Bitcoin PIPEs v2 | Misha Komarov SLP776

Bitcoin soft-fork debates around CTV, CSFS, OP_CAT, and OP_VAULT keep stalling — and Misha Komarov of Allocinit argues you can emulate much of that covenant behavior with cryptography instead of changing consensus. Misha joins Stephan to unpack Bitcoin PIPEs v2: a Witness Encryption design that locks a signing key under an NP statement so a valid zero-knowledge proof decrypts the key and produces an ordinary Schnorr spend. Bitcoin L1 only checks a normal signature. They compare PIPEs v1 (Functional Encryption / richer post-covenants) with v2 (Witness Encryption / binary pre-covenants), ciphertext sizes from ~300 TB toward single-digit terabytes, DKG and 1-of-n setup assumptions, non-custodial vault and shared-pool use cases, contrasts with cosigner models like Sigbash, and how Allocinit’s Shielded Bitcoin design differs from Shielded CSV’s client-side validation approach — plus open cryptanalysis challenges and a path toward implementable code. Timestamps: 00:00 — Intro: Misha & Bitcoin PIPEs v2 00:27 — Background: BitMessage to =nil; 01:31 — Soft-Fork Fatigue & Nice-to-Haves 03:24 — Emulate Opcodes Without Soft Forks 04:54 — Witness Encryption Unlocks Keys 06:01 — Witness Encryption vs Bitcoin Witness 09:00 — PIPEs v1 vs v2: FE to WE 11:39 — Ciphertext Size & Cost Trade-offs 15:28 — Vaults as the Unhappy Path 16:23 — PIPEs vs Sigbash Cosigner 18:05 — DKG Setup & 1-of-n Trust 21:11 — Shared Vaults & Lending Use Cases 23:24 — Beyond Canonical OP_VAULT 26:35 — Shielded Bitcoin vs Shielded CSV 32:17 — Self-Custody Peg-In and Peg-Out 37:14 — On-Chain Footprint Walkthrough 39:42 — Security Challenges & Code Roadmap Links: https://x.com/nemothenoone https://x.com/allocinitxyz Stephan Livera links: Follow me on X: @stephanlivera Subscribe to the podcast Subscribe to Substack