Bitcoin Forum

Bitcoin Core version 0.9.3 is now available from:

  https://bitcoin.org/bin/0.9.3/

This is a new minor version release, bringing only bug fixes and updated
translations. Upgrading to this release is recommended.

Please report bugs using the issue tracker at github:

  https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues

Upgrading and downgrading
==========================

How to Upgrade
--------------

If you are running an older version, shut it down. Wait until it has completely
shut down (which might take a few minutes for older versions), then run the
installer (on Windows) or just copy over /Applications/Bitcoin-Qt (on Mac) or
bitcoind/bitcoin-qt (on Linux).

If you are upgrading from version 0.7.2 or earlier, the first time you run
0.9.3 your blockchain files will be re-indexed, which will take anywhere from
30 minutes to several hours, depending on the speed of your machine.

Downgrading warnings
--------------------

The 'chainstate' for this release is not always compatible with previous
releases, so if you run 0.9.x and then decide to switch back to a
0.8.x release you might get a blockchain validation error when starting the
old release (due to 'pruned outputs' being omitted from the index of
unspent transaction outputs).

Running the old release with the -reindex option will rebuild the chainstate
data structures and correct the problem.

Also, the first time you run a 0.8.x release on a 0.9 wallet it will rescan
the blockchain for missing spent coins, which will take a long time (tens
of minutes on a typical machine).

0.9.3 Release notes
=======================

RPC:
- Avoid a segfault on getblock if it can't read a block from disk
- Add paranoid return value checks in base58

Protocol and network code:
- Don't poll showmyip.com, it doesn't exist anymore
- Add a way to limit deserialized string lengths and use it
- Add a new checkpoint at block 295,000
- Increase IsStandard() scriptSig length
- Avoid querying DNS seeds, if we have open connections
- Remove a useless millisleep in socket handler
- Stricter memory limits on CNode
- Better orphan transaction handling
- Add `-maxorphantx=<n>` and `-maxorphanblocks=<n>` options for control over the maximum orphan transactions and blocks

Wallet:
- Check redeemScript size does not exceed 520 byte limit
- Ignore (and warn about) too-long redeemScripts while loading wallet

GUI:
- fix 'opens in testnet mode when presented with a BIP-72 link with no fallback'
- AvailableCoins: acquire cs_main mutex
- Fix unicode character display on MacOSX

Miscellaneous:
- key.cpp: fail with a friendlier message on missing ssl EC support
- Remove bignum dependency for scripts
- Upgrade OpenSSL to 1.0.1i (see https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv_20140806.txt - just to be sure, no critical issues for Bitcoin Core)
- Upgrade miniupnpc to 1.9.20140701
- Fix boost detection in build system on some platforms

Credits
--------

Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release:

- Andrew Poelstra
- Cory Fields
- Gavin Andresen
- Jeff Garzik
- Johnathan Corgan
- Julian Haight
- Michael Ford
- Pavel Vasin
- Peter Todd
- phantomcircuit
- Pieter Wuille
- Rose Toomey
- Ruben Dario Ponticelli
- shshshsh
- Trevin Hofmann
- Warren Togami
- Wladimir J. van der Laan
- Zak Wilcox

As well as everyone that helped translating on [Transifex](https://www.transifex.com/projects/p/bitcoin/).

I guess the top text needs to be updated then ??? theymos should do it soon :)

Nice. Thanks all devs and translators.


Yup, this thread should be sticky, and the 0.9.2.1 thread should be un-sticky.

Thanks to wumpus and everyone who contributed!

 8)

OK, so ... clean install without any kind of old file.  :) (to test on WinXP SP3+all KBs installed).

we have and a ppa ubuntu new version

I 'm not using bitcoin core but thanks to everyone for the great job  :-*

The hash listed for the files are incorrect.
They seem to be for Sha256 but are marked as being Sha512.

Makes me think twice about installing.

Thanks for the great work @devs !

Thanks to everyone who contributed.

The SHASUMS is not signed by Gavin's Code Signing key.

It is signed by Wladimir's key, which is itself signed by Gavin's key, but still, this freaked me out momentarily when I went to verify it.

Thank you!

If I run Bitcoin-QT with core 0.9.3 installed does it say 0.8.6 beta still or is it supposed to say 0.9.3? If it's supposed to say 0.9.3 what do I need to do to correct this?

I am running windows 7 x64 and have installed the Win64 version of 0.9.3 core after shutting B-QT down and waiting 5 minutes.

Thanks,

thanks! updated my full nodes

this is looking great , but no, im not using bitcoin core for a moment
will see in next day :D

thanks btw

It is decided who signs releases on bitcoin.org?

It's a bit worrisome that it is so often different people, a regular user won't have all the dev's keys on hand.

 ;D P2P ... product release.
people behind is irrelevent.  :D

deal with it.

I downloaded bitcoin-0.9.3-win64-setup.exe 27-Sep-2014 07:33 12224864.  Shutdown the client and ran the update.  It crashed and upon the restarting the upgrade started to rebuild the chain.  I was a couple of weeks behind as well.  Just checked and my coins are gone.  I am not even sure where to start.  The client version shows 0.8.6-beta.  If anyone's willing to help me out I'd greatly appreciate it.

BUG: Installs but won't verify or open in OS X apparently because not signed by Gavin:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/4992

I in the same boat as far as the version number goes; the client version show 0.8.6-beta for bitcoin-0.9.3-win64-setup.exe. It didnt' crash on me as I had uninstalled Bitcoin-QT ages ago from myself. I make sure the old folder and old registry keys weren't still in my system when installed 0.9.3

But any of you coins gone?

Status: 193 confirmations
Date: 9/27/2014 02:23
To: 17ns8ggpV2SrUXvZwVkCPcGTGNjPUPSjL
Debit: -12.3380244 BTC
Transaction fee: -0.0003 BTC
Net amount: -12.3383244 BTC
Transaction ID: f9b0e5f573b410225d3519759263c12e859d4728d9ebfda0edbe03b3dcd96c90

Should I just consider myself a malware victim or could something possibly happened during the update?

Did you encrypt your wallet using a secure password?
I used grc.com/password on all my wallets. Steve Gibson's algorithm never generates the same password twice so even if someone managed to hack his site and steal the algorithm it would take them many lifetimes and far more of the total of computing power of the bitcoin network hack my passwords! :)

He claims 255 do the power of infinity. :)

In order for someone to transfer out, the passphrase would be needed in order to do that, correct?  I had one but I also found a backup directory with one of my wallet.dat files dating back to 9/16/2011.  Is there any way to tell if it's been encrypted?

It would look like that bitcoin-qt transferred your bitcoins to a new wallet as part of the update possibly?

I would write an issue here - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues - and see what the response it.

If your backup wallet.dat file was stolen and it didnt have a password, there is a quite high chance that your coins were sent..


You can load your backup file into your normal bitcoin client and try to add/change the password.. If you had one, it will ask you to enter it before you can change it.
Make a backup of your current wallet.dat before trying an old one.

I figured out my issue. I had bitcoin installed ages ago and was pretty sure I uninstalled but but I guess not. What I was doing was opening the 32bit version, as soon as I opened the 64bit version I could the 0.9.3

The now real issue is in 0.9.3 for windows x64 doesn't have an address book. I can't see my addresses, so I wanted to send someone bitcoins I would basically be screwed because I can't retrieve my wallet ID.

I sent as a set some bitcoin from another wallet to my bitcoin one (the same ID I had in the 32bit one) and coins are coming in but everything is kept secret I can't see where it's coming from. When I try to add my ID back to the 0.9.3 it comes back and say that Wallet ID is already in your address book. (which I can't see).

Bug? I don't know.. but you shouldn't be stopping people from seeing their Wallet ID's. 

Can't you enable the coin control features in the options menu? Maybe this helps...

i just updated mine and now it wont connect.  Says no block source available???  win32


after i updated, i added
maxconnections=2
connect=208.81.7.153
connect=204.27.61.162

in a conf file and still no connection?

Great to see another update to Bitcoin Core as it had been awhile without one.

no strange, read the debuglog file ... it download "by hell" too orphan block, now.
i'm stuck, too ... on the marker 1 years 10 weeks since 24 hours after many restart of the bitcoin core.

Linked question for "slow download" : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=252937.msg9017061#msg9017061

When will there be new features released in the wallet?

Nice update, thanks. Downloading now.

Great job devs. Keep up the good work.

Nice to see another release. I sure hope this fixes the transactions bug when sending coins rest of coins go into pending and have to close wallet and re open it again.

I am very curious to know when CoinJoin might be incorporated as something fully supported and available from Core, and given recent concerns regarding state actors such as the Russian Federation or some proposals which have recently come out of the UNSC, I believe that it would be timely to clarify this issue and raise its priority.

Link to existing issue and my comment on the subject in development is here:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3226#issuecomment-58085920

brief edit to this post:

CoinJoin development at this time has funding support of over 42 BTC.  Are there any impediments to the release of these funds to get this feature done, as well as any other privacy or anonymity options which might be considered development-worthy?
https://blockchain.info/address/3M8XGFBKwkf7miBzpkU3x2DoWwAVrD1mhk

OK, after a complet download from the official torrent ... no crash of this version 0.9.3 on my WinXP SP3 + all KBs updates.
Strange that it have been located on the blockchain files  :P

So, the answer is : when bitcoin core crash without warning ... re-download the whole blockchain folder.  :D

ps : i don't  have changed anything in this computer ... and it's run only for network stuff (no private use).

That's strange indeed. Probably a database (either the UTXO database or the block index) was corrupted in a sneaky way. You had tried a reindex before?

Anyhow, great to hear that your problem is solved.

It will be incorporated when someone implements it. It's an open source project, so there is no saying who will pick this up. AFAIK no one is working on wallet features in Bitcoin Core at the moment. The core developers are focused on improving the node infrastructure. Maybe Cozz (who got Coin Control to a state where it could be merged) would be interested, given incentive.

no, but ... in the future, if this append again ... instead of re-download the blockchain, i try this first.  :)
re-indexing blockchain take the whole day.

thanks for info

Hello wumpus,

Thanks for your reply.  I am not sure what would be the best way to communicate with Cozz to relay my thoughts or request.  Please advise by private message in this forum if possible.

I've posted a reply here https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3226#issuecomment-58226430
to an earlier comment from laanwj (git) which appears here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3226#issuecomment-58159250

Again, thanks.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=72619
https://github.com/cozz?tab=activity

Thank you, e-mail was sent earlier today which cc'd various including Cozz.  I appreciate the help!

For those needing to verify the downloaded files, it would be done like this:


If you already have Gavin's CODE SIGNING KEY on your key, the output for the second command above should include something like:

Which means Wladimir's key should be trusted.

Another question however is did anyone ever in person verify pgp  fingerprints from Gavin, Wladimir or other devs? When doing some reading on GPG, I see this is something that's recommended to do to establish trust, also calling someone and having them read their fingerprint out loud, if you already know them by person could be an option.

As Bitcoin is some very serious stuff, I can at least see persons responsible for larger amounts of funds in bitcoins, having the need to do fingerprint comparision to ensure keys are correct. Or do people in general just accept that downloaded keys should automatically be trusted?

The way to get Bitcoin Core, is to download it from https://bitcoin.org/bin/0.9.3/, then run sha256sum on the binary you downloaded, and verify output against the corresponding SHA256 Hash in the SHA256SUMS.asc file. And then this file itself has to be verified to see if it turns up valid. And if you do not have Wladimir's key, it needs to be retrieved as I described earlier in this post (you could always look it up on a gpg key server).

To verify the file:  , and get something like this:


Now if you already trust Gavin's key, then all should be swell. However, what if you just got hired to be the financial manager of finances at say Overstock.com, and you need to ensure that there's no friggin way that your 10 million dollars worth of BTC will be compromised in anyway, be it a malicious binary or otherwise.

Would it not be in the power of, let's say the NSA, or any other intel agencies to conduct a MITM? I don't know all the details, but there's been incidents of SSL certificates being stolen, so that an entity can claim to be somebody they're not, and serve malicious data to the user? And as such certificates can be stolen, I would think they could've been obtained through other methods as well..

Bitcoin.org's security certificate says: "You are connected to bitcoin.org which is run by (Unknown), Verified by GeoTrust, Inc., which is a US company.

So let's say that your download from bitcoin.org is compromized by an intel org which manages to make the site seem like everything's fine by connecting you over https but conducting a MITM. So you receive a malicious binary. Most users will not verify their download, and happily run Bitcoin Core. There's no instructions for verifying the downloads at the download page at bitcoin.org afaik.

So the amount of users who downloaded without verifying the downloads are now all compromised, the malicious software could do anything now really, like stealing all the bitcoins - installing a keylogger on the users machine, transferring private files, without the user knowing etc. Most likely, bitcoins would not be stolen, as this would alert the user base about the issue quite quickly, good thing is we have diversification in the bitcoin ecosystem, so not everyone is running the same software, or downloading from the same place all the time.

But let's say the download was MITM attacked, and the user wants to verify the download. He could just get Wladimir's key off a pgp-key-server and be done with it, but how can he be sure that the key  actually belongs to Wladimir? Could not also this download of the public key be compromized by a MITM attack? But, wait, Gavin has signed that key. Let's get Gavin's key? So we download it, from the web somewhere or from a public key server, we could still be mitm attacked.

So let's say you now have the binaries, the signature file, and you verify it against Wladimir's pubkey, which is signed by Gavins pubkey, and you think everything's good. The fact is that you could be fooled at this point. Does anyone remember the BGP Hijacking, where some clever hacker stole all the traffic for numerous miners, such that all the mined bitcoins would end up in his hands? He went off with 83K USD worth of bitcoins.

What if you're up against a more powerful entity, that really knows how to do MITM attacks? How could you secure yourself? What if your friend went to a bitcoin conference, then saw Gavin in person, and then he checked the fingerprint of Gavins CODE SIGNING KEY on his laptop and compared it to the actual fingerprint which Gavin could provide in person?

Then you would know that Gavin's CODE SIGNING KEY is legit, and by extension, if Gavin trusts Wladimir, then you should also trust Wladimir. However, Wladimir (no offence meant at all) could be associated with some intel org and he could inject malicious code into the binary, which any dev which had the right permissions could do, be it Gavin, Wladimir or anyone else that has the power to make a release of the Bitcoin Core software. So even, if we have established that fingerprints were correct, we would still need to trust the devs not to do anything nefarious.

The only other way to ensure we're 100% safe, is to study the source code, and then for every sucessive release, do a diff and check that nothing nefarious has snuck in. And then compile it ourselves, but then again, what guarantee is there that none of the libraries that the code depends on, or the compiler itself has been compromised?

The subject of Bitcoin security is quite complicated, but just imagine how much damage could be done for the right group of malicious hackers, if they manage to MITM attack quite a few users, they could monitor the users balances, and then at a given time, they could issue commands, if not preprogrammed in the binary, to empty the wallets completely, or upon next successful entering of the passphrase by the user, emptying the wallet completely.

Who knows if NSA or any other intel org not at this very moment has dedicated teams working on these scenarios.

Provided we do trust the developers, which I believe most do, we should also trust the software that they release, but how can we do that if we do not know with 100% accuracy that the pgp keys are actually belonging to who they're claimed to belong to?

Perhaps even more likely than the NSA scenario is one or a group of hackers working in concert. For instance, if such a group has access to all the traffic that goes through an ISP, they could manipulate the traffic anyway they'd like and with a stolen SSL certificate for bitcoin.org, they could redirect traffic and post malicious binaries for users to download, no? Of course, there's many hurdles to overcome, but there's some pretty advanced hackers out there that could pull of some serious tricks.

A market currently valuated at approx  5,000,000,000 USD is bound to atract some interest. I know the cap's just an imaginary number based on number of bitcoins multiplied with the current price, I digress..

But the final question would then be: How do a normal user ensure he's running Bitcoin Core safely, and how do a small business ensure they do not get wiped our completely, and how will major companies deal with the risk when they go heavily into the Bitcoin market? I would think such companies would have dedicated security engineers for such purposes.

So, I'm just thinking ahead, and wondering when we will see the most sophisticated attacks against the bitcoin infrastructure. Another problem would be the bad publicity, newspapers and TV-stations reporting about small businesses totally wiped out by the 'bitcoin hack', and then followed by very serious government types proclaiming that Bitcoins are inherently unsafe, and it's best to deal with regulated currencies that is issued and controlled by the state.

I'm not going into conspiracy territory with this, but knowing how relaxed many people are in regards to security, I would think there will be at least a few disasters ahead of us. Could that be prevented, and what measures are in place to prevent this from happening?

An answer could be, anybody could read the code, the code for all included libraries, and then compile it themselves. But who could do that? Could even a group of 5 experts do this and really understand everything in a short period of time? Sure, the source code is available, but for the majority of people, this is not something they'll ever concern themselves with.

If those running bitcoin.org reads this, it would be very interesting to know the stats, how many people download the binaries, as opposed to those downloading binaries and the checksum file? I would think many don't care about the verification.

Perhaps this was the wrong thread to ask these questions, but then the discussion could be branched out in a separate thread by a mod.

Also, I'm eternally thankful to everyone that works hard to make bitcoin exist, so this is by no way an attack on anyone, it's just an attempt at thinking about the different scenarios where users could be hurt, and wanting to learn others opinions about this, as I know there are very many smart people in this community.

I installed it.!! it would take around a day or two to get in sync.!! uninstalled it.!! :/

If you use the method where you download the torrent, you should be good to go in a rather short amount of time if you have a good network connection.

Check here: https://bitcoin.org/bin/blockchain/

On the other hand, if you plan on using this program, then you will most likely have it running, so the initial download will only be an annoyance at the very start.

Great version!

What are the upgrades that have been added in the latest version ? Also why there hasn't been a major release yet, only minor upgrades ?

because it works.

stop think like corporate and marketing branch ...

https://bitcoin.org/en/version-history

If you think progress is too slow, feel free to contribute: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin

I have a question about creating raw transactions.

If you are not spending the entire amount and don't want all of the change to go to the miners how do you tell QT how much change you want back and where to send it?

Here is an example from the testnet:

createrawtransaction '[{"txid":"483d3ddb086a5be6bdcccb4712bf7d84451af6a2a980c918e1d68eb0eec22725","vout":0,"scriptPubKey":"a914cf0d767ae8d9125b7d843112f8b8c07b333d4ac887","redeemScript":"5321034bdd619568d26a20d00a50e7c351f596c42e148cfdb099e317b2e2c553e1345d210230fd7 1e63947197589e706c2e0fb6aa05eae20fee2f92c2ffdacef252ea6afb52103ef21373b0a9e89bc f2a4e8481516c4849080a4d1f62b1b532445e5def3a4755d53ae"}]' '{"mxiuyocweZ6rPsLrGaR8wgsafHXnTcRBhU":0.05}'


EDIT: After doing some more homework I realize I have a lot more homework....

Thanks for update! Didn't really notice there was an update till this I saw this post

I like the CoinControl feature. BTW I synced from start and during the process bitcoin-qt crashed about 5 times (about once per 8 hours). Only two times out of five at the end of log was error (10091): closesocket(hListenSocket) failed with error WSAStartup

The other cases no error at the end of log...

I'm finally going to get my node running this week to support the network!

Using this, took me few days for my slow connection to download the first 4 years of blocks. Then used the torrent shortcut eheh.

yes ... after the block 0184 ... the v9.3 crash like the 0.9.2.1 (no debuglog entries to indicate the problem) on my WInXP SP3 with all KBs.  :(
rollback to 0.9.1 (with reindex command line to check the block folder and rev files). :-\

Excuse me my ignorance, but is there any reason at all to run WinXP these days? Have you looked into running a linux distro? No offence meant.

I really don't have experience with those offline wallets but if somehow my PC get burned or something & I can't fix .. does it mean I will lose all my bitcoins unless I took a backup ? if yes how to take a backup

Shutdown bitcoin core. Then find wallet.dat, and copy it to a usb drive or two, store those at the office or another location you see fit. Make sure you've sett a passphrase on the wallet. Also realize that once you do transactions, change might be sent to new addresses in the wallet, requiring you to do a new backup.

So each time I use my bitcoins (Send/receive) I have to take new backup of wallet.dat ? should I use Export & Import options or just find the file manually on directory ?

No problems at all with XP 64 SP2 (FX-8350, 16 GB RAM).

Every 50 transactions or so is the recommendation. You can use the export in the program or do it manually. If you do it manually shut it down first.

If you're using the GUI:  File->Backup Wallet...

If you're using bitcoind: use the backupwallet RPC command.

I have a dedicated device to this ... it run many other "softwares from the old world".
I don't want change the OS (that it don't crash after 60 days ... and the others software, too) because of the bitcoin core.

That why i return to the v0.9.1 ... that it don't crash at all. ;)

But, not a problem for me ... just an "under the hood" problem for the others (the dev.).
I understand, too, that winxp is not supported and depreciated.  ;D

It's the life.  ;)

I think your problem might be related to the limited amount of memory 32-bit Windows'es are able to access. If you were on XP 64, I'd tell you to stick with it and not downgrade your PC to 7Garbage or the 8th Abomination. Microsoft having stopped releasing those useless "security" patches that never protected anyone from anything is irrelevant. Linux is an option, if you're willing to accept the learning curve and live with the fact that you'll be missing on many Windows programs, even with WINE.

I remember that it had .dll's etc .. why it's just an .exe only this time  :o
anyway , is there is anyway to bypass that Synchronisation with the Network bullshits ?  :'( It takes forever

perhaps, but i already decrease the cache to 4Mb to avoid the "by the hell" comsumption of RAM of the start or the bitcoin core.

cache 4Mb = 200Mb of RAM used.
cache 100Mb = 1,2Gb of RAM used.

Is there truly a benefit to running Bitcoin Core, rather than another wallet software?

In blockchain directory, much more files will be created. Any other disadvantage? BTW I running Bitcoin core with 100 Mb cache on winXP 32bit with 1GB total system memory and it runs fine  :) - but I dont have other programs open when Bitcoin core is running because it would start swapping the memory to hdd

For me, it need long time to synchronize with the network, bro. How about?.

QT is not actually the most beneficial I would expect Armory to be a more secure solution than Bitcoin-Qt, because it allows you to sign the transactions from an offline computer.  This means that the private keys never need to be stored on a computer that is connected to the internet.

It takes me about half hour for every full day I have to synchronize, not much problem when I open the wallet daily.

Thanks, great job

Thank you, great job :) i hope someday we see the release of btc 2.0  8)

Amaaaaazing

I'd like to make a suggestion to have the last 5 letters in the public address in red(or whatever color) when sending bitcoin.
Like this: 1Hg1Ph176mtcBPcpVRpGwjxB74N2nCqkyZ
This makes it easier to identify and make sure you're sending money to the right address.

Maybe even use this function in receiving addresses.

 :)

look forward the next move!

good tnx,will try

Kudos to everyone who contributed to the continuous improvement of the network!

Wow seems interesting  :o

I don't understand the meaning of installing a new version. Can anybody explain me  ??? ???

clean orphan blocks.
optimize upload of blocks.

and many more for the others ...  ;D

Are there any issues with using past archived wallet.dat or will one just send from previous wallet to new address?

No issues (7-zip wallet to don't destroy when copy).
I use cold storage wallet of bitcoin core because of this ...  ;)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=763970.msg8608715#msg8608715

Thanks, really nice  :)

Thanks for the update guys , but May I ask what makes Bitcoin Core better then the other wallets ? Anything special on it ?

when multisig and p2sh will be added to bitcoin core?

BTC is the best ;)

When I try to start my bitcoin Bitcoin Core (OSS GUI client for Bitcoin) 0.9.3.0 it starts and then a box comes up with Exception 13leveldb_error database corrupted. What should I do to correct this? Thanks for yall's time.  :-[

the best wallet, but instead of the whole blockchain downloading i chosed light wallet - MultiBit

Thanks for the share!

Great updates.

Thanks for sharing & Great work Developpers !
Could anyone please tell me what to do to save Private keys ? I don't see it in the GUI (Windows) , Console command maybe ? thanks

this is looking great  ;D

Are you trying to backup your private keys? If so, you should just backup the whole wallet by clicking File -> Backup Wallet

Am I the only one that finds it odd that there seems to be no way to verify the provenance of the Mac OS X version?

What do you mean? Verify the origin of the installer file?

Yes - one is unable to verify the PGP signature of the distributed file. Unless I am doing it wrong.

I should only take this backup once at lifetime ? or Take it like one a day , or once a week ?

Roughly every 50 tx.

Alright , thanks for the answer dude , but I barely make that amount of transactions anyway ;D

Hmm. Perhaps I need to try again.

How do each of you feel about the fact that it is impossible to verify that Bitcoin 0.9.3 is an official build, and therefore unlikely to have a backdoor that allows some nefarious party to steal your bitcoins?

Or, if there is a way to verify this, how does one do so?

Not sure what you mean. There's file signature hashes published at https://bitcoin.org/en/download . That file is signed with Wladimirs key.

what is bitcoin core? what for? i dont understand please, where can i get started all of this, i'm interested to get bitcoin

Near as I can tell, 'Wladimir's key' is unverifiable as being Wladimir's key. Perhaps I am doing it wrong, but this is what I see:

You have to sign his key and add it to your trust database.

Sign who's key? That's the question. How do I know this is Wladimir's key?

https://bitcoin.org/en/development

Thanks.

I hate to be recursive, but how do I know that is Wladimir's key? Is there a more robust mechanism than going to a (hackable) webpage, and downloading a (hackable) *.asc file -- which itself exists upon said webpage with no explanation other than it appears in the same row of a table that also includes Wladimir's name and email? It seems to me that we'd have a better system for something upon which billions of USD of value depends.

If you're that paranoid, email one of the core devs or PM them on the forums.

The key can also be found on github, so they would need to hack that too.

Emailing won't help either as you still can't be sure. (If you're that paranoid...)

Other than that, this article may be of interest to you: http://www.rubin.ch/pgp/weboftrust.en.html

Bitcoin Core is a bitcoin wallet, first created by satoshi.

Before trying to get bitcoin, I think you should first learn about the basics about wallet and transaction. The bitcoin wiki should be helpful to you.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Main_Page

just downloaded it!

The linked article is very interesting - thanks. However, it merely raises more questions.

- the AT&T Path Server is evidently offline, with its return being in doubt. Is there an alternative?

- why is there not already a web of trust relationship for Wladimir's key? Or if such exists, how do I learn about that?

gpg does it for you. Or rather you build your own web of trust using it. Like Parazyd said you sign keys of people (which ideally you have met in person and checked their key fingerprint and ID). Others you can assign "trust". Depending on steps outlined in [1], if some of those people are in Wladimir's web of trust too (one way or the other) then your gpg will trust his key too. That is at least my understanding.

[1] https://www.gnupg.org/gph/en/manual.html#AEN385


As for the graphical representation it's nice, but not necessary as gpg will do it for you anyway.

There is a graphical implementation for #bitcoin-otc [2] for example, but of course only for people who submitted their keys there. I guess AT&T stopped it because it used too many resources. But again, graphics are nice, but not necessary.

[2] http://serajewelks.bitcoin-otc.com/trustgraph.php

Having to use old wallet as 0.9.3 continues to crash my system. Tried to wipe everything clean install. Gets to about 95% on block chain downloaded and indexed and shortly after crashes and when re open it then says re building blockchain. Yet on older version no problems are at be.

What could the cause of this be?

Bitcoin Core version 0.10.0 is now available from:

https://bitcoin.org/bin/0.10.0/

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/0.10/doc/release-notes.md

same for my WinXP SP3 ... i must stay at 0.9.1 to have no crash at all with continious running time.
0.9.2 and early crash after 19-28 hours ... with no explications (no errors, process is killed by itself).

Nice to see an update and looking at the release notes seems that this is going to make things a lot better in the future and when theirs a final release of it made public and testing done. Maybe this will fix a lot of the problems that the past releases of the wallet has been caused due to the sync problems and liability of the wallet. I will wait till theirs a full public release and not beta to test and then upgrade and see how it works out. Maybe this release will actually fix the syn and crash problems I had in the 0.9.3 release as can not seem to use it.

what about adding a conversion rate directly to the client?

What for? Makes no sense at all.
First, there's so much markets, and second, it's imagined to be used as a currency, not as a stock share. So I really doubt the devs are gonna add a feature that will tell you the equivalent in any fiat currency.

Oh thanks i'll report if i found a bugs  ;)

just anti lazy thing, i don't need to go to preev to know it

You could fork it and add it yourself. I don't think the devs would be interested in doing such a thing.

Very Good ! nice relise !

Great and thanks for the tuts ...

when applications bitcoin release in blackberry device
because I was a blackberry device users

all the better if made easier :D ;D

nice, it seems with bitcoin core this world will be a better one  8)

well does this wallet stores all the db into a 30 GB files for the blockchain i do nee like a multiwallet or soo for the pen ossibility of keeping BTc in the wallet but ok this seems quite good improve too

https://launchpad.net/~bitcoin/+archive/ubuntu/bitcoin (https://launchpad.net/~bitcoin/+archive/ubuntu/bitcoin)

New Version 0.9.4 Just Released in Official Ubuntu PPA Repository

Lucid, Precise, Trusty, Utopic. Go get it now. For all your full nodes and Core wallets.

Version history: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/41f94edf221019a6c4b8f78c2b17c389442f546e/doc/release-notes.md

(Thanks, Chemistry1988)

Good looking out Thanks ;)

Bitcoin Core 0.9.4 has been released for Windows or still not yet ? looking forward to test it

It's mainly a bugfix for the openSSL issue, with which the Windows version was not affected. That's maybe why they're in no big rush.

I agree the release process is a bit odd at times. 

Hello to everyone

I opened a MultiBit wallet almost one year ago and I put some bitcoins, last week my computer went down and I need to take it to a shop to put all new and eliminate everything.

And now I installed the Multibit wallet but all my bitcoins are missing... :(( I have the email from BitStamp to my Multibit adress with the confirmation of the transaction.

Someone who can help me plese? I can pay with bitcoins if you are able to recuperate my bitcoins... :)

Thanks
riojaoca007@gmail.com

Unfortunutly mate , there is absolutly no way to get your coins back . Unless you took a backup of your wallet or private keys you can try to use Recovery programs to recover them then import them back to your Multibit wallet . If you use tools to delete permanantly all you had in PC then all is lost and there is no way back.

Whats that Bitcoin Core??

It's simply a Bitcoin Wallet just like Multibit ,Electrum,Blockchain.info , Coinbase & others ... It helps you receive & send Bitcoin anywhere & anytime ;D
If you have any further questions (like you seem new here) , feel free to post on "Beginners & help" section and we will do our best to help you out .

Kudos to developers but we need old chain pruning asap.

the chain is way too big :)

personally i prefer online wallet, i tried this wallet ...it is working really fine.congrats dev

Is this the safest and most reliable wallet to have on your computer? I am beginning to prefer Multibit because of the slow sync and overall app responsiveness. Is there anything developers can do something to address these issues in future releases ?

Well, it's called the reference client.


Already under way: https://bitcoin.org/bin/0.10.0/test/

this is most recommended wallet :)