"Block difficulty" is the difficulty listed in a block's header, which in the
testnet can sometimes be min-difficulty (if time-since-last-block is too large).
"Network difficulty" is the difficulty that the network was trying to satisfy
at a particular block height. In mainnet this is always equal to the difficulty
of the solved block for that height, but in testnet the network difficulty is
derived from the last non-min-difficulty block difficulty.
This commit fixes the RPC APIs that are intended to show network difficulty, so
that on testnet they don't sometimes drop to 1.0, confusing users.
Closes#1181
The genesis blocks and miner tests have been regenerated, because changing the
block header serialisation format changes the block hash, and thus validity.
The Equihash solutions have been removed from the bloom test inputs for
simplicity (block validity is not checked there; only a valid serialisation is
necessary).
A fix for transaction malleability
This PR fixes transaction malleability by not including the sigscript of transaction inputs and joinsplit sigs when hashing the txid.
This PR supercedes PR #1101 which was a minimal solution based on a new serialization flag.
This PR introduces GetTxid() to distinguish between getting a transaction id and the double sha256 hash.
The key changes are:
- Adding GetTxid() method to CTransaction which makes a copy of the transaction, clearing out the sigscript and joinsplitsig fields, before hashing.
- Verifying that every call to GetHash() actually wants a txid, and replacing with GetTxid().
- Renaming GetHash() to GetSerializeHash()
- Rationale: In future, upstream code we want to merge will use GetHash() but we don't know the intent. We should check to see if the intent is to receive a txid (most likely) in which case we replace with GetTxid(), or if upstream actually wants a double hash of the transaction we can use GetSerializeHash().
- Updated genesis data in chainparams.cpp
Note that coinbase transactions are excluded as they need the sigscript hashed to help avoid duplicate txids per BIP34:
- This modification is related to a question from @ebfull on PR #1101 - "Can we think of a way this change allows us to construct two transactions with the same txid which can simultaneously appear in the blockchain? My guess is it would be possible to construct a coinbase transaction of such a form... this surely breaks invariants."
This PR Passes all tests in test_bitcoin (test data was updated in bloom_tests, miner_tests and script_tests).
