Bitcoin Forum

I've been wanting to know how it feels to run a full node, and for the time being, I've chosen Bitcoin core. I've installed the program on my machine, but along the line, I was discouraged because of the large historical blocks I'll download (about 400GB), which will cost me roughly $200 of internet plan, and I'm scratching my head if there is another way to prune the block download from the beginning of installation rather than downloading everything and then later prune it. If there is a method for me to download only a maximum of 20GB from a few years back.

Again, while doing research, I stumbled across a Github page that suggested an option to prune blockchain exe, but I'm scared of downloading something I don't know anything about, even if it's open-source and the exe file is digitally signed by Rare Ideas, LLC, according to the page, who knows these company or people?

https://i.imgur.com/WGSL1lS.png

https://github.com/Blockchains-Download/Bitcoin/releases

I also read a comment where someone said it is not possible to download just part blocks as it going to be useless without the chainstate.

What? It shouldn't cost that much for downloading bandwidth unless it's mobile data.

There's no alternative way to have the benefits of a full node. You have to verify everything, which includes downloading everything if you don't already have it. To answer your question, yes, you can run a full node with only few past blocks. It it's not going to show you any money, unless you made transactions very recently.

Yes, you are right, it's mobile data and it wouldn't favor me that way. I would have loved to use a WIFI service but their mode of operation wouldn't work for me too, it is per hour and there is a tendency that their network bandwidth might even be slow and I have years of files to download

Do you mean the alternative from GitHub is safe for use? There is no option to download a few past blocks at the beginning of the bitcoin-core set-up, I have to download everything then decide later if I want to keep the whole past blocks (400GB) or just recent ones which I can set to about 2GB in size.

Why don't you run your node from home and connect to it from work? You can run a full node for less than $50 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5364742.0).

It introduces trust so it's less safe.

It depends if these files include the unspent transaction outputs. What you're describing is pruning which isn't what you want as you'll have to download the entire chain.

Do you realize that if you run a full node others will connect to you and there will be quite some data transfer (smaller because pruned, but still), also you will download each and every node from now on.. on your mobile data? As good as your intentions are, it doesn't look like a good idea (also I don't know how legit those files are, but that's a different story).

Plus: wasn't a pruned node tied to a certain wallet and if you change the wallet you have to basically re-download? (Maybe I'm wrong with this, I didn't really use pruned node).

If you want to import a new key into your wallet, the software has to know its transaction history and for that it has to "scan" the blockchain. If it doesn't have the chain (like in case of a pruned full node) it has to re-download it.

So I've remembered it correctly. Thank you very much!

Also, then I'd say that quite probably OP, if using those "blockchain files", when he will put his own wallet there, he'll be basically back to square one.

Just to save you some time & money, you are wasting your time and money running any large blockchain thru a mobile system that is charging you that much.
Even if you were fully synced , you don't know how many others could be catching up their sync from you driving up your mobile costs way higher than $200.

Aside from the belief you are supporting the btc network, which you are really not, since your pruned node is not supplying the full blockchain and you are not mining new blocks. It is literally just a waste in your case as long as expensive mobile is your only internet.

If you are set on wasting your money, you are better off looking into VPS, and paying $100 per month for unlimited internet and 1 tb of hard drive space.
That way you only use your mobile connection to remote control the VPS.
At least then you won't waste more than $100 per month, and you could allow the entire blockchain to be downloaded not just a minuscule pruned segment.

It contains blocks and chainstate folder.
I tried to download the files and set-up a temporary instance of Bitcoin Core v22.0 using those files.
This instance is using the blockchain downloaded from that repo:
https://i.imgur.com/4JKH0eL.png (https://i.imgur.com/4JKH0eL.png)
The blockchain loads but I can't comment nor vouch on the integrity of the files.

Now only if you really want to use it: there should be no problem if you'll just create a new wallet since it's empty;
that's assuming that the contents are legit, there's no existing wallet files in the datadir and you've set the right setting: prune=2200.
It will not work if you'll load an existing wallet.dat or will import addresses/keys because it will have to rescan to verify transactions.

But take consideration of the recommendations and warnings by other users.

And where did they say they do it for the network? There are tons of benefits from running your own full node, such as privacy and verifiability. Essentially, that's the only way to know for sure you own money of the system; every other way introduces trust.

Even though they don't advertise the NODE_NETWORK they can relay transactions from mempool and blocks at the chain-tip.

You made points to some levels, and I'm not sure why I was thinking about prune node when I wanted to operate a Full Node. What is the use of a Full Node if I can't transmit them to other Nodes or offer a copy to other Nodes? My question is even invalid, and I shouldn't have to bother scratching my head. I have found an option for a low mobile plan that would cost me around $80 for over 500GB, based on my calculations. I'll execute the entire procedure and provide an update if everything goes fine.

Bitcoin is an open to the public blockchain, you have no privacy.
As far as verifying goes, he could use 3 separate block explorers to confirm the transactions, which will be a 3X better verification that a single node.

You can't run a blockchain network off of only pruned nodes, so therefore aside from a propaganda feel good belief ,
they hold no real value, as real full nodes with the entire blockchain do the same plus the history since the genesis block.

This is such an invalid conclusion. Just because it's open and transparent, it doesn't mean everyone can be identified by everyone, which is how I understand "no privacy". The more careful you are, the more difficult it becomes for others to trace you.

For instance, if I reuse the same address I'm making it provable that the same person(s) have done all of those transactions. If I don't reuse addresses and avoid spending all of my UTXOs in one transaction, the thing changes. Let alone if I coinjoin, use mixers etc.

This is also false. The initial block download doesn't happen from just one node. I can create up to 8 full-relay outbound connections. Also, verification plays the biggest role of the whole situation. There's no trust that what you're viewing is true; you've verified that it is.

Not to mention the privacy drawbacks of handing out your transactions to block explorer(s).

I didn't say they help as much as non-pruning nodes, I just said they also do. BTW, they're both "real full nodes".

it's a shame someone has to spend that kind of money to be a full participant on the bitcoin network but it is what it is...

Open Public Blockchain , no privacy, saying anything else is lying to yourself.
You should study the effects of cross referencing in Forensic accounting.
https://bitcoin.org/en/protect-your-privacy

Coin mixers are a joke, you don't know who is running it and they might be selling your data to the feds.
https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2021/04/27/us-officials-arrest-alleged-operator-of-336m-bitcoin-mixing-service/




And 3 different block explorers would have 24 full-relay outbound connections, like I said 3X more.
You seem hooked on a false privacy myth, one last time OPEN BLOCKCHAIN for the public.



Turn off all of the real full nodes that contain the blockchain from the genesis block , and you end your coin network.
Turn off all of the pruned nodes and see if anyone even notices.
Pruned nodes are an insult to a blockchain, if you are not going to host the entire chain, a pruned pretense is worthless because it adds nothing except some feel good propaganda nonsense, that it is supporting a chain when it has no value at all to a blockchain.

Again, I didn't say you get enough privacy to be considered completely private. I just said it's not zero. If you want to prove me wrong, tell me exactly how much money I have in BTC and in which addresses.

You seem hooked on a trust syndrome. For one last time, besides privacy, when you run your own full node you use Bitcoin trustlessly. You know that what you're viewing is correct.

You can run a pruned full node for the sake of you; it doesn't have to be for the network.

You have $1100.58 worth of bitcoin in your wallet address, now try and prove me wrong by showing your bitcoin address.  :D
Because until you show your address, I am right, and after you show your address, you still have to send $2 out to confirm you own said address,
and then the cross reference has one more data point closer to your home address.

Guess you don't understand a Sybil attack is easier and more effective on a single IP than 3 separate IPs.

Their is no need ever to run a pruned node, unless you are so emotionally unstable it means something to you.
Run a Full node with the full blockchain or don't waste your time.
Running Pruned nodes with the pretense they have any value, could one day lead to the demise of bitcoin.
If everyone ran a pruned node , a minor 51% attack could backtrack past their pruning and collapse the network with no hope of retrieval.

That may be the worth of the wallet address BlackHatCoiner does not care about showing.  There are a few ways you can enhance the privacy of your coins.  For one, there is Coin Joining.  Good luck finding BlackHatCoiner's joined coins, if there are any.  Can you find out if they have any joined coins?  And then, there is Mixing.  Maybe not as safe as a Coin Join is but definitely cheaper and faster and the link between coins is completely broken unlike Coin Joining.  Anyway.  Pretty sure BlackHatCoiner has many more addresses of which privacy they have taken care of unless they do not care about enhancing it.

Bitcoin's ledger is public.  We are pseudonymous on it, not anonymous.  With that being said, we can take advantage of its pseudonymity and use a variety of tools to improve privacy and get as close to anonymity as we can.  Even Coin Control can do wonders.  Truth is, all these things are ultimately a waste of time if all the mixed, joined or whatever coins go at the end of the day in the same Electrum wallet.  You need to run a full node if you want Coin Control to truly have a positive effect on your privacy and you need to run a full node if you want mixed coins not be linked together by a malicious node you connect to through an SPV wallet.

I have some joined coins myself.  Good luck finding them and linking them to me.

Edit.  Will return with a proper answer without deviating from the subject again, as it seems that I did.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

Not at all, you can make a signature without moving any coins. That also means, if you will be sybil attacked, I can convince you in SPV-way that I own something, just by creating a fake transaction and showing that to you.

You're not wrong. I'm earning a few hundred bucks every week, it is publicly known (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1935179.0). But, that's not all of my money. As I said, it's not zero privacy.

I've already told you that you make 8 outbound connections, not just 1.

I do encourage people to run non-pruned full nodes, but if they can't afford the 1TB hard drive or don't want to, I want to know they're still able of enjoying the benefits of a full node. What you're describing is a fallacy of composition; something that is true for the whole isn't necessary true for a part of the whole. (In this case the demise of the network)

And I responded that 3 different block explorer would have 3x8 connections for a total of 24.
Making a sybil attack 3X harder.


The OP lost $80 on excess mobile data just from attempting sync,
bitcoin developers have artificially limited onchain capacity to keep node data storage low, so btc nodes requirements are really pathetically low.
A 1TB drive cost $38 US$ on amazon.

If a 1 TB drive is unaffordable , they don't need to be wasting resources they need for survival items,
because pruned nodes are unnecessary and hold no value to the network or even the user.

That's not true, pruned nodes still have value on network by sharing recent transaction/blocks. And from business side, pruned node is useful to accept Bitcoin payment or help manage LN channel without rely on 3rd party at lower cost. Self-hosted solution such as BTCPayServer support pruned node and it's even default option on their docker guide.

How can you be sure about that? You have to trust the block explorers while the technology promotes the opposite. By running your own node, you trust no one. Don't you like the maximum number of connections? Increase it, it's in the source code. Be your own block explorer.

Because they're doing it wrong. No one should use their mobile data to sync the chain, for the same reason they shouldn't use them to download a 4k 3-hour movie from a pirate site; better just buy it, it'll come cheaper!

Is there any proof that a block explorer shows legit information of a blockchain?  There is not.  Block explorers are used based on trust.  Under ideal circumstances, meaning every block explorer has a different owner with no malicious intents and the explorers have not been targeted by attacks that maliciously show you wrong information, what you say is true.  But rather than relying on the information others show you, I believe there is so much less need to trust if the node is ran by yourself.  If you call a block explorer safer than running a full or pruned node that YOU are hosting, you are wrong.

Full nodes help the network stay healthy and alive.  I agree.  But how are pruned nodes unnecessary and useless?  I do not understand.  The way I see it is, full nodes help the network by improving its security and health while pruned nodes help you by ensuring you that what you see in your wallet is legit and you can be independent even without the storage space requirement.  1TB drives are affordable but have you considered some want to run a Bitcoin wallet on their smartphones without relying on servers, in a safe and private manner?

Open Electrum and enter a seed.  Great, now every single request for every single searched address goes to the same server.  Your privacy is worsened immediately.  If you run a pruned node, this is not the case.  You can enjoy privacy on a budget.  You may not be helping the network's health, but you are helping yourself and besides syncing time I do not think there is any advantage of running an SPV wallet over a pruned node.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

Exactly.
The false information may not even be malicious but just their buggy implementation showing wrong information. The most famous example I can think of is the Genesis block's address balance where majority of block explorers are showing the wrong balance.
Wrong (68.53407772):

Correct (18.52407772):

P.S. another obvious bug here is the fact that they show P2PK output as P2PKH address and they all do that!

blackhatcoiner suffers from the altnet delusions of not wanting blockchains to work. he does not believe in them
he has tried many ways to try to convince people that blockchains dont work, cant scale and people should not be full noders by pretending if you switch off all the features of a full node your still a full node.

he wants people to stop using bitcoin daily, he hates that people want to use bitcoin for daily use stuff. he wants people to move over to an altnet and not use bitcoin for weeks/months at a time, to an altnet that doesnt even have a blockchain.

he has no clue as to the word "full" and just wants to exaggerate the word "node"

part of the full node feature is to be supporting the network. its not about individual validation. its about the network effect.
its about being a seeder so that others can initial block download.
its about having the chain to verify no hacker has edited your data because you can compare the utxo to its txid, to its block merkle, to the block hash, to the chains current height hash, to other peers chain height hash.

if everyone was just to store a utxoset and separately just a bunch of blockheaders but nothing inbetween to compare the 2 datasets. then the data integrity is broke
just having a personal utxo set is not a full node feature.

full node is a term that has existed for 13 years.
pruning is a newish step down option that has only existed for a few years. pruning has never been defined as part of a full node feature because pruning was not even a thing when fullnodes were defined

pruning is a step down from full node status.

this is not to say that some users should/shouldnt personally decide their level of involvement. nor is it saying that pruned mode is useless.. but it sure as hell is less useful for the network security/integrity/feature-case. and less useful at the personal use feature-case

there is nothing wrong with highlighting that pruned node is an option. but there is alot wrong with pretending that pruning is the same level as a full node

Pruned node perform no added function, that is not performed by a full node holding the entire blockchain.
Sorry ,  it is true , pruned nodes are worthless because they add nothing of value.



You are trusting those 8 connecting nodes to not sybil you with a false chain.



Is there any proof that your node is not on a fork, without looking at block explorer or another not onsite node.
Nope, you are trusting those 8 connected nodes, where as 3 different block explorers give you 24 total different nodes.

Using 3 different block explorers gives greater verification than any single node, no matter what you incorrectly belief.

This is the last post, I shall make about this, because if you still can't comprehend it.
Well not really my problem.

What's the genesis block's address' balance is debatable. It's 68 BTC whereas 50 of those are unspendable. There are other unspendable outputs as well, such as those with OP_RETURN or those which had "0x14" replaced with "0x00" (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=50206.0) and are provably gone. Shouldn't it show there's a balance?

But, thanks for mentioning it.

As always, franky pushes his own agenda and constantly twists my words. Sorry, but you don't get my attention.

A sybil attack requires computational effort besides full nodes left running. There was a thread made in 2011 regarding this[1]. By the same reasoning, I also trust a billionaire for not deciding to attack the network.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4335.0

And it has been repeatedly told you that you verify nothing when you visit a block explorer. Also, it's mentioned that you don't know their outbound connections, which is little significant due to the former.

you do realise the network structure is far different now, compared to how it was in 2011.. right?
in 2011 full node features were default. people didnt run hundreds of nodes on amazon servers..

but now they do.. meaning the ability to mess with the network is now easier

not all nodes are full nodes and thousands of nodes are hosted on centralised servers. the 'computational effort' is not the same as it was in 2011

did you know that if you just search bitnodes.
out of ~14.8k nodes shown on bitnodes.. only 5.6k 38% are full nodes
https://bitnodes.io/nodes/?q=1037
yep the 1037 is an important number in the useragent

There is nothing special about NODE_BLOOM flag to make it "important" when you look at nodes. The SPV clients aren't really using this feature and the only implementation I knew of wasn't popular to begin with.
The only important flags are NODE_NETWORK and NODE_WITNESS which is equal to 9. If you are checking pruned nodes that makes it 1033 with NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED flag.

With computational effort, I refer to mining.

The difficulty has increased from few terahashes per second to hundreds of exahashes per second. It's much harder to gain the required computational power to accomplish a sybil attack without looking suspicious to your victims. Just having the IP addresses and the computers that are running a Bitcoin client isn't going to harm anyone.

Complete and total anonymity in any crypto network is obviously not possible but most protocols' architectures design the information leakage to be as little as possible, therefore most privacy breaches happen after you correlate your name to an address on some web service.