Bitcoin Covenants Part 1: Exploring New Possibilities for Complex Spending Conditions on the Bitcoin Network
A single missing feature in Bitcoin Script has spawned twelve competing proposals. Cointelegraph Research gives an overview.
Recently, the concept of so-called covenants has received renewed attention as Bitcoin development and protocol discussions underwent a renaissance. Covenants could enable and facilitate a wide range of applications, including new trustless and scalable layer 2s, fully non-custodial vaults with more complex spending logic, and more efficient payment channels. However, most paths to implementing this functionality require a soft fork of Bitcoin’s consensus rules, a process that would likely spark debate within the community.
With the recent diversification of consensus clients into Core and Knots nodes, reaching agreement on such a change has become less likely. In spite of recently pushing for a soft-fork of their own, namely BIP-110, the Knots side tends to advocate for protocol ossification and appears less supportive of facilitating scaling solutions on the base layer. The recent controversy that Bitcoin Core has attracted, both as a technical debate and in governance, is diminishing the prospect of covenant implementations on Bitcoin anytime soon.
Prominent figures such as Michael Saylor have also publicly advocated for protocol ossification, portraying zealous, well-funded developers as the greatest threat to the protocol. Nonetheless, some minimal covenant implementation likely offers the most conservative path to trust-minimized Layer-2s, which can bring the privileges of self-custody to the next billion people. Should mainnet fees spike again in the future and a resolution to the spam wars is found, discussions around these proposals are likely to regain momentum. In this article, we will lay some of the foundations for our readers to understand covenants. In follow-up pieces we will take a deep dive into individual proposals.