Bitcoin Forum
February 18, 2019, 09:15:39 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 ... 551 »
341  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Using Createrawtransaction Got no-witness-yet Error on: May 03, 2018, 03:08:43 PM
This error means that you are trying to spend from or create segwit outputs without segwit being activated yet. Is your node fully synced?
342  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Upgrading to Bitcoin Core 0.16 on: May 03, 2018, 03:08:55 AM
I used to use a old Bitcoin Core and it crash.  I kept the wallet.dat file.  It is only 88 Bytes.  
Your wallet.dat file is most definitely corrupt and does not contain any key data if it is only 88 bytes. An individual key is much longer than 88 bytes. The keys don't even exist in this file so there really isn't anything for you to even attempt to recover.
343  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Output in coinbase transaction on: May 03, 2018, 03:04:26 AM
No client checks for coinbase transaction outputs (we've forgotten about segwit, have we?)
Output values are checked to make sure that no more than the correct value is created. The output scripts are not checked.
344  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: How can I get a copy of blk0001 on: April 29, 2018, 07:19:56 PM
Like to get a copy of  blk0001 for 2009-2010.
It's the same as a modern blk0001.dat file. Those file formats have not changed.

And maybe you can tell me what format was the private key on a encrypted wallet was. Mid-2010 beta wallet before 3.2.4, before blue Matt changed the format on encrypted private keys.
Wallets were not encrypted prior to Bitcoin 0.4.0 when Matt introduced encrypted wallets. The format of wallets at that time for private keys is the same for unencrypted private keys today.
345  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Setting Up First Wallet -- BitcoinCore 0.16.0 on: April 29, 2018, 02:45:44 AM
I am having trouble getting armory online and in turn, I have downloaded Bitcoin Core 0.16.0 to speed things up. 
Bitcoin Core does not just "speed things up" for Armory. Armory requires Bitcoin Core to be installed and running when Armory runs. Otherwise it will not work.

Is it OK / safe to store the block chain on an external drive? 
You can, however keep in mind that when you do so, Bitcoin Core's databases are more likely to become corrupted.

I have seen products which are 'physical wallets' (a USB drive) which seems like the same concept as I am investigating here. 
No, they are vastly different things.

If this is a viable option, will I have to connect the external drive each time I use my wallet? 
Yes.
346  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Rewinding blocks every time I start bitcoin-qt on: April 27, 2018, 11:32:34 PM
Your node is rewinding hundreds of blocks, that seems like a huge problem.

What version of Bitcoin Core were you running before 0.16? This seems characteristic of upgrading from a non-segwit node to a segwit node. I'm guessing that's the problem (especially since the log is full of lines about non-standard transactions) and, with pruning, it gets into some weird feedback loop.

Your best option is to resync the blockchain entirely. You can do that by deleting everything in the datadir except for your wallet file.

It looks like you need to run the program with the -reindex command line option.
He's pruned so that won't work without resyncing.
347  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: What IDE used for Bitcoin developement (Ubuntu) ? on: April 27, 2018, 11:09:46 PM
But what about making changes on the source code ?
Use a text editor. A source code file is just a text file. As I said earlier, many people use emacs or vim.

IDE is a good way to debug the code, retreive errors etc.
It's not the only way, and often IDEs require special configuration in order to work with projects that weren't created with them.

For debugging, you can use gdb.
348  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: What IDE used for Bitcoin developement (Ubuntu) ? on: April 27, 2018, 08:39:36 PM
Most people who work on Bitcoin Core do not use an IDE. Many just use a text editor (such as emacs or vim) and the terminal. All of the build commands are documented and it is not difficult to copy and paste commands into the terminal.
349  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / MOVED: ... on: April 26, 2018, 10:07:12 PM
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.

Trashed on request
350  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: What is the difference between createmultisig and addmultisigaddress? on: April 26, 2018, 04:12:16 PM
Thank you for your answer.

When I create multisigaddress by using 'createmultisig' command in my full node coin server which I built, is it possible to remove private keys associated with this multisigaddress
from this server for the purpose of security ?

If possible,how should I do ?
No, you cannot delete private keys from a wallet. However, you can just run your coin server without a wallet which guarantees that there will not be private keys that are active on your server.
351  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: A critique on the Lightning Network from a regular poster. Long. on: April 26, 2018, 03:36:35 PM
Quote
Core is also the centralised regulator of the rules. they set the policy. change the rules and nodes(merchants) are suppose to follow cores set rules and reject(ban hammer) users(nodes) that send dodgy transactions/blocks
Except Core does not have any sort of centralized authority to force any rules to go through. Otherwise you would see all of the forks that the Core developers propose to activate within a few weeks of the software supporting the fork being available. Case in point, segwit. Segwit took several months to activate, way longer than any previous soft fork. It took people threatening to perform a user activated soft fork before miners finally activated it. The UASF was not something that was officially supported by Core (i.e. no Bitcoin Core release containing UASF logic). If the Core developers had centralized control over the consensus rules, then segwit would have activated quickly and without contention, which is clearly not what happenend.

Quote
It used to be the case that anyone can alter their node and then promote their own new feature. and if enough users liked it they would add it to thier node and then the network would evolve.
This is still the case. You can do that if you want. No one is preventing you from creating the next Bitcoin XT or Bitcoin Classic or Bitcoin Unlimited. No one can stop you from writing the software and running your own node. Just because the vast majority of users decided to stick with Core does not mean that Core can prevent you from doing this or that Core is forcing you do follow them.

Quote
LN is not a direct pay the recipiant(P2P).
It certainly is. You can open a payment channel directly with your recipient and avoid having to route your payment through anyone else.

Quote
its in laymans terms opening a channel(account) with a well routed(bank branch) hub. depositing funds into a channel(account) that requires co-signing(bank authorisation)
It can be used in that way, but that is not the only way to use LN.

Quote
all with the very same banking features of 3-5 business day settlemnt (CLTV
That is completely false. There is no 3-5 business day settlement. That is not what CLTV is used for. It is a timeout for if a transaction fails. Not a "transaction goes through after X time".

Quote
) and wire transfer chargebacks(CSV)
That is completely false. That is not what CSV is used for. It is used as a timeout during which time a punishment can occur which is not the same as a chargeback. Once an HTLC is resolved or once new commitment transactions are put in place, the payment is final. There is not charging back. Trying to perform a chargeback would mean that you are broadcasting an old commitment transaction which means that you LOSE ALL of your money, not you gaining back whatever money that you sent.

Quote
There are only ~1500 LN nodes.
It's still in beta, what do you expect?

Quote
but already there are hubs being the middlemen for ~10% of the network
You seem to be ignoring the criss-cross of gray lines for all of the other channels.

The "hubs" currently on mainnet are due to people opening direct channels with merchants (i.e. performing direct P2P payments).

Quote
Do you let there be 10 middle men having the authorisation power of the whole network. so that most people can make a payment only needing consent from maybe 2-10 middle men 'managers'(banks/hubs) to route
or break it down so that hubs can only have 1% of total channels. meaning more middle men are needed between you and the end destination where it would need the consent/authorisation of 2-100 middle men managers(banks/hubs)
None of the above, because nothing stops you from closing your own channel unilaterally and then opening a channel with someone else directly to avoid these middlemen.

You don't seem to understand how LN works. These hubs can't force you to do anything. You have full control over your money and you can close a channel any time you want. If you want to avoid hubs, then open a channel directly with the person you are paying. No one is forcing you to have channels with hubs nor is anyone forcing you to use LN anyways.
352  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: What is the difference between createmultisig and addmultisigaddress? on: April 26, 2018, 03:14:47 PM
If I create multisigaddress by using createmultisig command, is it true that nobodoy can get both privatekeys and redeemscript associated with this multisigaddress from this coins server ?
If the private keys are not stored on the server, then yes. However there is no such security guarantee. Createmultisig just prevents the generated redeemScript from being added to your wallet; the private keys for the public keys in that redeemScript could still be part of the wallet.
353  Other / Meta / Re: Banned for what? User: Sellingaccs on: April 26, 2018, 02:11:18 AM
The moderator achow101 is abusing his position here
I did not ban him nor did I request for him to be banned. Also, normal moderators cannot ban any users, they can only request bans.



The comment on your ban is "(Now edited out) Wirex phishing." I don't know what post this refers to, but presumably it's now gone.
354  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: airgapped wallets and private key theft on: April 26, 2018, 01:30:00 AM
Please do not post in a thread that is long dead. I have moved your post into it's own thread.

If you are not using a HD wallet, anytime you sign a transaction, your wallet.dat will be unencrypted in RAM, or more specifically, the decryption key to decrypt the wallet.dat file will be in RAM, along with the private key(s) of what you are using to sign.
The part I highlighted in red is where my questions focuses. I apologize if it sonds n00b I'm not very well versed with the core wallet and such.
That part you have highlighted is also partially incorrect. The HD-ness of a wallet does not matter, the decryption key is always held in RAM when your wallet is unlocked,

Suppose I have an airgap PC that I want to use to sign a transaction with but the wallet is passphrase protected. I assume that the wallet can't sign the transaction if it's kept locked correct? Therefore keeping it safe. The issue is once the wallet is opened the info is then sent to RAM and then it's game over.
Yes, your private keys are encrypted until you unlock your wallet. When your wallet is unlocked, the private keys are not actually held unenecrypted but rather the decryption key is.

However it is not necessarily game over even if you have malware. The decryption key is held in memory, but other software cannot typically access the memory of other programs unless it is executed with special permissions.

I'm also wondering what malware they created to be able to pull this off!? Super scary stuff!!
It's really not that special. In fact, the malware is probably something that is extremely simple because the wallet in the video is not even encrypted!. It just needs to read the wallet file in order to get the private key, and then encode that into an audio file and play that audio. It's not that scary and not very special. In fact, that paper itself is nothing new nor is it anything special. It is a well known fact that air gapped wallets are not foolproof and that there are non-networking methods of getting keys off of air gapped machines. Everything that they describe are methods long known before hand. The methods seems scary, but they really aren't as they all require a some fairly targeted attacks in order to pull off (i.e. they need to target you specifically and be somewhat physically close).
355  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Rewinding blocks every time I start bitcoin-qt on: April 25, 2018, 09:43:46 PM
Post your debug.log file.

Rewinding some blocks is always part of the startup sanity check, that is normal behavior. However it should not take very long.
356  Other / Meta / Re: Members in this forum are abusing the merit system on: April 25, 2018, 09:17:56 PM
OK number one from http://fonstavka.com/index.php?topic=3371680.new#new

Quote from: Bitcoin Forum
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

Quote
Are you talking about this "G"

Quote
public static readonly BigInteger P = "FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFC2F".HexToBigInteger();
public static readonly ECPoint G = ECPoint.DecodePoint("0479BE667EF9DCBBAC5......FFB10D4B8".HexToBytes());
public static readonly BigInteger N = "FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEBAAEDCE6AF48A03BBFD25E8CD0364141".HexToBigInteger();

I don't get all the maths behind the curve and use some cheesy function to encrypt the keys during key exchange which is all but useless
since the project is open source (Will keep ISP's out) so maybe I should look more into what your saying here.

What i am desperate for is encryption that will work on 5k -2mb blocks that is fast and is not bloated to death or uses calls into windows
black box code like happens with DES/AES because it seems to be missing from the internet.

Byte shift is fast Date[f]=Crypto[Date[f]];
but using Maths.Mod is too slow for what i need.
Currently I have got something that looks like
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ABC>>>>>>>>>>>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<XYZ<<<<<<<<<<<
I could throw in some byte swap in the vertical axis but even then I don't think it
would be fantastic so it looks like I am stuck for now.

The post was off topic. In that thread, the OP is asking about secp256k1 and its security properties in regards to ECDH. Yet in your post, you do not talk about secp256k1 and its security properties. Instead you have decided to say that you don't understand the math (which is entirely unhelpful to the OP) and then go on to talk about things that you want and projects that you are doing. This is completely off topic for that thread, therefore it was deleted.
357  Other / Meta / Re: Members in this forum are abusing the merit system on: April 25, 2018, 08:37:57 PM
OK i will let you go first
Huh I thought the plan was for you to post the posts I deleted and have me explain them. Or did I get my threads mixed up?
358  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin Core 0.16.0 Released on: April 25, 2018, 08:22:46 PM
Hi all!

I am trying to rescue some BTCs from "wallet.dat corrupt, salvage failed"... I have tried many different things without success. Pywallet, for example, doesn't find anything at all in this wallet.dat. But it found some keys in another wallet.dat...
Please make a post in tech support, not here. Support requests are off topic for this thread.
359  Other / Off-topic / Re: File storage options and technology selection for accounting software on: April 25, 2018, 08:13:04 PM
Don't use a blockchain. It's not just a magic thing that magically makes all of your problems go away. A blockchain may be secure (it also could not, depending on how it is implemented), but it certainly is not fast.
360  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Why Transaction Fees in the First Place? on: April 25, 2018, 05:04:46 AM
Anyone cares to explain why and when transaction fees become mandatory. (Or are they mandatory? As far as I can tell, there is no way I could set 0 tnx fee in electrum.)
Transaction fees are not mandatory, you can create a 0 fee transaction that is consensus valid. However such low fee transactions are considered non standard and thus will not be relayed by most nodes. Because of this standardness rule, most wallets make it impossible to set 0 fee.

Was there a need to introduce a criterion by which miners could sort transactions in some meaningful way (that is, from highest fees to lowest)? Because miners seem to have total freedom when it comes to including transactions in the blocks they mine.

Was this really necessary, perhaps to prevent congestion?
AFAICT, the idea to migrate to fee based selection came up very early on in order to prepare for post-block subsidy world. Since the block subsidy halves every 4 years on average, it will reach negligible amounts fairly soon as it is an exponential decay. In order to make up for the decreased block subsidy, we need transaction fees. The transition from primarily priority to primarily transaction fees needs to happen at some point, and probably sooner is better than later.

Other than that I see no reason to increase the mining reward, after all 12.5BTC seems to be high enough a reward.
It seems how now, but in the fast when all of this happened, 12.5 BTC was in fact a fairly small amount. First of all, the block reward was previously 25 BTC, and before that, 50 BTC. At those times, the block reward was worth a lot less in USD than the block reward is now in USD. It's USD value is so low that it was actually not profitable to be a miner for quite some time or you need to have special conditions (special electric prices, etc.) in order to be profitable.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 ... 551 »
Bitcointalk.org is not available or authorized for sale. Do not believe any fake listings.
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!