Hoping someone has a solution for this problem, I have like .6 BTC stuck in there :S
Does it work if you temporarily disable the (windows) firewall? Do you have any other software that might cause this? |
|
|
|
Guess I'll become an Electrum contributor! Will add the necassary changes to the file once I'm home.  Let me know if you need someone to test the installer. |
|
|
|
What kind of NAS server do you have? Specs? I've been trying a variety of other old linux boxes. Though not NAS I can report the following:
Anything less than 1.6GB RAM forget it.
Anything less than 2 cores x 1.6 GHz cpu forget it.
Why? If you have less CPU power you will have a very hard time to sync up. This can be done on a different machine though (mind the chainstate obfuscation that came with 0.12. core on windows versions) and you just copy the data over once you are in sync. If you have less RAM your node will constantly crash as its running out of memory. I have 2 GB on my old VPS and its not enough when there are many transactions around. This might be better with 0.12.0, because it limits memory for transactions to 300 MB by default and I did some other things to reduce the need for RAM (no wallet, small dbcache), but I dont know yet. |
|
|
|
See above, almost all alt coins have a different prefix. For bitcoin its 1 for litecoin its L for dogecoins its D, etc. There are however exceptions to this and it has happened in the past. Im not sure if this is true for Etherum though. Litecoin uses 3 as a prefix for multisig (or more general pay to script hash) addresses same as bitcoin. Thus a litecoin pay to script hash address is indistinguishable from a bitcoin pay to script hash address. The good news however is, if you have the private key(s)/needed script for one you have it for the other, so no coins are actually lost. They might just be difficult to retrieve. |
|
|
|
|
uhm... the world... europe... its, broken?
|
|
|
|
Is the problem on Bitcoin or in this single linux scanner?
How much bigger is the problem now?
How much does it cost to fix it on possible disadvantages?
No, I dont think its a significant problem now. It might become more pressing in the future. I doubt windows will stay the prominent OS, thus new viruses will emerge for Linux and MacOS and more snake oil will be sold to users to protect them. However, it isn't a removed feature, it is just disabled by default.
If someone will need it, he will be able to enable it again whenever he wants.
Disabled or enabled it doesn't change the experience of the other users/nodes of the network.
I dont disagree with you. I just missed the downsides when I read the patch notes. |
|
|
|
update - The network is not showing this transaction anymore, The above pic on blockchain.info does not show either now.
But it is still in my wallet with 0 confirms, Do I just wait to get it back now? or is it still in the background somewhere?
Its always better to post the Txid's so we can cross check with other networks.Blockchain.info doesn't necessarily cover up the transactions on all the networks.Maybe the transaction still exists on other network but only way to verify it if you post the Txid's. sure Status: 0/unconfirmed Date: 01/03/2016 06:08 To: mphosting 196UHob8ExkDQUm8W9CM5PEuHhRQsf1P3D Debit: -0.34503200 BTC Net amount: -0.34503200 BTC Transaction ID: 4bb769955b2306b7939673ab4121ffca089ecbbf095c7b1121501838425c76f6-000 update - The network is not showing this transaction anymore, The above pic on blockchain.info does not show either now.
But it is still in my wallet with 0 confirms, Do I just wait to get it back now? or is it still in the background somewhere?
Did you rebroadcast it? Would you prefer it to get returned to the sender (as in: forgotten by the network) or do you want it to confirm as is? I did rebroadcast yesterday but I would rather get it back now, yes it was sent with no fee (silly me) but sent 8 days ago now :-( On an update note, it is showing up again on the blockchain :-/ If you want to have it back you first need to remove it from your wallet. From the TX ID ( -000 at the end) you are using bitcoin core or one of its forks, so it should have zapwallettxes unless its an out of date version. #1 close core #2 make sure its closed #3 start it with -zapwallettxes#3.1 for linux/OSX you open a terminal and start bitcoin-cli with the added comman, usually a bitcoin-cli -zapwallettxes
is enough, sometimes you have to give the full path. #3.2 for windows you open "run" (win + r), enter c:\Program Files\Bitcoin\bitcoin-qt.exe -zapwallettxes and confirm with ok #4 let core do its thing, depending on your system this can take a moment. #5 wait at least 24 hours (up to 72h) before you recreate the TX with a fee. You need to give the network some time to forget, or nodes will consider the new transaction a double spend and reject it. |
|
|
|
@shorena Maybe they thought that could be a problem from retro compatibility with older versions, but it is still be possible to enable it. EDIT From Tom Zander on Slack its an awful idea to make everyones chainstate unreadable by older or competing software while this only happens on Windows (not exactly the most used server platform) and then only on machines that have a crappy virus killer (which practically no servers do have). Makes sense, but the problem is not limited to windows only. There is at least one[1] linux scanner that also detects virus signatures in the chainstate folder. I suspect that it will be a problem for all OS in the future. [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1388201.0 |
|
|
|
It's possible to create a Windows installer that does the Regedit stuff automatically using something like NSIS. I could write one that wraps around a portable Electrum version, but that isn't something you would want (a third party person making an installer for a portable program). If I were you, I would ask the Electrum developers to create a specific installer for Windows that handles the Registry stuff. Well, it looks like we have one here and interested. Electrum is using NSIS[1]. Do I see a new Electrum contributor on the horizon? [1] https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/blob/c86ef5e8b0dcebf1940a68e8857165e6e4768920/contrib/build-wine/electrum.nsi |
|
|
|
Its OS specific. #1 hit win+r to open "run", enter regedit and confirm with ok. #2 go to HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\bitcoin\shell\open\command#3 edit the (Standard) from whatever it is now to "C:\Program Files (x86)\Electrum\electrum.exe" "%1" (modify path if needed) Edit: tested here -> http://213.165.91.169/only works if electrum is alreay open any idea how we could automate this with the installer? Sadly not, but Multibit HD does it with the installer (I had to change it from Multibit HD to Electrum). I was not able to find the actual installer with the source though. This[1] sounds like its not published with the rest of the source. [1] https://github.com/bitcoin-solutions/multibit-hd/blob/189ba7970d36226da75f55c850432e49c6529f3c/.gitignore#L26 |
|
|
|
I'd like to stake Address: 1 foreverDArUNEX2gVD26vautcx3b8zTZ -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- This is LoyceV staking address 1foreverDArUNEX2gVD26vautcx3b8zTZ on March 8, 2016 for https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318-----BEGIN SIGNATURE----- 1foreverDArUNEX2gVD26vautcx3b8zTZ HH92BZEyS13Z1md5bF/c8QHqdB9W2Z2amLQJPBkNa3jldMaD0AhPFhmGD/HtXFC4y0ULyAzUoqbWN8ZK7akJaNI= -----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- I would appreciate if someone could quote this message for me. verified w/ electrum 2.6.2 |
|
|
|
I do not understand everything , but I still try to understand it  btw thank a lot for your thread, i appreciated it Its not as difficult to do than it is to understand. Just try signing a message and see if you can verify it somewhere else or post it here for others to see if they can verify it. |
|
|
|
Here are some of my understanding about signing a message with bitcoin address.
Kindly correct me if I misunderstood anything .
1. Basically bitcoin address has 2 parts :
a. Public address to share
b. Private key to keep secretly
c. Public key to verify signatures made by the private key. Private key -> public key -> address (you cant go backwards on this chain!). 2. We can derive a 3rd part from a bitcoin address.
a. This 3rd part is optional
b. Unlimited number of this kind of 3rd part can be generated
c. This 3rd part can be associated to some text.
No you dont derive the signature from the address. Its created by the private key and can be verified with the public key. The (version 1) address is the hash of a public key. The public key is part of the signature. There is however an unlimited number of messages you can sign. 3. To generate this 3rd part, we must need the private key of the address.
a. It is not possible to sign a message with online wallets who does not let access to private key
b. Online wallets (eg: Xapo or coinbase),
exchange or gambling deposit address are some example for without private key bitcoin addresses.
Yes and no. Coinbase allows you to sign a message even though you dont have access to your private keys. The just create the signed message for you. 4. By creating this 3rd part we can prove that we have the private key.
a. This 3rd part is called as Signature
b. This Signature is associated with some text, usually the purpose of signature along with time and owner.
Yes, it proves that someone has the private key for the address in question. It is however no proof that they are the only person. Yes, each signature is unique for the given text and address. It makes sense to include certain information as they are not part of the signature (e.g. a timestamp). 5. Purpose: Prove the ownership of bitcoin address.
a. We can also prove ownership by adding "public note" in sending transaction from an address.
But it is costly and it has no privacy (can be seen by anyone).
No, the public note is a blockchain.info specific thing and not part of the bitcoin network. If blockchain.info is down there is no public note. There is also no way to verify a public note. I can create a public note "Whosdaddy" for one of my addresses on blockchain.info. That does not make me you, nor does it mean the address is yours. Its just text set by the owner of the address. Similarly I can sign a message claiming that I am you, thats why its important to stake your address in the thread in meta if you want to use it to prove ownership over your account. |
|
|
|
Any idea why they didnt enable the chainstate obfuscation? AFAIK its only used to avoid false positives from anti virus software. |
|
|
|
Well this should be easy to implement, the forum already does this with certain domains such as ones that end in .tk
But as whywefight said, you should request this for the new forum, I think it will be live in two or three months so i dont think we should waste any time implementing anything new here
Really? Interesting... didn't hear of this. I wonder what all the accounts will be worth then that account traders collected on the old forum.  Yeah certain links are replaced by [suspicious link removed] or something similar. Its mainly used for those link shorteners that are against the rules AFAIK. I dont see a problem to add *bitcointaIk* to that list. |
|
|
|
I made the idiotic decision to try the Blockchain Beta wallet, and for the life of me, I cannot find anywhere to sign a message with my address. Does anyone have information on how to sign a message with the Beta version of the wallet? Unfortunately, Blockchain does not allow you to revert back to the old wallet once you have tried the beta.
Thanks in advance!
AFAIK you cant. There are many crucial options not available on their new beta wallet. There seems to be a hack to get your private key however[1]. I have not tried it though. It would allow you to import into a different wallet, like electrum that you can sign a message with. [1] https://twitter.com/coin_artist/status/706914092326502400 |
|
|
|
update - The network is not showing this transaction anymore, The above pic on blockchain.info does not show either now.
But it is still in my wallet with 0 confirms, Do I just wait to get it back now? or is it still in the background somewhere?
Did you rebroadcast it? Would you prefer it to get returned to the sender (as in: forgotten by the network) or do you want it to confirm as is? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
