Not certain if this could have an effect on crypto denominated dark web markets.
Most probably not. Since thePirateBay is being accessed via the clear net, the ISP does know the metadata from your connections (When, which site, how long, how much you have downloaded, .. ). This is not the case inside the TOR network. Inside the TOR network there are 3 types of nodes: entry nodes, relaying nodes and exist nodes. Exit nodes do see all data in plain text (if no TLS or other form of encryption is being used). An ISP does not know who you are connecting to in this case. This does not mean that the TOR network is fully anonymous. Especially if you don't take precautions. But with a proper configuration and enough paranoia it is definitely possible to stay anonymous inside the TOR network. |
|
|
|
Is there any other API or node module that i can use for transfering BTC from one address to another using private key of address?
Well, you might start with telling us the current module you are using. Usually you always can set a fee (or all the outputs including change output). https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib does give you the option: const txb = new bitcoin.TransactionBuilder(regtest)
txb.addInput(unspent0.txId, unspent0.vout) // alice1 unspent
txb.addInput(unspent1.txId, unspent1.vout) // alice2 unspent
txb.addOutput('mwCwTceJvYV27KXBc3NJZys6CjsgsoeHmf', 8e4) // the actual "spend"
txb.addOutput(aliceCpkh.address, 1e4) // Alice's change
// (in)(4e4 + 2e4) - (out)(1e4 + 3e4) = (fee)2e4 = 20000, this is the miner fee
Source: https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib/blob/master/test/integration/transactions.js#L55 |
|
|
|
The deposit has to "exceed $5000 at the time of deposit" ( source), making another deposit doesn't change that. I'd say it would be an incredibly stupid thing to try, as they may not appreciate you trying to trick their policy and only recover the biggest amount, but if someone is willing to risk it, please post the results  What if OP accidentally again sends an amount which is >5000$ ? Would someone (Bittrex) really assume OP is trying to 'trick their policy'? I'd rather think the customer is super stupid instead of 'clever enough to figure out a way how he could lead bittrex to access those wrongly sent funds'. In this case they would have to recover those 5k. And if they are doing this.. it would be really cocky not to recover the first amount too (which does not increase the effort). I'd not recommend doing this. But it is worth thinking about it. |
|
|
|
As much as I know ther is no possiblity of hardware wallet being hacked as you need to deal with a physical device here.
Just because you are dealing with a physical device, this does not mean it is unhackable. New vulnerabilities can always be found and exploited. Nothing is guaranteed to be 100% safe and secure. A vulnerability inside the ledger architecture has been found which allowed an attacker to replace the firmware with a malicous version. This has been fixed. And it could not lead to via the internet. Physical access prior someone using the nano s is necessary for this attack. I think the biggest vulnerablilty for hard wallets was the connectivity requirements to smartphones.
Hardware wallets are not required to be connected to smartphones (some allow you to pair them with a mobile wallet). And even if they would require such a connection, this would not pose any security threat. This is simply due to the fact that the private keys are generated and stored inside the hardware wallet. They won't ever leave the device. Transactions are being sent from the mobile to the hardware wallet (an attacker might be able to insert a malicious TX here), then signed on the device after approving it via pressing the physical buttons. If you are checking the transaction on the nano s screen and only approve correct transactions, there is no other way of stealing coins in such a scenario. |
|
|
|
Let's say they are successful, then they must sustain this attack for it to be affective.  This news will then trigger a shift of mining power to other Alt coins and also investment capital moving to these coins. <A lot of these coins do not rely on POW>  I doubt that a successful 51% attack would lead to money moving from BTC to non-PoW alts. If there really should be such an attack (double spendings, rewriting blockchain, ..) the most probable outcome (in my eyes) would be that the whole crypto market would suffer heavily. It doesn't matter if such an attack happens on bcash (or any other PoW coin). But if it would happen to bitcoin, the price would probably dump pretty hard. Since this would lead to a heavy monetary loss for the miners (especially bitmain), i doubt that this will happen to btc. the problem with non-PoW altcoins is that they are usually more flawed than PoW coins. for instance take PoS coins. they are literary the "Rich get Richer" schemes. in PoW you have to literary work for new coins but in PoS you just have to be rich to become richer just by having coins. I did not intend to give the impression better alternatives to PoW would exist. Other consensus algorithms do definitely have flaws, PoW doesn't have. But to be fair, regarding the wealth needed to generate more wealth it doesn't differ much. Whether one casual guy will be buying 2 graphic cards compared to 200 asics, doesn't matter much from a casual guy staking 500$ compared to 50.000$ being staked. It is basically pure money in PoS and hardware+electricity in PoW. |
|
|
|
Is there a reason for you to create another thread asking the same question? You can simply google the answer yourself. And you should really start googling. You are asking VERY basic questions all the time (even tho they already have been answered!). One helpful answer has been given in your older thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4469028.msg40079188I wonder why you actually created this thread if you already know everything you should about this command, especially since you already have asked about it in your previous thread.. |
|
|
|
As title, How to make coin's wallet address sanity check algorithm?
To block user's trial of send coin to wrong address or other coin's address.
Are we supposed to build your online service? You seem to know almost nothing about IT/coding/bitcoin/server/googline/computers.. It is literally the FIRST RESULT on google: Bitcoin address checksumP.s. Make sure to message me when your service will be online. I am looking for fast and easy money. |
|
|
|
Did you actually try what Xynerise suggested? On the console enter ismine("1BitcoinAddress")This command will check whether this address has been generated by your wallet. Electrum does give you a new receiving address each time. This is done to increase your privacy. The above command will clear out whether the private needed to spend funds sent to this address have been generated by your wallet. To open the console goto 'View' -> 'Show Console' -> then go to the 'Console'-tab. If it returns true your wallet does hold the private key. In this case it is a network-/sync- issue. If it returns false your wallet does NOT hold the private key. In this case you somehow copy/pasted the wrong address (maybe clipping board malware ? ). |
|
|
|
What was the actual problem? Could you fix it with the above approach?
Since OP was mentioning that electrum is taking forever to synchronise: It’s been synchronising all night tho??
And regarding this answer: Close your wallet, open the Electrum folder (%appdata%\Electrum) and delete (or rename) the blockchain_headers file. Then, just open Electrum again and wait for it to synchronize.
All sorted thank you!! It seems like electrum somehow messed up (file corruption, whatever..) and was not able to properly synchronise the header. In this case, yes. TryNinja's answer should (and obviously also did) help fixing this problem. |
|
|
|
Let's say they are successful, then they must sustain this attack for it to be affective. This news will then trigger a shift of mining power to other Alt coins and also investment capital moving to these coins. <A lot of these coins do not rely on POW> I doubt that a successful 51% attack would lead to money moving from BTC to non-PoW alts. If there really should be such an attack (double spendings, rewriting blockchain, ..) the most probable outcome (in my eyes) would be that the whole crypto market would suffer heavily. It doesn't matter if such an attack happens on bcash (or any other PoW coin). But if it would happen to bitcoin, the price would probably dump pretty hard. Since this would lead to a heavy monetary loss for the miners (especially bitmain), i doubt that this will happen to btc. |
|
|
|
Online wallet platform can be exploited from their vulnerabilities as well and do note that antivirus adds updates on the basis of vulnerabilities known.
What if in the case of unknown vulnerability found by black hat hacker first? Ofc antivirus will not detect such as malware.
Antivirus producer do not update any vulnerabilities (or any databse for vulnerabilities). They do only update signatures of malicious programs. A vulnerability in a program/interface/.. is not related to anti virus software in any way. An AV does recognize malicoius actions on your PC by checking the signature of the executable with their database. Additionally they analyze the behaviour of such programs (e.g. creating sockets, http requests, ... ). But this is irrelevant from any vulnerabilities found. |
|
|
|
3.should be 3 but i see on official website that they support mycelium and coinomi
What did you actually try to accomplish? Did you try to access your coins because it somehow doesn't work with ledgers chrome application / electrum? Or did you try to 'pair' it with your mobile wallet? The nano s can be used with mycelium (as a hardware wallet). What you actualy did when entering the seed is to expose your mnemonic seed. If you intended to further use this seed, you might reconsider this. After you have gained access to your coins, the best would be to generate a new seed (reinitialize your nano s). This seed should never be shared with any person/application. |
|
|
|
If at the moment of splitting people already own coins, and it's value is split in half, then the first to sell in those few seconds profit out of nothing. For instance if the value of both the hammer and the screwdriver were split in half, then whoever sells the screwdriver (against another currency alltogether) at .50 profits, because at that instant prolly not everyone knew about the split therefore sat at home sipping on lemonade, while the rest sold as soon as possible because they weren't that confident. So the value of the screwdriver shot back down to zero in the bargain and hammer reached $1 due to the sudden pump. Now essentially the people who sold the screwdriver at .50 are holding $1.50 because of some "split".
A fork/split does create a different currency which does share the same history of transactions. The first people who sell do not profit 'out of nothing'. Their profit is from the people who bought the screwdriver (and sold their hammer for it). Their net worth went to 0 in your example. If the coin start off at zero, things make more sense.
The first 'value' (exchange rate) of the coin is determined by the price a seller is willing to accept AND a buyer is willing to pay. Only after the first trade happened, the coin has a 'price'. Note that the market is determining the price. For each buyer there has to be a seller, and vice versa.. |
|
|
|
Selecting one, and letting core sync the chain doesn't seem to cause any problems, and I believe that this gives me a number of backups without having to copy the full files.
Well, it gives you backups of the blockchain and chainstate files. Because all transactions are based on the blockchain, I believe that any of these 'backups' will allow me to spend my coins should I widh to do so.
These files will NOT allow you to spend your coins. To be able to redeem your UTXO's you need to sign a transaction with the corresponding private key (which is stored inside the wallet.dat). No need to backup the wallet, as core will update this for me.
Core does not update your wallet. Once you choose a hard drive, it will sync the blockchain and you will be able to access the wallet stored in this directory. But updates or backups to the wallet file itself are not done. |
|
|
|
Maybe its true that earning merit is almost impossible now
I disagree with this. Earning merit is by far not impossible. It is just that few subs are extremely spammed by low quality content. Threads inside these subs get read way less, therefore less merit is given on average. But for high-quality content merit is still being given. There are a lot of helpful guides, answer to questions, tutorials, discussions, etc.. which all receive 5+ merit. If someone wants to receive merit, he should create quality content. Not just the daily average price discussion talk.. |
|
|
|
bob123 , as far I know in order to hacker can get a chance to steal coins from any Electrum before version 3.0.5 victim need to have open browser and run in a site where hacker is waiting his chance/of course victim need to have Electrum open/decrypted to make the hack successful. So in theory with no open browser older version are safe from this attack?
Well, in theory, an opened malicious browser site is one way to get a (non-encrypted) wallet compromised. An attacker could also use a vulnerability of your OS or any service which run on your machine/network to get access to the RPC interface. So, no. An open browser is not the only possiblity to get your funds stolen trough this vulnerability. But, on the other hand, if your wallet is (properly) encrypted and the attacker does not have access to your password (e.g. via keylogger), your wallet should be safe. But this also means, that the moment you want to use your wallet (decrypting it), an attacker could exploit this vulnerability to steal your private keys. So, storing an (properly) encrypted wallet should be fine. But you shouldn't use it (send funds / sign messages) if you want to stay safe. The best way is to always fix any issues and updating to the latest version. |
|
|
|
You can start your daemon with a startup command to use another path for the blockchain (data directory). On linux: ./bitcoind -datadir=/your/external/path
|
|
|
|
Not directly, since electrum does not use BIP39 to generate the mnemonic phrase. But you can derive the master private key itself from electrums seed (with several code snippets available on github), which then is compatible with most wallets. Electrum uses a different (and superior) derivation scheme than BIP 39
Why would you call it superior? Both use PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA512 to calculate the seed out of the mnemonic. The calculation of the checksum (BIP39: uses positions; electrum: uses HMAC) and the wordlist differ. While electrum gives the ability to use a custom wordlist, it is not compatible with other BIP39 wallets. So both have pro's and con's. But obviously none of them is superior. |
|
|
|
I don't make traditional backups of my wallets or the blockchain. I have an version of core that relies on an external hard drive for the information. I have more than 1 external hard drive, and i just connect the appropriate drive and synchronise the blockchain to make my 'backup'. Can anyone see any problems with this alternative method of backing up Bitcoin?
When connecting your second hard drive and syncing the blockchain, do you also perform a manual backup of your wallet file? Syncing the blockchain does download the missing blocks and build the chainstate. Since you actually have to manually copy it to your second hard drive, it doesn't differ from a traditional backup (or what do you define as a 'traditional' one?). |
|
|
|
They won`t be so enthusiastic,when they find out how much it will cost to implement the blockchain technologies and much electricity will be consumed.
OP said they are enthusiastic about blockchain. This does NOT mean that the costs (electricity) will be higher than currently  It is not about an asic-flooded PoW chain, but about decentralized, immutable and trustless data storage. You have to see the value in it. Just because they might use a blockchain, this does not mean that they use PoW or any other currently existing consensus algorithm. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
