Ist alles ein bisschen merkwürdig. Es scheint Indizien zu geben, die eine Beziehung zum Bitcoin-Ursprung 2009 vermuten lassen. Andererseits gibt es aber einige Ungereimtheiten, und das ganze Auftreten passt nicht wirklich ins Bild. Ohne eine mit dem Original-PGP-Schlüssel signierte Nachricht glaube ich das Ganze erst mal nicht. Den kleinen Kursschub finde ich natürlich trotzdem nett  Onkel Paul |
|
|
|
@shorena: add me to list please, I want to win this:)
(thanks)
Me too! Me too, please! Didn't make it in this activity interval, let's see whether I've got better luck next time (would be a nice Christmas present) thanks, Onkel Paul |
|
|
|
|
Das kleine Problem bei so einer App ist, dass sie eigentlich nur die Bestände auf einer Liste von Adressen überwachen kann. Ist also für Cold Wallets bzw. z.B. Spendeneingangs-Adressen geeignet.
Die normalen Adressen, die deine Wallet generiert, wechseln aber, und die "Display-App" kann neu generierte Adressen nicht kennen.
Ausnahme (wenn ich das mit HD-Wallets richtig verstanden habe): wenn es sich um eine HD-Wallet handelt und die "Display-App" den Master-Schlüssel kennt - dann ist er aber nicht mehr wirklich sicher.
Das Darstellen von public Adressen kann Mycelium übrigens auch so, man kann dort einfach Adressen tracken, auch ohne Bestände auf der Wallet selbst zu haben.
Onkel Paul
|
|
|
|
You should be aware that SSH RSA keys and PGP public/private key pairs are somewhat different beasts.
Typically, GPG keyrings are in .gnupg (secring.gpg and pubring.gpg), not in the .ssh directory.
Yep, I'm learning this pretty quickly. I'd guess that about 40%-50% of what makes cryptography so difficult to tackle is the sheer number of incomprehensible and incompatible formats that all try to solve the problem of allowing for future expansion, in case old algorithms get out of favor and new ones are required. I'd love to have a better grasp at how the same primitive data (key pairs, signatures, encrypted streams) are handled in the different frameworks, but I've got far too little time to learn all that stuff  The code that you want might involve a conversion between those two different key formats which seems to be a bit tricky.
I've just today discovered this as well. Unfortunately all of my cryptography knowledge is limited to what I've learned from being engaged with the bitcoin community here at bitcointalk.org. I've got lots of questions and am finding it very difficult to figure out where/how to get answers. A Node.js program to do the job would also need to implement a plethora of symmetric ciphers since it is unspecified which of the available ciphers in gpg is goin to be used.
I've given the command that would be used with gpg to encrypt. It will just use whatever cipher is default, since it won't be specified. I can certainly specify one if that helps. In addition, it is somewhat unlikely that the sender knows your SSH RSA public key which they'd need to encrypt a message to you.
Since I am both the sender and the recipient for the purposes of this demonstration, I'm confident that the sender knows my SSH RSA public key. That simplifies things a lot of course, as the number of cases to consider is greatly reduced! Is the SSH/PGP mix part of your intended demonstration? Otherwise it might be easier for whoever implements a solution to stick with just one "world" - either the PGP-based stuff or the SSL stuff. Tools for both worlds are plentiful (and equally arcane on both sides.) Surely not a 2-3 hours thing.
Well that's disappointing, but I'm beginning to realize that what I have here is probably an XY problem. Without a reliable source to learn about X, I've apparently invented a Y that is perhaps leading us all down the wrong path. That all said, I'm pretty much aware that
1) you probably already know that what you're trying to do is a bit weird, and you still want to do it
I didn't realize that it was weird when I created this post, but as I've been trying to research it a bit myself I'm slowly coming to the realization that it's weird (see XY problem). Unfortunately I don't know where to turn to have a conversation about what I actually need to accomplish. The SE article http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem notes that interactive chat (e.g. IRC) might be better suited. But IRC is not everybody's taste. If the core of your problem is to automatically handle encrypted and signed messages, ruling out the well-tested solutions OpenSSL and GnuPG is somewhat like "wash my fur but don't make me wet". In cryptography and security, cooking up your own solutions is almost inevitably calling for trouble. For a demonstration it might suffice, but in production I'd rather use something well-tested. 2) you'll ignore my posting anyway since it carries a signature ad
Onkel Paul
Nah, you're not on my ignore list. I've come across enough well thought out posts from you that you've been kept off. Phew, that's good to know  . I noticed that you had me on the list, and I decided not to argue it because it's your list and your rules, but I must admit I was a little sad about it. I still see your point even though I don't fully agree with it. Onkel Paul |
|
|
|
|
You should be aware that SSH RSA keys and PGP public/private key pairs are somewhat different beasts.
Typically, GPG keyrings are in .gnupg (secring.gpg and pubring.gpg), not in the .ssh directory.
The code that you want might involve a conversion between those two different key formats which seems to be a bit tricky. A Node.js program to do the job would also need to implement a plethora of symmetric ciphers since it is unspecified which of the available ciphers in gpg is goin to be used.
In addition, it is somewhat unlikely that the sender knows your SSH RSA public key which they'd need to encrypt a message to you.
Surely not a 2-3 hours thing.
That all said, I'm pretty much aware that
1) you probably already know that what you're trying to do is a bit weird, and you still want to do it
2) you'll ignore my posting anyway since it carries a signature ad
Onkel Paul
|
|
|
|
|
Have you checked the market prices for used testicles? You might be disappointed.
Most bitcoin users (at least here in this forum) seem to have some testicles of their own and probably don't need one more, and the few users without testicles probably don't have an immediate need for one isolated testicle. Overall, I think your chances of making a good profit are pretty slim.
However, if you happen to find a buyer, make sure you pack it (the testicle, not the buyer) in ice so that it arrives in a good condition. You would not want to read complaints about bad packaging here, would you? It would seriously worsen your prospects of follow-up business if you ever decide to sell the rest of your manhood.
Onkel Paul
|
|
|
|
Oh, would you please dox Satoshi for me? For $6 that would be pretty cool  Onkel Paul |
|
|
|
[OT]Wenn der Tank leer ist, kann man selbigen an sogenannten Tankstellen neu befüllen. [/OT]
Kennst du ne Tankstelle, wo man mit BTC bezahlen kann? Nee? Siehste, so doll ist die Idee mit dem Auftanken auch nicht! Onkel Paul |
|
|
|
Testnet bitcoins? Hmm, why would it contain value in the first place when everyone can produce millions of it without having a sweat?
Actually, producing millions of them in the shared testnet isn't so easy. You can do that when you run your own testnet, of course, and for most software tests that should suffice, but I think the "official" testnet still offers some additional uses. Onkel Paul |
|
|
|
|
As unamis76 already quoted, testnet coins are useful as long as they are worthless, because that means you can get them without much effort, use them to test your software, send them using weird new transaction types without fear of losing anything valuable.
As soon as people start trading them and start emptying testnet faucets, they lose their usefulness because it will be harder to get some, and developers are forced to think twice before using them in some test or experiment.
Just leave them alone. If you want to play with them, get some from a faucet (or mine some if you have a USB miner), send them to a different wallet of yours, return them to the faucet, whatever.
But don't buy or sell them for real BTC.
Onkel Paul
|
|
|
|
|
I've notified the mods about this thread, it does belong in the altcoin section, please don't discuss it here.
Onkel Paul
|
|
|
|
|
There are several issues with your post:
1. english is not your native language. That in itself is nothing bad, but what you wrote is almost incomprehensible. You might have more success posting in the local section for your language.
2. Are you talking about a POS coin? Then you should move this to the altcoin section.
3. If you don't understand the code at all, you should probably stop coding. If you have a specific question about something, ask that question. If you can't say what your specific question is, nobody can help you.
Onkel Paul
|
|
|
|
|
Is retrieving bitcoins from a deliberately published private address theft at all?
Of course, if some hacker empties a wallet because its owner is very careless about his PC security, it's still theft even if it was almost as simple as photographing a QR code.
But if I write account credentials such as username&password or a private key down and show them in public places, I can't really complain if someone uses them...
Onkel Paul
|
|
|
|
|
The (always correct) answer to the question "when will a transaction confirm?" is: "Nobody knows for sure".
That's the nature of bitcoin. You can't be sure, there are only probabilities. If a transaction includes a high enough fee the probability for timely confirmation is higher, of course.
These transactions were made with zero fees, and their probability of being included in a block is low. Any transaction building on the outputs of these transactions can only be confirmed after the first one gets confirmed, so don't hold your breath for it.
If you want to avoid this kind of problems, you should check which of the transactions to your receiving address have been confirmed, and only use those transaction outputs as inputs for transactions that you create and that should be confirmed in a timely manner. If your wallet does not check this for you then I'd consider using another wallet software that behaves better.
Onkel Paul
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot create a private key from an address. Period.
If it were possible, bitcoin would be worthelss.
The best you could hope for is understand what happened. But since you only state what you did not do ("i dont think i send it i was ofline on 23 pm") it is very difficult to see what could have gone wrong.
In most such cases, there is either malware on the wallet computer involved, or misunderstanding about how bitcoin transactions work (many folks don't understand the "change" parts of their transactions at first).
Onkel Paul
|
|
|
|
I'm wondering if there is any potential of receiving a higher-pay rate if I adhere to higher standards or posting and possibly some other terms?
Adhering to higher standards is always a good idea, so go for it! It will not change the Bitmixer signature campaign payout, but that should not be a reason to post worthless stuff, right? Onkel Paul |
|
|
|
|
People can put a bitcoin address into their profile at which they accept tips. Of course, since bitcoin isn't so well suited for micropayments and this is not well integrated with the forum software, tipping is relatively expensive due to miner fees, and complicated to do on top.
Onkel Paul
|
|
|
|
Nein, ein Wallet ist eine "Geldbörse", bei Bitcoin ist das eine Sammlung von privaten Schlüsseln für Bitcoin-Adressen, über die du verfügen kannst. Es gibt lokale Wallet-Programme (also Programme auf deinem Rechner, die die Verwaltung dieser Schlüssel und das Erzeugen von Transaktionen für dich übernehmen) und Online-Wallets z.B. bei blockchain.info und vielen anderen. Bei so einer Online-Wallet müsstest du dich registrieren, das stimmt. Edit: Wie sho_road_warrior (shorena) schrieb, gibt es offenbar auch Online-Wallets ohne Registrierung. Mit der Beschreibung (speziell mit Binde- oder Unterstrichen und / am Anfang) sieht es nicht so aus, als ob es sich um einen normal kodierten privaten Schlüssel handelt. Der würde eher so aussehen: 5JvzoX4q7JDYUXGHcCUgNNj8zGBKNcaqXRqh8NZc1iymaV1mcP5 (das ist der private Schlüssel für die Bitcoin-Adresse 1152itre3fMZa6L5XEBiJSGPaH6JW7hs7d, die ich gerade bei bitaddress.org frisch erzeugt habe und auf der nix drauf ist). Ob es sich um irgendeine Passphrase zu einer Online-Wallet oder so handeln könnte, kann man mit so wenig Infos nicht sagen. Auf jeden Fall gilt: Falls das wirklich was wert ist und nicht einfach Gekritzel, auf keinen Fall online irgend jemandem geben (außer mir natürlich, ich bin absolut vertrauenswürdig ) Abgesehen von dem komischen Format stellt sich wirklich die Frage, was an dieser Geschichte stimmt. Hättest du an der Stelle deines Nachbarn als Bezahlung für etwas, das 12000 EUR wert ist, einen Zettel mit unverständlichen Codes akzeptiert? Falls ja, könnte ich dir einen Deal mit meinem nigerianischen Schwippschwager dritten Grades vermitteln, der hat gerade geerbt und sucht jetzt einen, der für ihn die Milliönchen in Sicherheit bringt. Onkel Paul |
|
|
|
Have you looked at http://support.kaspersky.com/viruses/disinfection/8547 ? It seems that at least for some crypto locker type trojans, Kaspersky has decryption utilities. Of course, as others have noted, regular backups rule. Make sure that whatever happens to your computer, you can just continue with a new one (or reformatted one in a case like this.) Making backups is like brushing your teeth: If you don't do it, you'll only realize that you should have done it when it's too late. Make it a regular exercise to back up your data! Alas, anti-virus software can't always protect you - some trojans have ever-changing contents and behavior that makes it hard for AV software to recognize them, even with heuristics. Brain 2.0 is a much better protection against this kind of malware - if something's smelly about an e-mail you got, even when the sender's address is one you recognize, your first suspicion is often correct. Onkel Paul |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
