Yes. And?
I don't see much of a purpose for "vaulting" and "unvaulting" funds as it seems to serve the same purpose and doesn't add much/any extra security than a multisig might.
I disagree. Per the author,
Vaults are an especially useful kind of covenant that give Bitcoin users operational simplicity
during expected use, but heightened security in the event of unauthorized access to private keys
Multisig does the same though?
I'm.sure there could be a mistake I've made in this (hence why I didn't post it straight away) but why is this different from.a 2of2 multisig where a time locked transaction is signed from.them 2 and held in a wallet. The second can still sign for funds to be spent if they want to at any time (to cosign the first) but it could be stored in a more secure manner (such as on an airgapped machine).
Considering you have to store extra values in op_vault (an extra address at least) it just seems like a less efficient way to do it.
I think NotATether was getting at the idea that an attacker unvaulting coins wouldn't be waiting around with their transaction too and would try to do both broadcasts fairly quickly.