4
2
From previous questions this bitcoin 1FYMZEHnszCHKTBdFZ2DLrUuk3dGwYKQxh address had an invalid public key of "00" and was unspendable but the coins are now spent?? The invalid key was generated by a bug in the wallet software the owner was using and should have been "locked" due to the invalid key
see link to the owners original query https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2t3vn0/i_cant_send_my_btc_a_triangle_apear_i_use_multibit/
also see link to a paper that lists that this is an invalid key https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/734.pdf?from=http%3A%2F%2Fresearch.microsoft.com%2Fpubs%2F204914%2F734.pdf
see page 11
"00" is not a private key, so it certainly wasn't the key for that address. – Pieter Wuille – 2017-12-20T23:42:19.100
@PieterWuille: It looks like the paper of Bos et al uses
00for the "point at infinity" public key (not private key). So there is a valid and interesting question here - either they were mistaken in their claim that it is unspendable (which might have to do with some interesting mathematical property of ECDSA), or else someone has broken ECDSA and/or RIPEMD-160 (which would be interesting for obvious reasons, though pretty unlikely). – Nate Eldredge – 2017-12-21T06:40:25.4102Oh - the spending transaction is unconfirmed. So another possibility is that it actually isn't a valid transaction, but blockchain.info mistakenly thinks that it is (perhaps because they use some homebrew validation code instead of the consensus algorithm)? – Nate Eldredge – 2017-12-21T07:06:50.867
The point at infinity is not a valid public key. – Pieter Wuille – 2017-12-21T07:23:04.150
@ Nate Eldredge . Oh ok, I see now it says "unconfirmed". How long does it stay in unconfirmed state before being returned or rejected? – MShepstone – 2017-12-22T07:05:44.633
@MShepstone It can stay unconfirmed forever. Who would reject it? We have no mechanism to agree on anything but confirmed transactions. – David Schwartz – 2017-12-22T07:06:04.917