Segwit Reading Assignment

[MoCrypto]

1. BCH was the alternative and looked to solve the scalability issue by starting out with a larger block size to continue with.

2. SegWit fixed transaction malleability by removing the signature information (otherwise known as the “witness” information) and storing it outside the base transaction block. With that, signatures and scripts can be changed without affecting the transaction id.

3. It supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network. The malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.

4. No, those that do not agree with Segwit are free to use BCH for their blockchain transactions.

[ybernaerts]

1. Increasing the block’s size.
2. It solved a malleability issue: btc receiver could change the signature of a TX directed to them claiming then they never got it (TXid changed) such that the sender would send it a 2nd time. Now they can still change it, but it doesn’t change the TXid itself anymore since the signature is outside the block, so the sender can check it. That’s an improvement to security.
3. The malleability fix paves the way to 2nd layer protocols such as the lightning network, which can now take small TXs offline and put back online when the users are ready.
4. No, they are not, yet it is encouraged. It’s a soft fork.

[xeviuus]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? Increase the max block size to 2mb
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? it removed the issue with signature transaction malleability that could lead to abuse.
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? Segwit is bases of the Lightening network.
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? No it was soft fork. more and more wallets are adding SegWit support.

[AlfaMorales]

1.To increase the block size limit.
2.It fixed a flaw allowed anyone to change small details that modified the transaction id (and the subsequent hash) but not the content.
3. The fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.
4. No. Since its a soft fork, transaction with the SegWit format are valid with the nodes and wallets that does not support SegWit.

[Wevlin]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   Bitcoin cash with a 16mb increase
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   Id information that could be gleaned because of a malleability bug
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   It is built on what segwit made possible with a 4mb road whilst keeping the base 1mb so it did not need a hardfork
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   no, only a minority use it but it is growing everyday as the infrastructure and adoption grows.

[Crypto_Tax_Fixer]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increase the block size to 2MB or 10 MB.

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

It avoided the problems of a hard fork. It also protected transaction malleability. It also made possible several other features like MAST (smart contracts features), Schnorr signatures (greater transaction capacity), and TumbleBit (an anonymous top-layer network).

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Lightning network is a second layer protocol that takes frquent, small transactions off-chain which relieves the Bitcoin block chain from being burden by these transactions until later.

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

Because Segwit is a soft fork, it doesn’t obsolete existing services.

[Henk1]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

• Increasing the block size limit to 2 mB (hard fork)

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

• Fixed malleability issue.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

• The lightning network won’t be possible without segwit.

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

• No it was a soft fork.

[Rzinho]

1.What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
To increase the block size like in the case of the Bitcoin Cash hard fork.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   It fixed the transaction malleability bug which enabled the storage of the signature outside of the transaction block.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   Segwit supports the development of the Lightening Network.

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

[Madsern]

@filip

• What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
• What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
• How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
• Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

1.The proposed alternative Segwit was to increase the MB a block can store with data.
2.It also solves the problem with malleability and lower fees.
3.Segwit was implemented and made it possible to make lightning network possible.
4.People are not forced to use it. It was a soft fork and old addresses and transactions can still be used.

[cryptopunk]

1. increase the block size limit to more than 1 MB
2. transaction malleability is no more possible (as the signature is no more part of the hash resulting in the tx-id, it can no more be altered; also fees are lower
   3)as segwit fixed the malleability issue (no altering earlier blocks tx-id/hash possible), 2nd layer solutions like lightning are now less risky from there design
   4)it is a softfork, therefore it is volontarily

[cincinnato]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
To increase the size of the blocks
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
The initial aim was to fix the bug of malleability.
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Solving the problem of malleability Segwit makes possible to develop second layer protocols like Lightening networks
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No; implementing the Segwit update required a pretty long time

[Brijay]

1.A proposed alternative to SegWit was increasing Bitcoin’s blocksize (which would require a hard fork).

2.SegWit also solved the malleability issue. By separating the data signature of a transaction from the transaction itself, and storing it outside of the transaction block, SegWit prevented the data signature from being used to alter that transaction.

3.Because the Lightning Network creates a secure network of participants who can transact bitcoin at high volume and speed, at low cost, it required a solution to the malleability issue to make it viable. SegWit was that solution.
Also. because Lightning Network transactions are not recorded on the blockchain, LN addresses the scaleability/blocksize issue. Because those transactions do not take up room on new blocks, they free up space for other transactions.

4.No, because SegWit is backwards compatible and the previous system still works. When a SegWit transaction is being validated by a legacy node (one which hasn’t been upgraded), the witness data is stripped from the transaction keeping the block size in accordance with the original Bitcoin protocol (less than 1MB).

[matthurd]

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

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   transaction maelability

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   lightningn network takes transactions off chain untill the user is ready. Segwit makes this possible.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No they cab choose as it is not implemented on all wallets.

[Adam1]

1. bitcoin cash

2. transaction malleability

3. segwit and lightning network are connected by further boosting bitcoins transaction capacity

4. no, because it is a soft fork

[rubio132]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   By increasing the block size by allowing more transactions within the 1MB block and making signatures data separate.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   It fixed transaction malleability by making unconfirmed transactions less risky. Preventing transaction id modification.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   By supporting a second layer of protocol and making lightning network possible.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No, Segwit it is optional since it is a soft fork.

[Von]

1. Upgrading blocks’ size. (bitcoin cash)

2. Malleability problem which was a risk.

3. Since segwit solves the malleability problem (less risk attached to unconfirmed transactions), and that lightning network is a second layer protocol, lightning network is safer with segwit.

4. No not forced but it makes sense for them to upgrade since it allows bitcoin to be faster and safer.

[iceman007]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   The proposed alternative is the block size increase of bitcoin cash

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   t fixed transaction malleability which allowed the transaction id to be changed.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   The lightning network is a 2nd layer protocol which will boost bitcoins transaction capacity.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No, old transactions can still be used.

[FilipGuldhill]

1. A hardfork with 2mb block size.
2. By moving the signature “witness” information out from the transaction, the malleability issue was solved. This issue created a vulnerability where the transaction could have been received but by changing the signature, the sender would not be able to find the transaction as the hash would have been completely changed.
3. Segwit made it possible to supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network. The lightning network will further boost bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain.
4. No, only about 45% of transaction currently follow this protocol.

[Bunbo_Hue]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

The proposed alternative was increasing block size from 1mb to 2mb.

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

Segwit solved both the issues of scalability as well as transaction malleability.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols such as the lightning network.

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

No, it is a soft fork but now has been widely adopted.

[donhuey]

1.What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increasing the Block size to 2mB

2.What did segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

Segwit solved the trxn malleability issue which allowed the script signature to be altered.

3.How is Segwit and the lightning network connected?

The lightning network, a 2nd layer protocol, required transaction malleability to be fixed in order to function.

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

No, people do not have to upgrade to segwit (Soft fork)