Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#4256

  1. Increase block size.

  2. Issue with transaction malleability. Signature now is outside transaction block, so it cant be hacked this way anymore.

  3. Lighting network have been used for malleability fix so small transactions have been made besides main blockchain.

  4. No, bitcoin cash was invented by the miners who did not wanted new segwit upgrade. So they can invent lager block size and fix problem like that.

1 Like
#4257

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increasing the block size

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
By reducing the block weight, Segwit allowed greater throughput, increasing transactions per block. It also enabled development of L2s (like Lightning Network), all without the need for a hard fork.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit enabled layer two development, and the Lightning Network, to be implemented safely.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No. Many wallets and services adopted Segwit, but those in the Bitcoin community that disagreed or did not support it went on to create Bitcoin Cash.

1 Like
#4258

  1. to make the blocksize bigger

  2. problem was solved and tx time is slower

  3. segwit was an update, lightning network is a 2nd layer

  4. not necessary, but it is better, faster and cheaper

1 Like
#4259

1 larger block size

2 the transaction malleability bug present in bitcoin’s code

3 Segwit allowed Lightning to be implemented

4 no

1 Like
#4260

1.) increasing the block from 1mb to 2mb
2.) it helped solve the tx malleability
3.) Segwit makes the second layer possible
4.) No not mandatory, old tx and addresses can still be issued (SF)

1 Like
#4261
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

User Activated Soft Fork (UASF) was proposed, whose nodes would activate at a predetermined future time.

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

Segwit solved the issue of malleability.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit solved transaction malleability by enabling the lightning network. This allowed large numbers of instant low fee transactions to occur “off chain.”

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

Segwit isn’t mandatory so people. Wallets and other services are not forced to use it.

1 Like
#4262

Note: The link from the course is not responding. So i had to go straight to the general study group forum.

It’s time for a reading assignment about Segwit. Read through the following article https://www.coindesk.com/information/what-is-segwit , and answer the following questions.

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Block size increase up to 4 mg.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Solves the transaction malleability challenge.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit can collaborate with second-layer solutions such as Lightning.

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

1 Like
#4263

  1. A hard fork into Bitcoin Cash which increased the block size limit

  2. It solved the issue of Transaction maliability

  3. Segwit makes second layer possible

  4. No it is a soft fork

1 Like
#4264
  1. To increase the blocksize from 1Mb to 2Mb.
  2. Also solved security issue with the tx malliability.
  3. It helps making the lightning network possible.
  4. No, it is a softfork but it is possible to use segwit with your wallet transactions.
1 Like
#4265

  1. Increasing the block size. This created the Bitcoin Cash hard fork.

  2. It solved the transaction malleability issue.

  3. SegWit supports the development of second layer protocols, which makes Lightning Network possible.

  4. No, it is a soft fork so it is not mandatory to use SegWit.

1 Like
#4266
  1. Increasing the blocksize to 2mB
  2. the Malleability issue
  3. Solving the Malleability issue made features relying on Unconfirmed Transactions less risky
  4. No
1 Like
#4267

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the bitcoin block size. This is what bitcoin cash, a fork in the bitcoin network, did.

  2. Segwit solved the transaction malleability issue, which allowed people to change the transaction ID after the transaction had been sent by modifying the transaction’s signature. Segwit removed the signature from the transaction data structure so the transaction ID can no longer be changed by modifying the signature.

  3. The Lightning network is a 2nd layer solution on top of the bitcoin network. It would not have been possible to run a 2nd layer solution on the bitcoin network if Segwit had not been introduced.

  4. People, wallets, and other services are not forced to use Segwit, it is a soft fork.

1 Like
#4268
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Answer: the initial proposed solution was to increase block size from 1mB to 2 mB. However, it would have been a temporary solution because Bitcoin network was growing exponentially at the time. Plus, it would have resulted in a hard fork.

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

Answer: It also solves the so-called “transaction malleability bug”. Prior to the update someone potentially could have tampered with the transaction signatures which would have resulted with invalid transaction being permanently stored on the blockchain. With SegWit, signatures are no longer a part of the transaction data, which removes the possibility of altering this data.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Answer: By fixing “transaction malleability bug”, it gave the blockchain community an opportunity to innovate further by introducing second-layer protocols and smart-contracts. The Lightning network is a popular second-layer protocol (built on top on the Bitcoin) which operates as a micropayment network.

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

Answer: SegWit is a soft fork upgrade, meaning that it is backward-compatible. Bitcoin nodes that are not ungraded to include SegWit, are still able to process transactions.

1 Like
#4269
  1. It was increasing the block size.
  2. It has solved the malleability issue.
  3. Segwit has allowed the lightning network operatable by solving the malleability problem/deleting signatures from the block.
  4. No, they’re not. Also, some of the community has chosen the increasing block size and forked the network(bitcoincash).
1 Like
#4270

Segwit Reading Assignment:

  1. The individuals who disagreed with Segwit, proposed the alternative of increasing block size limit.

  2. Segwit not only solved the scaling issues of blockchain, but it also eliminated the chance of transaction malleability. These issues were solved with removing signatures from transactions. This decreased the transaction size, which allowed more transactions within a block. Also, transaction IDs would never be affected if signatures were altered.

  3. The changes implemented by Segwit, supports and builds the development of the Lightning network (second layer protocols). This is done since it makes unconfirmed transactions less risky.

  4. People, wallets, and other services are not forced to use Segwit, since it is a soft fork update. The transactions of nodes that choose not to upgrade, will still be accepted with the update.

1 Like
#4271
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

A// Increase block size

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

A// block full issue
TX malleability

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

A// segwit support the lightining network and this will boost the bitcoins transaction capacity.

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

A// No, because it was a soft fork but it doesnt mean that big names are including this update in their wallets, it is a slow move.

1 Like
#4272
  1. The proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the 1MB block size limit. Which was actually implemented by an inevitable hard fork known as Bitcoin Cash. That chain has a 8MB block size limit and does not use Segwit.
  2. Segwit enhanced the network’s security since the removal of the signature (aka witness) from the transaction by nodes (in order to reduze its size), storing the signature separately, also elimates a potential exploit vector around transaction malleability. Changing the transaction ID (by slightly modifying the signature or scripts) by the transaction recipient would not cause the TX hash to change anymore.
  3. Segwit fosters the development and establishment of second layer solutions such as the lightning network, because transaction malleability poses risks to unconfirmed transactions. This is especially important since second layer protocols greatly enhance network scalability with many transactions happening before settlement takes place on the main bitcoin blockchain.
  4. People, wallets and other services are not forced to use Segwit. It makes sense though since transactions using Segwit are less expensive in fees.
1 Like
#4273
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    A: Increasing the size of thew Bitcoin blocks.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    A: The transaction malleability issues that were taking place due to a bug in the initial code.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    A: Second layer protocols like the Lightning network will take boost Bitcoins transaction capacity buy taking smaller transaction offline.
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    A: No, it was a softfork and they have the ability to choose whether they initiate a Segwit transaction or a regular transaction.
1 Like
#4274
  1. An increase to of the transaction blocksize above 1MB was proposed as an alternative to Segwit.
  2. Segwit was able to solve the transaction malleability vulnerability.
  3. The enablement of Segwit is related to lightning network because by separating signatures outside of the transaction block payload, it became user to build 2nd layer solutions on top of bitcoin.
  4. Because the move to segwit was a softfork people and wallets were not forced to move to segwith right away. I would happen over time.
1 Like
#4275
  1. The proposed alternative to Segwit was increasing the block sizes.
  2. Segwit solved the issue of transaction malleability, where some transactions IDs could be altered from signature tampering.
  3. Segwit supports the development of Lightening Network, a second layer protocol. Lightening Network increases bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking frequent and small transactions off-chain.
  4. No, even though it is a soft fork, it’s still compatible with the old protocol.
1 Like