Electrum supports bech32. So does the latest release candidate of Bitcoin Core, and so does Samourai wallet.
The issue is that very few gambling sites or exchanges allow you to withdraw to a bech32 address. So if just one popular site implements bech32 withdrawals, their transactions will be easily identifiable. I addressed that in the last sentence of my message, which you left out for some reason. Hi sir,I have an issue with sending my bitcoins from my bustadice account.I can't able to send my bits to segwit address,and no problem in sending to the legacy address.
So this issue is only for me or everyone has that issue?I hope you will help me in this case.
We do not yet support bech32 addresses (like bc1qar0srrr7xfkvy5l643lydnw9re59gtzzwf5mdq), but it's on our list of planned features. Since bech32 addresses are still uncommon, an unwanted side effect of implementing withdrawals to them right now would be to make it much easier to reliably track bustadice's hot wallet, so we're holding off a little. Electrum supports bech32. So does the latest release candidate of Bitcoin Core, and so does Samourai wallet. Those are just the ones I use that I know off the top of my head. I understand the privacy concern though. |
|
|
|
|
You can just use a flash drive, or hand type it.
|
|
|
|
|
IIRC you can replace ChromeOS on some models of chromebook with any other OS (usually Linux). I'm not sure I trust Google enough to store Bitcoin on ChromeOS. I might trust it enough to run the ledger chrome app on through, so you could use it to send from a hardware wallet.
|
|
|
|
You want this code: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/pull/507 it will be astronomically faster than your current code. I believe when I previously implemented the techniques in this code my result was faster than vanitygen on a GPU. It could also be made faster still with some improvements. E.g. it doesn't actually need to compute the y coordinate of the points, so several field multiplications could be avoided in the gej_to_ge batch conversion. It could also avoid computing the scalar for any given point unless you found a match. (E.g. by splitting the scalar construction part into another function which you don't bother calling unless there is a match). Another advantage of this code is that it is setup to allow an arbitrary base point. This means you could use untrusted computers to search for you. Sipa also has AVX2 8-way sha2 and ripemd160 that he might post somewhere if you asked. An 8-way bech32 checksum generator should be really easy to do, though if your expression doesn't match on the final 6 characters you should avoid even running the checksum. Thanks for this Greg. There's a lot I don't know about ECC but I'm hoping I can contribute in other ways. I just tried to use the makefile and deal with the errors in order, I didn't get there
The "Makefile" is for FreeBSD (and probably other BSD); the "GNUmakefile" is for Linux, and should automatically take precedence with gmake. I assume you are using a GNU toolchain on Windows? I could try to produce a makefile which makes isolating errors easier; let me add a no-libcrypto build option first. Edit: I thought tossing in the hash implementation C files would be a quick fix. Oops. This may take a few minutes. I'm using mingw, so I've been running mingw32-make.exe CC=mingw32-gcc inside the project directory. I'll start using the GNUmakefile since I'm using the mingw version of gcc. |
|
|
|
Head meets wall repeatedly with mingw cross-compiling.
I found a regex library for Windows at PCRE, but now I need to go find a way to get openssl in there too because that's not on Windows either. Thanks for your response. I am under the impression that PCRE has wrappers for POSIX regex functionality (#include <regex.h>); so that should work. I’ve also found a bunch of different links and discussions (mostly on Stackoverflow) leading me to believe there’s also a mingw regex package without PCRE. I did not yet sort it all out. I had forgotten about the OpenSSL libcrypto dependency. Thanks for reminding me. It is only used for hash functions, SHA-256 and RIPEMD-160. If it would help, I could easily copy portable C code from FreeBSD’s libmd, and eliminate the -lcrypto entirely. The biggest question to me is getting secp256k1’s build system to work with a mingw cross-compile. The code is portable; it’s part of Bitcoin, which I will take as proof that it runs on Windows. But the trick is to get it to cross-build the right way. Have you tried this part on your Windows machine? I just tried to use the makefile and deal with the errors in order, I didn't get there |
|
|
|
Head meets wall repeatedly with mingw cross-compiling. This is actually my first time ever attempting such a thing; the last time I needed a Windows binary, a significant number of years ago, I used MSVC on a Windows machine. I want to help Windows users get spiffy new Segwit addresses; but I think I’ve spent enough time on that for now, whereas I should be writing documentation and improving the code. If anybody who has a working mingw setup (including a POSIX regex package) on any platform could at least confirm that it compiles that way, I’d appreciate knowing that such a thing is possible without significant code changes before I spend more time trying. If I can successfully produce a Windows binary myself, I will distribute it on Github PGP-signed using the ECC key identified in my signature. I found a regex library for Windows at PCRE, but now I need to go find a way to get openssl in there too because that's not on Windows either. |
|
|
|
Thank you for the clarifications  Do you see any contrainst that can make it difficult for to move the transactions (in the two ways : from connected device, to disconnected and disconnected to connected) through QR-codes ? I guess the limit is the number of caracters i'm moving. I don't want any physical connection between my computer and my 'cold' storage device. Also, does these processes (generating a tx offline, signing it offline, broadcast it online) apply to Etherum and other cyrpto-currencies ? Thanks in advance, For example: This is an unsigned transaction: Looks too long to be qr-coded ? {
"lock_time":0,
"size":1364,
"inputs":[
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"2738c88b71a466c1e844b46156abfb1533fd11adf1db97215e6c80162b7cb9ce"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"2527485015ce0502988cbc3f8b7f4ef7e38ebb00ad6d4b4f5a817c0b5869b657"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"19f54045219638bdb6bf04c1599a64d9915b0c07c71159224e0927ec65ae26f5"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"e100fa80e99a0928bbd55278cd85d8ed9ecc54dd2de4f93a3e7dd1fabaac22e7"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"b0b96a76f6d65f49328586844589128072f877e7e0b78d67268e4ccf8246d005"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"a19c058e8edcbc63028f7bf92aa75de983aa8c589cb226040cc6425f9fedfaf9"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"eab87650588dfec3cafcf616984a57aab7769c989923ca6920407ae0459b4454"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"93afec66aa1b4e5cac21d13f8225c1d04ceb3779c07e9ce4294ebad12d264824"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"41ec28321aac32d3200cf218b4a287167ac5f2c65bcef51caea0e80a8f151e67"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"eb703740c78563e9b3ddc6eca3004a1899c261c0f4b8f8c2a30609cfb218fe60"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"23a82ae670ba05d9e631465cd80119099a698f7bb6ce35bd7925054ecbb5d23d"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"73f656e5a7a5e03ffe878730d5518802e247556396cac243792f103ced3a838a"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"d7196db8b3f3b1dea43536eceaf08ad386d8e7770274c412fb78e90d7cacba3a"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"97186e2560f46594f569691b2b2f4e9b066fefe9705e9fb33fbc4dcbdf5fe8e9"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"32738d5ee1a8f3079a362fc7718ea778ac7d4c513b04676fc3438e892164cdce"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"2798a6aae2ef13cac83d30e4608fd5ad16f99d0c57d254e357664aab6a3bd923"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"ec1a10ad665073d355d55755677590e1f6f4b0075bc5ad7e70fb51007deab206"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"9855ea9b048f25294681868264886b5fc44c8c295cd8c3f938f4fa492de5a057"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"4fa4a09cdade58c8e7217f64bc4e3b99e04e0b1f56613ca1dd03370d1abc6cc4"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
},
{
"prev_out":{
"index":0,
"hash":"761b4472f7ec584799e9e16b2c075cd71a2c8cddc2b4d3a990eba93796ecbe10"
},
"script":"76a914ba507bae8f1643d2556000ca26b9301b9069dc6b88ac"
}
],
"version":1,
"vin_sz":20,
"hash":"a523768de0835ee210d8afe47593328df2369267cecd5cea57ab5be28520ad5e",
"vout_sz":1,
"out":[
{
"script_string":"OP_DUP OP_HASH160 d29dde3ae2b63619bb2ccaf0219a368d758dfcd0 OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG",
"address":"1LCe29mys7ieDGJunTczRos9PjvvzF2ggu",
"value":6660000000,
"script":"76a914d29dde3ae2b63619bb2ccaf0219a368d758dfcd088ac"
}
]
}That is an unusually large transaction with many inputs, and it is also in JSON format instead of standard raw hex format used for transactions. It would need to be serialized first or read by a program that understands that encoding. |
|
|
|
Transaction creation must be done on an online computer that has access to the blockchain. This is because to create a transaction, you need to know information about the inputs that are available to you to spend. Transaction signing can be done on an offline computer. Since the offline computer wouldn't have access to the blockchain, typically the following is done: - Generate the unsigned transaction on an online, watching-only wallet. This wallet knows the public key of the Bitcoin address(es) you want to spend from but not the private key. This means it's secure, because if the online machine were hacked, attackers would not be able to gain access to your private keys.
- Move the transaction via qr codes/flash drive/typing onto your offline computer that does contain your private keys, and sign the transaction.
- Move the now signed transaction back to the online computer (or any online computer) and broadcast it to the Bitcoin network. This can be done via node software like Bitcoin Core, or through a few different web portals provided by other services.
This is typically referred to as cold storage, and is one of the safest ways to store Bitcoins. |
|
|
|
|
Question, iirc IOTA transactions require a small proof of work to send. If your site gets many users, won't the large amount of POW bog down your server?
|
|
|
|
See here and here. I would be careful when ordering a magstripe reader/writer, as that can be viewed as a suspicious purchase by some. |
|
|
|
So bitcoin uses sha256, litecoin scrypt, dash x11.
Where is revision location(source code filename, approx line position) of this algorithm?
Simply google. Those algorithms (SHA, scrypt) weren't invented for those cryptocurrencies. They existed before. SHA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-2scrypt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ScryptX11 is concatenated algorithm composed of BLAKE, BMW, Grøstl, JH, Keccak, Skein, Luffa, CubeHash, SHAvite, SIMD and Echo. How change to x11 algorithm? Some site says x11 is best algorithm.
Changing the algorithm would require a hard fork ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_(blockchain)#Hard_fork). There is no "best" algorithm. Simply because there is no definition of a "best" algorithm. Additionally you should not believe what you read on "some site". Thanks, but what I wondered is where should I revise at bitcoin source code to change its algorithm from sha256 to another? It looks like you better have a good idea of what you're doing before you attempt to make your own coin, as that's what it sounds like what you want to do. |
|
|
|
|
This appears to be from the days when you could send free transactions based on some factors like coin-days destroyed. Free transactions are no longer allowed or accepted by miners based on that so it was removed from the code.
|
|
|
|
|
For a pool like BTC.com that has such a large portion of the hashrate, eventually hitting 7 blocks in a row is honestly not that unlikely. There are lots of blocks every day, so they have plenty of chances to hit a few in a row like that.
|
|
|
|
With your approach, an attacker gets access to one sheet and they have 16 out of your 24 words. This gives them a significant advantage, as they only need to brute force the remaining 8 words. To brute force 8 words, they would need to check 2048^8 possibilities, and each possibility would require 2048 HMAC-SHA512 hashes as described here. This means an attacker would need to compute at maximum (2048^8)*2048 HMAC-SHA512 hashes to find your wallet. While this is still a very large number, it's nowhere near the security provided by 24 words. That's why we use 24-word seeds instead of 8-word seeds. Even though if the entire Bitcoin network was performing HMAC-SHA512 hashes instead of SHA256, and they were all searching for your wallet seed, it would take them around 1000 years (maximum) to find your seed, that's way way less than the security provided by 24 words. You could do this much better by using Shamir's Secret Sharing. This would allow you to split up your seed into 3 pieces (or nearly as many as you like really) and require 2 (or more) pieces to put it back together. The best part about this is with SSS, an attacker having one or anywhere up to one less than the required number of pieces means nothing, as they don't know anything about your seed until they have all the required pieces. You've got a good idea going, it could just use some improvement. Thank you very much for the SSS tipp and the calculation. I have tested this with https://github.com/iancoleman/shamir project. Works really fine. Maybe I can use this for my passwords. But for my ledger I am using the method above, I think this is easier for my wife  , if something happens to me. That's a very valid point. Someone is very unlikely to understand how to use SSS to recreate your seed unless there are detailed instructions included with each seed (which is possible). Your strategy is still better than storing multiple copies of the full seed in different locations. There's usually a tradeoff between convenience and security, and that's very apparent here. |
|
|
|
With your approach, an attacker gets access to one sheet and they have 16 out of your 24 words. This gives them a significant advantage, as they only need to brute force the remaining 8 words. To brute force 8 words, they would need to check 2048^8 possibilities, and each possibility would require 2048 HMAC-SHA512 hashes as described here. This means an attacker would need to compute at maximum (2048^8)*2048 HMAC-SHA512 hashes to find your wallet. While this is still a very large number, it's nowhere near the security provided by 24 words. That's why we use 24-word seeds instead of 8-word seeds. Even though if the entire Bitcoin network was performing HMAC-SHA512 hashes instead of SHA256, and they were all searching for your wallet seed, it would take them around 1000 years (maximum) to find your seed, that's way way less than the security provided by 24 words. You could do this much better by using Shamir's Secret Sharing. This would allow you to split up your seed into 3 pieces (or nearly as many as you like really) and require 2 (or more) pieces to put it back together. The best part about this is with SSS, an attacker having one or anywhere up to one less than the required number of pieces means nothing, as they don't know anything about your seed until they have all the required pieces. You've got a good idea going, it could just use some improvement. |
|
|
|
Hi sir,I have an issue with sending my bitcoins from my bustadice account.I can't able to send my bits to segwit address,and no problem in sending to the legacy address.
So this issue is only for me or everyone has that issue?I hope you will help me in this case.
We do not yet support bech32 addresses (like bc1qar0srrr7xfkvy5l643lydnw9re59gtzzwf5mdq), but it's on our list of planned features. Since bech32 addresses are still uncommon, an unwanted side effect of implementing withdrawals to them right now would be to make it much easier to reliably track bustadice's hot wallet, so we're holding off a little. Electrum supports bech32. So does the latest release candidate of Bitcoin Core, and so does Samourai wallet. Those are just the ones I use that I know off the top of my head. I understand the privacy concern though. |
|
|
|
|
None of this is new or unique. We already have had provable fairness for years, and contrary to your claim, most Bitcoin betting sites are provably fair. We already have decentralized smart contract betting.
We don't need more bullshit ICOs for companies throwing around buckets of buzzwords trying to catch as much clueless investment money as possible.
|
|
|
|
My exchange has been shut down, likely permanently. I decided it wasn't worth the extra effort it would take to make a "real exchange". Sorry to the people that were using it. If you guys are looking for an anonymous exchange, I've been using https://flyp.me/ because I wanted a private exchange and didn't want to use Shapeshift. I've used it twice so far and haven't had any issues yet. (I don't hold any of their profit sharing tokens and I don't stand to gain anything from anybody using the exchange, but I've had good experiences with them so wanted to share in case anybody was looking for something similar). |
|
|
|
|
Burning tokens or coins can have a number of purposes. Historically, coins/tokens of one type have been burned to acquire tokens of another type, which gives value to the new token.
Tokens being burned could also be to effectively increase the value of all other tokens in the ecosystem.
|
|
|
|
|
There is no need to connect to the internet to create valid Bitcoin addresses. Mistyped Bitcoin addresses won't be valid because of an invalid checksum. This is basically a math problem embedded in the text of the Bitcoin address.
Think about any other normal math problem. You don't need to connect to the Internet to see what 2+2 is equal to.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
