small routine transactions off-chain until the users were ready to process these transactions.
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit : I don’t think so, it seems from the article that once Segwit was introduced other developers and wallets started implementing the update and at the end of 2018 several wallets for example have already adopted the update such as Ledger, Trezen and Kraken.
1 Like
#3977
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Segregated Witness, or SegWit, is the process by which the block size limit on a blockchain is increased by removing signature data from transactions that are included in each block. When certain parts of a transaction are removed, this frees up space or capacity to add more transactions to the chain. Segregate means to separate, and witnesses are the transaction signatures. Hence, segregated witness, in short, means to separate transaction signatures.

  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

SegWit alleviates the scaling problem in two ways: SegWit solves Transaction Malleability, thereby enabling the Lightning Network, an overlay network of micropayment channels, hypothetically resolving the scaling problem by enabling virtually unlimited numbers of instant, low-fee transactions to occur "off-chain

  1. How are Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

SegWit is a “soft fork” (a backwards-compatible code change) that has been implemented on some cryptocurrencies (such as Litecoin). It is a scaling solution meant to solve Bitcoin’s blockchain size limitations by allowing more transactions to be added to each block thereby increasing Bitcoin transaction speeds. The trick involves splitting a transaction into two segments, moving the unlocking signature (“witness” data) from the original segment to a “witness” segment. It is up to Bitcoin users, including entities like Coinbase, to embrace SegWit. As more entities embrace SegWit, Bitcoin transaction speeds will become faster

  1. Are people, wallets, and other services forced to use Segwit?

SegWit hasn’t been fully adopted by all Bitcoin network participants because it isn’t mandatory, but also due to different incentives between users in the ecosystem

1 Like
#3978
  1. The proposed alternative to Segwit was a hard fork to make the block size larger.
  2. In addition to a scaling solution, Segwit also enabled the development of second layer protocols like lightning.
  3. By not having to change the transaction ID i.e. preventing transaction malleability, this enabled the development of the lightning network.
  4. No. It is a soft fork but wallets have been adding Segwit.
1 Like
#3979
  1. Increasing the block size to fit more transactions (BCH). However, this would have been a very temporary fix
  2. It also solved the problem of transaction malleability.
  3. Lightning network would not be possible while transaction malleability is still a problem, because it relies on transactions that are not settled on the bitcoin blockchain yet.
  4. No. Segwit was a soft fork. Many network participants have upgraded, while others have not. Many wallets / exchanges offer the option to either use segwit or not.
1 Like
#3980
  1. Increasing the block size
  2. Segwit allowed for lower transaction mass which allowed for more transactions to be included in each block but also eliminated transaction malleability as the signature was removed from the hash equation which meant that the transaction ID would not be changed if someone altered the signature
  3. Segwit and the lightning network are connected as it enables recurring transactions to be processed off-chain without risking security as the transaction id is no longer impacted by the signature and transaction malleability
  4. No as it is a soft fork
1 Like
#3981

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increasing the blocksize greater than 1mb.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Transaction mallability

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit and the Lightning network are connected by being a two layer solution ontop of Bitcoin.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No

1 Like
#3982

1:The alternative solution to the scalability problem in Blockchain was growing the capacity in transactions of the Blocks from 1MB-2MB
2:It also solves the transaction Malleability bug.
3:Thanks to the protocol Upgrade of Segwit the lighting network a second layer protocol was developed to boost Bitcoin transactions.
4:No, because the it was a Soft Fork

1 Like
#3983
  1. making the allowed blocks bigger to 2 mb
  2. the signature malleability
  3. made second layer solutions possible
  4. no its a soft fork
1 Like
#3984

Increasing the block size was another discussed alternative solution for Bitcoin scaling problem back in 2015.

Instead of rooting for SegWit as a solution for Bitcoin scaling problem back in 2015 some argue that increasing the block size would be the right solution. That is also one of the reasons of the birth of Bitcoin Cash, a hard fork of Bitcoin.

SegWit solved the Bitcoin malleability problem.

Before the introduction of SegWit Bitcoin transactions were malleable. It was possible to alter the transaction ID but not the content of the transaction. This flaw made certain type of an exploits possible.

SegWit made Lightning network possible.

Now that SegWit fixes the malleability problem is use and development of Lighting network and other layer-2 protocols possible.

Lightning network helps by taking small transactions, frequent transactions off-chain clearing more bandwidth for transactions.

SegWit is a soft fork.

One of the reasons others consider SegWit to be the right solution for Bitcoin scalability problem was the fact that SegWit is a soft fork so no necessary split of chain was needed because of this update.
SegWit adoption is optional.

1 Like
#3985
  1. It was raising the block size cap. Which is what Bitcoin Cash went on to do later.
  2. They fixed the network so that people couldn’t change the signatures in the transaction.°
  3. Lighting Network is a layer 2 solution which wouldn’t have been possible without segwit.
  4. No they are not
1 Like
#3986

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    A proposal to increase block size.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It fixed the tx malleability problem that also prevented second layer protocols and smart contracts.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit allows the lightning network to be secured and practical.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No. Concerning bitcoin the majority ruled making it a soft fork.

1 Like
#3987

  1. A hard fork

  2. transaction malleability

  3. fixing the transaction malleability allows for the implementation of the lightning network

4)No

1 Like
#3988

1- A proposed alternative to segwit would have been to increase block capacity (size) but would be a temporary fix.
2- Besides the scalability issue segwit solved, it also fixed the malleability issue.
3- Segwit made it possible for further development of layer 2 protocols such as Lightningnetwork, Mast, Tumble Bit, Schnorr Signitures.
4- No one is forced to use segwit as it is a soft fork.

1 Like
#3989

1.- It was to increase the block size, resulting in a hard fork ansd a new coin called bitcoin cash.
2.- It solved a bug where a malicious actor can make slight change on tx id so inducing the spender to make tx again. Its called transaction malleability.
3.- Lightning network is a second layer protocol, and any of them needs the security improvement of the tx malleability.
4,. No, they can still choose to use the legacy nodes (not upgraded).

1 Like
#3990
  1. The alternative proposed was to increase the block size to 2 MB.
  2. By separating the signature from the tx, the malleability was defeated too. By changing the signature of a tx, the hash of the tx would not change anymore - because it is not part of the hash.
  3. Because of segwit there is the posibility of second layer, such as lightning network.
  4. No. It is a softfork.
1 Like
#3991

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    A: The initial alternative solution was to increase the max size of a block from 1 mb to 2 mb.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    A: By removing the signature and storing it outside the transaction block, SEGWIT solved the Transaction Malleability problem as well, because the transaction ID / hash is not affected anymore when a signature is changed.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    A: SEGWIT made the development of second layer protocols possible, as the lightning network.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    A: No, they are not, because SEGWIT is compatible with the previous protocol, and avoids the need for a hard fork. (SegWit does not increase the block size limit, but it does enable a greater number of transactions within the 1MB blocks. The 4MB cap includes the segregated witness data, which technically does not form part of the 1MB base transaction block).

1 Like
#3992
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increasing the block sie
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Removing signiture
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Second layer solutions
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, compatible with the old protocol
1 Like
#3993
  1. Increase the size of the block.
  2. It was able to fix transaction malleability which makes it possible to change to transaction ID.
  3. Lightening network is the second layer application on top of Bitcoin which is made possible by using Segwit.
  4. People are not forced to use Segwit as it is compatible with the old protocol.
1 Like
#3994

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    One of the alternative purposal was to increase the block size limit, which led to a hard fork and new coins were founded.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    The Segwit allowed the solution for transactions malleability, which actually allowed to fraud with transactions by changing their hash

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit actually provides a new way to implement new protocols giving more security to unconfirmed transactions.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

No, they are not part of this is the amount of wallets that still in 2021 have not adopted this, these represent at least 11 Million BTC. Source:

https://en.cryptonomist.ch/2021/09/05/bitcoin-segwit-adoption-booms/

2 Likes