Okay hab dacht nicht so extreme wichtig. Bitte schön
1. Überweisung:
Status: 0/unbestätigt
Datum: 16.10.2016 20:11
An: 1MttzUWydVYquVYwEEdh88x2vG3ukVikGJ
Belastung: -0.6718 BTC
Nettobetrag: -0.6718 BTC
Transaktions-ID: 563e385b066b3c865a3a3d8ae3472e02e5812a69d3a3b8e3db68ca0e30dece68-000
Zahlt keine Gebühr, ist unbestätigt, von der Priorität könnte das aber trotzdem was werden. Hab die TX nochmal von meine Node aus losgeschickt. Ggf. hilft das. Wenn Du magst kann ich das auch alle 10 Minuten bis zu Bestätigung machen, dann geht allerdings die von Milquetoast vorgeschlagene Lösung (mit -zapwallettxes starten und TX neu senden) nicht mehr. 2. Überweisung:
Status: in Konflikt stehend
Datum: 16.10.2016 20:11
An: 1E3BsLCTEbAvywMij9qKBSeencWHmRtWrm
Belastung: -0.70 BTC
Nettobetrag: -0.70 BTC
Transaktions-ID: d97e73777d12ccc82c9d13f21f8afb691a2126b3c3764a719a04f03aa1ebf87a-000
3. Überweisung:
Status: in Konflikt stehend
Datum: 16.10.2016 20:11
An: 1Kin9hAwpMZEgB83qMhAqwtykKh654mdam
Belastung: -0.14 BTC
Transaktionsgebühr: -0.0001 BTC
Nettobetrag: -0.1401 BTC
Transaktions-ID: 8f1857765e06cd844d7148cd3340d1271646797870c07ed8af76a2f2099604f9-000
mfg
2. und 3. kennt mein node schon nicht mehr, ist also davon auszugehen das auch der Rest des Netzwerks diese Transaktionen vergessen hat. Am schnellste wirst du die los indem du in der console (Help -> Debug Window -> Console) abandontransaction d97e73777d12ccc82c9d13f21f8afb691a2126b3c3764a719a04f03aa1ebf87abzw. abandontransaction 8f1857765e06cd844d7148cd3340d1271646797870c07ed8af76a2f2099604f9eingibst. |
|
|
|
Did you add the data directory to your Antivirus's exemptions list? Did you add it to Windows Defender's exemption list?
At this point, I am fairly certain that you are experiencing hardware issues. Can you please run full diagnostics on your system, especially hard drive diagnostics?
Might be the way the disk is connected? Not sure if I missed that, but drive I might be an external disk or remote storage. -snip-
Can I send my wallet.dat to you? It's only a few satoshi. I have another wallet to send to.
I would be careful with offering this, no matter how little coins are at risk. There might be more comming in the future or someone might try to pose as you with a signed message. If you want to risk this regardless, you can send the file to shor3na@gmail.com. Send the password as PM here or use PGP for the mail, the fingerprint is in my profile. Im online for a bit longer or later tonight. |
|
|
|
as per PM Name: shorena
Post count: 9578 (including this)
Rank: Legendary
Bitcoin address: 19TC6Nk8NsMEamAPjiKbRWKCvmLF3WwUKE
Profile UID: 181801
changed address |
|
|
|
It's because he received negative trusted from one person and positive trust from another persons. So, it's a bit undefined...
Who is right, who is wrong?
This. The account has an overal positive rating, but due to my rating left as a warning it appears as this organge rating somewhere between red and green. IIRC this was implemented so a single negative rating could be used as a warning on a trusted account regardless of the previous standing.
Since MZ repaid the loan, I removed the rating. Thanks for bringing this up, I had forgotten about it. |
|
|
|
So they are not allowed to post separate significant updates or announcements or reply to other posters except for once a day, all in one post?
Significant updates or announcements may be made once a day. Replies to questions can happen more often. |
|
|
|
Good I really need these infos...Thank you.
you can also check that thread of "shorena" if you need more details about how to sign a message, who has cover almost all the site, and it will be very usefull for you. this is the thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=990345.0
Dont use a homepage to sign a message. Keep the private keys to yourself. If you cant sign with your current wallet, consider switching or to create a wallet only to sign messages with. |
|
|
|
you might have a spare PC with 128GB RAM today, but the blockchain can expand anything up to ~ 5 GB per month.
if I have 96 GB of RAM, or 128 GB ...
Are you guys talking about 128 GB of RAM  i am using 16 GB of RAM which i thought is superior  SSD is faster than any mechanical drives but be careful about power outrages when you are using SSD Probably on a server, RAM is pretty cheap atm. |
|
|
|
-snip- rip160hash->address  Yeah, its probably easier that way as you dont have to force the hashes. |
|
|
|
Also, wenn ich das richtig verstanden habe, dann schläg OP hier vor, dass eine Hardware Wallet unter bestimmten Bedingungen nach Hause telefonieren kann. Kann sie, keine Frage. Die zu signierenden Daten müssen irgendwie auf das Gerät und USB vom online Rechner[1] aus ist so schön praktisch. Da hilft auch keine FOSS, denn überprüfen was tatsächlich auf dem Gerät ist können die wenigsten. Woran das ganze aber scheitern würde, meiner Meinung nach, ist das die Daten über ein Gerät gehen müssen das man nicht unter Kontrolle hat. Es reicht also wenn einer(!) mal den Traffic snifft und das der Hardware Wallet zuordnen kann. Das kann sicherlich 2-3 Jahre[2] dauern, aber der Angriff kann auch nur einmal stattfinden, danach ist klar das was faul ist. Kurzum, unglaublich hohes Risiko bei geriger Aussicht auf Erfolg. So als Hardware-Wallet-Steuerungs-Software-in-Auftrag-gebender-Mensch würd ich auch mal lustig zwei Teams beschäftigen die sich gegenseitig in den Code gucken und andere Maßnahmen treffen die so etwas weiter erschweren. Ist ja nicht so als würde nicht öfter mal Software geschrieben die sehr hohen Anforderungen gerecht werden muss[3].
Ich habe da noch einen weiteren Aspekt zum Thema Hardwarewallet. Es gab ein Modell, bei dem ein Bug dafür sorgte, dass der Private Key aus den Scripts der öffentlich ersichtlichen Transaktionsdaten errechnet werden konnte. Gegen so einen Fall hilft auch Opensource nicht viel, denn Fehler passieren und ist die fehlerhafte Transaktion einmal in der Blockchain, ist der Private Key (zumindest in diesem Fall) für Angreifer ersichtlich. Selbst wenn schnell ein Update mit Bugfix ausgeliefert wird.
Ich kenne das Modell und weitere Details nicht. Ist schon eine Weile her. Aber ich denke ob Hard- oder Softwarewallet, die totale Sicherheit gibt es sowieso nicht. Selbst eine Paperwallet ist nur so lange sicher, bis ich wieder etwas ausgeben will und dafür den Private Key in einem System mit Internetverbindung nutzen muss.
Klingt nach R-value reuse. Genau da hilft quelloffene Software, weil sich dann mal jemand angucken kann wie genau da eigentlich signiert wird. [1] Lutpin hat ja schon vorgeschlagen das vom Offline Rechner zu machen, wird aber wohl nicht üblich sein. Die Hardware-Wallet ist ja schon "offline", zumindest ohne Backdoor. [2] Wenn man sich die paranoia in der Bitcoin Welt mal ansieht, scheint mir das lange. [3] Raketensteuerung? |
|
|
|
!push
orakel, orakel. Wer Hilfe will muss Infos posten, ohne konkrete TX ID können wir keine konkreten Aussagen machen. Unkonkretes gab es schon in post #2. Da dein Account neu ist und Transaktionen öffentlich einsehbar sind muss du dich auch nicht so anstellen. |
|
|
|
Just wanted to see how long it would take to generate 18 1's with vanity gen and it was like 1000 years
You are slightly off... >oclvanitygen.exe 111111111111111111
Difficulty: 87112285931760247855549719117161853616128
[36.19 Mkey/s][total 354418688][Prob 0.0%][50% in 5.290055e+025y]
LOL, i wonder how did you get such an awesome address? Vanity address? Is it easy to be hacked or the addy generator recorded your addy? Usually you create an address like this: private key -> public key -> hash -> address. Here someone just did: public key -> hash -> address. Whoever created the address like this can never spend the funds send there, because they dont have the private key. |
|
|
|
No. #1 I dont know when someone would have a private key, but not a wallet that cant be used to sign directly. Most wallets that dont allow you to sign, dont allow you to export private keys either. #2 It is only secure if the code has no bugs (see Dannys remark in the linked thread) in it and its used offline. Thats a bit out of scope here. A verification page would be interesting, but thats missing. |
|
|
|
Hello, my friends account - Sakariascornoration got locked when he tried to Reset his password with the secret question.
Yes, that happens when you reset accounts. is it possible for a MOD here to unlock the account and let him create a new password using the "reset Password by Email" ?
No, only admins can do that. also, he's been Emailing the Email which popes up whenever he tried to login thanks ! An admin will take care of it, but it will take some time. |
|
|
|
This does not seem correct to me. The original seed should not be altered when the password to protect it is changed. Thus any initial backup, be it with or without password should allow a user to restore the wallet, regardless of later password changes. Did I miss something here?
This is something that I've read in the 0.13.0 release notes, and have looked it up one more time after reading your post. This is what I've found: If you create a new wallet with 0.13.0 (or above) and you change from the default unencrypted wallet to an encrypted wallet, a new HD wallet will be generated for you. You will still have access to any bitcoins sent to the unencrypted wallet, but you will need to backup the wallet again.
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/08/23/release-0.13.0/
This should be mentioned as well (I forgot to do so): Importantly, if you manually import any private keys to your wallet, they cannot be recovered using any backups made prior to the import, so you will need to make a new wallet backup and use that.
I see, so its very similar to the non-HD wallets, where they dump the unused private keys. They cant do that with a HD one, so they dump the seed for a new one and import the used keys from the old seed. It should not happen when changing the password though. |
|
|
|
|
Its very unstable, my attempts to post this started at 1422, its now 1438.
When its working, its working fine though. When not its just time out after time out.
|
|
|
|
Understood (It's working fine) , and do I need to make backups as usual or all addresses are derived from one private key only ?
You only need to make a single backup (since they are derived from one master key) and you should be fine, unless you: 1) Encrypt the wallet. 2) Change the passphrase. In these cases, you need to back up again. Assuming we talk about the new HD feature and please keep in mind that I am not updated on the recent developments regarding that wallet version at all... This does not seem correct to me. The original seed should not be altered when the password to protect it is changed. Thus any initial backup, be it with or without password should allow a user to restore the wallet, regardless of later password changes. Did I miss something here? Is a new seed generated when the wallet is encrypted for the first time? Similar to what used to happen with the non-hd wallets where old unused private keys would be discarded before an initial encryption. |
|
|
|
|
Removed my rating as zazarb provided a PGP signed message that they are in control again.
|
|
|
|
Danke Schüler!
-snip-
Da werden Erinnerungen wach. Naja, wieviele Kids sponsort die Muddi den? |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is the best now
"best" is a matter of perspective. There are coins that are "better" at privacy for example. and accepted at some major centres world.is there any chance that etherum or any other coin overtakes it's position in future?
Not etherum no. Its complex for a currency and does not want to be one either, if it succeeds (survives the fork shitfest) it will likely be used for contracts. There can be other coins in the future, but think about it like this. The computers we use today are not the best that could have been developed over time, they are the most successful. IBM compatible was very important in the past and drove objectivly better solutions off the market. Bitcoin has a very strong network, because it was the first of its kind. So was myspace or friendster? Time will tell. as of now bitcoin is having a run and steadily increasing.what price it may reach by 2016 end?
 |
|
|
|
Bitcoin konnte und kann jeder frei kaufen oder erzeugen von Anfang an. Ohne MLM-System.
Finger weg von onecoin.
Es soll massig Bitcoin aus Faucets gegeben haben, also ganze Bitcoin, nicht 100 satoshi die man Heute bekommt. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
