Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#1966

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

The first initial intention was to fix a bug in the bitcoin code called transaction malleability.

But the proposed alternative was: Bitcoin Cash because it would increase the block size.

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

  • Supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.

  • Removed the signature portion of the transaction

  • Allowed more transactions to be included in 1MB blocks

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit and Lightning Network are both second layer protocols.

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

Segwit is not a hard fork, therefore anyone is free to choose to use segwit enabled wallets or not.

1 Like
#1967

Segwit is an on chain solution that made second layer solutions like Lightning safer and easier to implement :slight_smile:

1 Like
#1968

Thanks! now I got it. :slight_smile:

#1969
  1. Increase the block size.
  2. It also solved a malleability issue.
  3. Lightning network is a layer two protocol that could not operate until segwit.
  4. Not until 51% of the network has witched over.
2 Likes
#1970

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

    An alternative was to increase the block size

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

    It also fixed transaction malleability by removing the signature information and storing it outside the base transaction block.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

    Both are solutions to solve the scalability problem, moreover SegWit allows and supports second layer solutions such as the Lightning network.

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

    No, as it is a softfork old addresses and transactions can still be used.

2 Likes
#1971
  1. increasing block size was an alternative solution.
  2. segwit eliminated transaction malleability. TX Mall was a trick used to acquire more BTC from unsuspecting victims by changing the TX signature. therefore the TX ID.
  3. Segwit allows any layer 2 solution that relies on unconfirmed tx to exist. with segwit the risk of a tx changing decreases, and the ease with which a protocol can be designed increase.
  4. you are not forced to use segwit, it is a soft fork.

Will TX that dont use segwit eventually be eliminated as more and more nodes adopt segwit?

2 Likes
#1972

Ah okay thanks :slightly_smiling_face:
But I guess it wouldn’t make a lot of sense to use the old style, right? (Or are there some reasons to use old style?)

#1973
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
  • Increasing the block size to 2mb , so it became bitcoin cash as a hard fork
  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  • Security , since transaction ID cannot be modified now due to input signature being outside the
    transaction and block.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

    • Segwig allows lighning network development since it made transactions easier to be built and more secure. Lightning moved frequent small transactions off-chain.

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

    • Not at all , some wallets support Segwig so the user can chose if using Segwig or not while other wallets are working to implement it.
1 Like
#1974

Most of the nodes have already updated, wallets implemented the feature more slowly. In any case old style transactions will remain valid on Bitcoin. :slight_smile:

1 Like
#1975

It makes sense in case you still have funds on an old address that you haven’t spend or a wallet that doesn’t support it. But it is beneficial to switch to segwit due to lower fees. :slight_smile:

3 Likes
#1976
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

A hard fork in which the maximum block size is increased from its original 1MB. This happened (Bitcoin Cash, lightning network).

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

A vulnerability due to transaction malleability, in which someone could change a signature on a transaction which was in a block which would completely change the hash.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

When Segwit fixed the transaction malleability issue it allowed 2nd layer protocols like lightning network to be designed more easily and with much less potential for those types of vulnerabilities.

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

No it’s a soft fork but the more that do the more efficient the new “version” of the network will be.

2 Likes
#1977

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    The proposed alternative to the segwit was to increase the block size from 1mb to 2mb. This was an ok solution but would’ve resulted in a hardfork of the blockchain.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    The segwit solved the scaling problem, added security because a user could change the signature (malleability) and that would not change the hash. Also adding the segwit allowed for second layer solutions to built on top of the btc network such as lighting network allowing for faster payment solutions.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    The lightening network took small transactions ‘off-chain’ only bringing them on chain when the users are ready to settle. Making itpossible.

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

1 Like
#1978
  1. Hard fork
  2. In addition to increasing Bitcoin’s ability to process transactions, SegWit fixes a fatal flaw in Bitcoin’s protocol that allowed users to tamper with transaction identities.
  3. SegWit is the foundation for the Lightning Network. By eliminating the possibility for transaction malleability, secure payment channels can be created that will eventually allow the Bitcoin network to process millions of transactions per second
  4. No Segwit is not a fork. It is a feature that was added to Bitcoin in 2017.
1 Like
#1979

Alright, thanks. :slightly_smiling_face:

#1980

1/ increase capacity from 1 to more mb

2/in addition to that, it resolved the ability to manipulate the signatures and thus the hash of the block

3/ the lightning network is possible thanks to segwit

4/ They are not forced but they are adopting it in the same way

1 Like
#1981
  1. Increasing the block size.
  2. Transaction Malleability.
  3. Segwit made second layer solutions possible (ex. lightning network).
  4. No, because old addresses and transactions are still valid, thus making this a soft fork.
1 Like
#1982
  1. To increase the blocksize
  2. Transaction malleability
  3. Because of Segwit a second layer solution became possible
  4. No, the old non-Segwit wallets work just fine.
1 Like
#1983

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size which led to Bitcoin Cash.

  2. Segwit helped to resolve transaction malleability, this way people could not manipulate the tx in order to trick others to sending more money. Also led to the lightning network as a second layer solution.

  3. Segwit helped to make it possible.

  4. They are not forced to.

1 Like
#1984

Some people wanted to increase block size instead of implement Segwit.

Segwit also solved the tx malleability issue.

Segwit allowed for second layer protocols such as lightning.

Segwit use is not forced.

1 Like
#1985
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
  • the alternate was the increase the block size, which would have been a hard fork.
  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  • transaction malleability and allowed more transactions to go on one block
  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  • Segwit made 2nd layer solutions possible. Lightning is a 2nd layer protocol with less potential for vulnerabilities
  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  • no, it’s a soft fork
1 Like