Maybe the winning player is white and chess is a win by force for white. Or the same could even be true about black! (Probably not.)
This is a sensational title. Apparently "only" a list of email addresses was stolen.
It's true that the rent payment depends on the previous transaction's signature, but if that payment (even if mutated) has made it into even one block, the wallet software that generates the rent transaction is able to…
But the mutated version necessarily has the same outputs, right? How does mutating then make your rent payment invalid? edit: To clarify, once the mutated transaction is on the blockchain even once, the wallet should be…
Maybe the winning player is white and chess is a win by force for white. Or the same could even be true about black! (Probably not.)
This is a sensational title. Apparently "only" a list of email addresses was stolen.
It's true that the rent payment depends on the previous transaction's signature, but if that payment (even if mutated) has made it into even one block, the wallet software that generates the rent transaction is able to…
But the mutated version necessarily has the same outputs, right? How does mutating then make your rent payment invalid? edit: To clarify, once the mutated transaction is on the blockchain even once, the wallet should be…