Resource consumption will be a function of both total number of addresses being monitored and the total number of transactions.

The list of addresses that need to be monitored needs to be kept in memory. I would presume that I/O and CPU would be a function of how often the OP's customers would query their balance, and the OP may want to keep a separate database with each customer's balance if his customers will be spending some of their deposits off-chain.

Using electrum, the memory usage by electrum, as reported by my operating system increased from about 110 MB to about 230 MB when I changed the gap limit from 20 to 10,000. After my wallet finished syncing, electrum would take around 18% of one of my 1.8 GHz cores, up from about 2% with a gap limit of 20.

I don't think electrum is really designed to be handling transactions associated with very large numbers of addresses, and another wallet software might be more appropriate.

I am not.

You could create a new wallet, set the gap limit to 1, measure the amount of memory your wallet software is using, then set the gap limit to say 10,000 and measure memory use again. This should give you an idea as to how much memory each address being monitored uses. The gap limit should monitor both receiving and change addresses.

IMO, you might be able to sell “support and hand holding” including setup on your customers equipment or cloud account. You could charge a reduced price for the first few hours of help and a higher rate after that, including some type of on-call service that provides up to a predetermined amount of help each month.

Most major exchanges have API endpoints that you could connect to that display the “last” price on their exchange. I also believe futures exchanges have endpoints that return the reference index price. I wouldn’t think they would have limits you would reasonably hit.

Are you using a block explorer API to obtain the balance? Or do you have a DB with each address’ balance?

I would think you would hit your 5k request/month limit fairly quickly considering that each time this page is viewed, it is querying your site 6 times.

I was discussing creating an API for someone who wanted to be able to query the balance of any address a few months ago. He ended up ghosting me (and I strongly suspect creating additional accounts asking for help with various aspects of this project) before we could arrange for escrow to hold payment. I had created basic pseudo code for importing address balances into a DB. Querying a DB shouldn’t be difficult and it shouldn’t be difficult to monitor the bitcoin price on an ongoing basis.

Your wallet will need to keep track of every address starting from the first address up to the last address in your gap limit after the last address that received a transaction (that your wallet is aware of). Sending dust to every 100th address will be very expensive and will not save much in other resources because the number of fewer addresses your wallet will need to monitor will decrease only by the amount of the smaller gap limit.

I would not implement this solution.

This will be a function of how many addresses your wallet can monitor without encountering performance issues.

The desired gap limit should be an estimate as to how many empty addresses the OP expects to have between depositing customers.

This is probably too large for most web browsers. I found this stack overflow question where someone claims that browsers tend to die after loading a 60 MB text file.

I think a better solution might be to use a search function that would allow for someone to search if/when a username had a security event.

Sending 100+ MB of data to the internet is also expensive. Sending a 100 MB file to the internet will cost about 0.9 cents, or US$0.009 and this can add up if you send this file many times.

I believe when you say "withdraw" you mean "spend".

1. If your gap limit is set to 20, your wallet software will look at 20 consecutive addresses that have no transactions before stopping to look at additional addresses. So if you have a transaction in the 15th address, your wallet software will look at the 16th through 36th address for transactions before it will stop if none of any of the 16th through 36th addresses have any transactions.

2. Yes, it is common to spend coin in multiple different addresses in the same transaction. You can either choose which addresses you wish to spend from (based on the inputs) or can let your wallet software choose automatically based on your preferences.

There is no limit as to the number of addresses a HD wallet can have. However, at one point, you will start to experience performance issues once the number of addresses (used and unused when accounting for your gap limit) reaches a certain size. You can address this by having a hard limit to the number of addresses your wallet will generate, once you hit this limit, you can create a new HD wallet on a different machine. Once you have created an arbitrary number of HD wallets, you could depreciate the deposit addresses associated with the oldest wallet, and tell your customers to click a button on your website while logged in to trigger you to generate a new address to be associated with their account.

This transaction is confirmed now.

---

OP, you can go to the paid membership page to enable wearing your copper member title, and obtain the ability to post pictures, and decreased limits between actions.

Yea this sounds like a way to get people to go to their website where they can be pitched a competing device. Not a bad way to get what amounts to some free advertising. The usefulness of their disclosure is minimal considering the information is a year old.

I still don’t think this exploit is trivial to execute, even if the hardware required is cheap. Realistically, you will need to be specifically targeted to fall victim to this exploit.

My point is that BitMex’s practices make the fee rate estimates displayed on wallet software less reliable, especially considering that you don’t know how when blocks will be found after you broadcast your transaction.

This is predictable if you frequently use bitcoin, but not as much if you are a more casual user.

If you deposit a check electronically, such as using mobile deposit, you will still have a physical copy of the check. Your bank will process the image of the check as if it had the original.

Someone could endorse a check to you as a third party payee. If you receive a check that is endorsed to you, the original payee is probably going to have to be present for you to cash the check due to the high risk associated with accepting these checks (it is difficult to verify if the original payee actually endorsed the check to you, or if the check was stolen).

It is very difficult to verify if a check has been cashed or not because of the possibility it has already been deposited electronically.

IMO, your chances are better of being able to buy one as a novelty versus being able to buy an uncashed check. Most banks are waiving check cashing fees to cash these checks, so whoever the check is made payable to has no reason to accept anything less than face value, and you would have fraud risk in buying one of these checks.

I was reading this blog post today and thought of the OPs transaction.

According to blockchain.com block explorer, his transaction was originally seen at 12:25 UTC, and it not getting confirmed by 13:00 meant he would need to wait several hours for it to confirm because of Bitmex's practices of processing withdrawals once daily, and all at once.

If other large businesses engage in similar practices, there is the potential to see large spikes in required transaction fees at arbitrary times, and the fee rate estimates will be less accurate.

I have not used Amazon's SES service, but I am a customer of AWS, GCP, and others. I have gotten various limits raised on various cloud platforms, such as GPU, ASIC and notebook limits, and I have never had to do anything more than enable billing (the first time), or occasionally give a one-sentence explanation of what I am working on and an offer to show the repo with my work.

I had also looked at the documentation for increasing SES limits, and I don't see anything about having to provide any kind of personal details. A google search did not yield any results that imply personal information needs to be provided to increase SES sending limits. If you have evidence the accounts being sold are hacked or require verification resembling KYC, I would recommend reporting the threads, and the sellers will be banned.

If you believe fibbing on a form that AWS support might review constitutes a scam, I would suggest moving to about 400 miles south of San Francisco to Los Angelos, where walking on dry sand might get you arrested, but walking on wet sand is okay.

I read through the WoodCollector threads referenced, and others, and I would say I am very happy there are so many experts in wood making. I don't think you needed to be an expert to see what WoodCollector was doing after certain facts were highlighted.

Fraudulent or not, the coins look pretty cool. Even as laser engraved, the coins would probably not be trivial for most people to design and make.

I can say, looking at his threads that WoodCollector was a very good salesperson who knew how to gin up interest in his products. Once his reputation was ruined, he used this ability to create interest in his threads and eventually started trolling. My guess is his primary trade is some type of sales, and maybe art was a hobby of his.

I don't know if the 10th coin exists, but as time goes on, it appears less likely the 10th coin will be available for sale after this public plea. Nevertheless, your collection is very nice and is a unique part of bitcointalk history.

I am not sure if you are trolling, or are unable to read:

I would not say the OP is scamming Amazon/AWS as it appears he is selling AWS accounts that have high limits to send emails via their “SES” service.

My presumption is that the target market of the OP is spammers and scammers emailing mass spam and/or scam emails.

I am not entirely sure if AWS would be able to secure payment for the SES service the OPs customers would be able to use. If not, the OP would be crossing the line into helping people default on their obligations to AWS in addition to the above, which would be scamming.

I don’t think the OPs business is something that is giving BitcoinTalk a good reputation, nor reflects positively on the forum. I also can’t say I disagree with the concept of giving red tags for the OPs business.

No, before today, if you wanted to backup your google Authenticator keys, you would have to do so when you given the keys when you import them into your phone.

 

https://thunderspy.io/

According to a report (referenced above) the contents on your encrypted hard drive may be vulnerable to compromise if you have a thunderbolt port on your computer. Attackers will need physical access to your computer to copy its data, and doing so will only take a few minutes.

You can read about how to protect your computer here and can read the research paper on the matter here.

This attack is only applicable to computers manufactured prior to 2019 and the attack would generally need to be targeted to you specifically.

This is one additional example as to why it is important to guard against possible attackers gaining physical access to your computer.

Unfortunately, it is very difficult to prove that a person is or is not a specific anonymous person whose identity is a mystery. Given the value of satoshis probable coin, he most likely doesn’t have access to the private keys.

---

I think some of the moderation decisions around the time the block size debate was getting started were a mistake. I think it probably resulted in the community becoming split, which I view as a negative. Just as attacks on theymos are unproductive, attacks on Ver and other “big blockers” are similarly unproductive and neither even attempts to address differences in opinions/viewpoints surrounding consensus rules and block size.

The fact that everyone involved has the technical ability to do things that may manipulate the direction of discussion, especially on platforms such as reddit, probably played a role in the above moderation decisions.