The proposal seeks to impose temporary restrictions on how data can be added to transactions, a move that has divided the community.
A heated debate has emerged among Bitcoin developers over how much arbitrary data should be allowed on the blockchain, centering on a new proposal: Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 444 (BIP-444).
The discussion comes in the wake of Bitcoin Core’s v30 update, which removed caps on the amount of data that can be included in a standard transaction using OP_RETURN, provided users pay the appropriate fees. Despite the update going live this month, adoption has been slow, with only about 6.3% of reachable nodes currently running the software, according to Bitnodes data.
Concerns over illegal content
BIP-444 was introduced by a GitHub user named “Dathon Ohm,” who appears to be new to the Bitcoin development community. The proposal argues that unrestricted arbitrary data could create legal liabilities for node operators if illegal content, such as child sexual abuse material, is uploaded to the blockchain.
The proposal states that operators could face a “forced choice between violating the law (or their conscience) or shutting down their node,” a scenario it describes as a threat to Bitcoin’s decentralization and security model. To address this, BIP-444 suggests temporary limits on data storage within transactions.
Under the proposal, OP_RETURN outputs would be capped at 83 bytes, while other scriptPubKeys would be limited to 34 bytes. The plan also includes restrictions on individual data pushes, invalidating unused script versions to prevent workarounds, limiting Merkle tree sizes in Taproot outputs, and disabling OP_IF inside Tapscripts, which would effectively block the Ordinals inscription method. The soft fork is intended to last roughly one year, giving developers time to explore alternative approaches for handling arbitrary data.
Support and criticism
Longtime Bitcoin developer Luke Dashjr, known for his opposition to Ordinals, publicly supported the proposal. Dashjr emphasized that BIP-444 is “good enough and super simple to buy time to design a long-term solution,” clarifying that it is not intended as a permanent change to Bitcoin’s design.
No. BIP 444 is already on track with no technical objections.https://t.co/sF7HUiGgRm
— Luke Dashjr (@LukeDashjr) October 26, 2025
However, the proposal has faced criticism from other members of the Bitcoin community. Many argue that arbitrary data has existed on the network since its inception, and restricting it could be seen as a form of censorship that conflicts with Bitcoin’s permissionless principles. Leonidas, a prominent figure in the Ordinals community, warned that limiting certain transactions could set “dangerous precedents” similar to state-imposed censorship.
Jameson Lopp, co-founder and chief security officer at Casa, also questioned the proposal’s assumptions. He noted that BIP-444 does not define what content is legally or morally questionable and highlighted that legal experts disagree on whether node operators would actually face liability.
Lopp added that participation in the network is voluntary: “By running a node you consent to the consensus rules. If you don’t consent, you can simply not run a node.”
Next steps and community response
The proposal has yet to be distributed to the Bitcoin Development Mailing List, a key step for draft BIPs to collect feedback and move toward formal consideration. Despite this, BIP-444 has already sparked extensive discussions on social media platforms like X, illustrating the intense community interest in balancing network security, legality, and freedom of use.
As Bitcoin continues to grow in value and global usage, the debate over arbitrary data underscores broader tensions between innovation, decentralization, and regulatory compliance. Whether BIP-444 will gain traction remains uncertain, but it highlights the ongoing challenge of maintaining a decentralized network while addressing potential legal and ethical risks.
Matvii Diadkov
Disclaimer: All materials on this site are for informational purposes only. None of the material should be interpreted as investment advice. Please note that despite the nature of much of the material created and hosted on this website, HODL FM is not a financial reference resource and the opinions of authors and other contributors are their own and should not be taken as financial advice. If you require advice of this sort, HODL FM strongly recommends contacting a qualified industry professional.
