Bcrypt is not asymmetric.
Couldn't you make it asymmetric if you introduced another alogrithm into the mix in a smart manner? Are you suggesting something like Lamport's signature, which builds a digital signature algorithm from the SHA256? It's not clear where the Bcrypt's advatange is here, Bcrypt is computationally intensive, but that doesn't necessarily imply QC resistance. Well you could have a schedule and raise the computational power it takes to get the hash as time goes by, this will not only solve the quantum computer problem but all other advances in technology as well. |
|
|
|
Bcrypt is not asymmetric.
Couldn't you make it asymmetric if you introduced another alogrithm into the mix in a smart manner? |
|
|
|
|
I am wondering why hasn't bcrypt been implemented yet? It would make since to sign with different strengths according to an alternative curve that would predict the technological advances. From what I understand current transactions can be broken with a quantum processor within seconds so assuming this technology will be available and you broadcast a transaction one could potentially change the outputs to different ones....
|
|
|
|
Erm, I'm pretty sure you need to pass in an empty array there, and not the string "null".
Nope, if I pass it empty I still get the same error. |
|
|
|
Glad you got this worked out.
I get "Expected type array, got str" for some reason, this is what I send: {"jsonrpc":"1.0","id":"1","method":"signrawtransaction","params":[" myhex","null",[" myprivatekey"]]} where have I went wrong? |
|
|
|
Thanks!!
What did you pass as the second argument?
Null. So signrawtransaction <hex string> null '["5Ksdfsd..."]' For the key-in-wallet part you can just give the hex string and it will default to null for the 2nd parameter. Thanks!!!!  |
|
|
|
I'll start the bidding at $180, feedback thread in my signature.
I will give 1.9BTC for 220$. "FastCash4Bitcoins is limited to US residents only. Support for international residents will be added in the future once support for international payments has been approved." |
|
|
|
|
I will sell below market price, post bid.
|
|
|
|
|
Looking to sell via Paypal, trusted members only.
EDIT: Already sold.
|
|
|
|
Yes I understand that, what I'm asking is whenever I can create a raw transaction with inputs from the current listunspent and add another input which isn't on listunspent but from a different wallet and then just specify the private key on createrawtransaction?
Actually, I just noticed this in the help message for signrawtransaction: Third optional argument (may be null) is an array of base58-encoded private
keys that, if given, will be the only keys used to sign the transaction.
So, if you don't specify that parameter, it will find keys in your wallet, but can only use the ones that are in it. If you do give it, it won't look in your wallet. My tests seem to confirm this. A way around this that seemed to work for me for a test with 2 keys (one in wallet, one not), was to signrawtransaction with no keys, which gave a partially-signed transaction from the wallet key. Then I copied the output into another signrawtransaction and passed the remaining private key as a parameter. The result had "complete":true and the decoded transaction appeared to have both signatures, so I think that would work. I'm not sure if there's a nicer way to do this. Maybe someone with more experience with the RPC API knows. The raw transactions wiki page may also be helpful. Thanks!! What did you pass as the second argument? |
|
|
|
Assuming you're already dealing with a raw transaction, the signrawtransaction command lets you specify additional private keys as an optional last parameter. I think for keys already in your wallet (and referenced by the raw transaction), it will find them automatically. createrawtransaction takes arbitrary outputs and address:amount pairs and creates a hex transaction string. listunspent will show you the unspent outputs for keys that are in your wallet. The problem is I don't want to use all of the input under that private key, just half here and half under the private key. I'm not sure if you are saying that there are multiple outputs associated with the private key, and you don't want to use all of them as inputs to your transaction. . . Or if you are saying there is only one output associated with the private key, and you don't want to use all of that output as an input. If there are multiple outputs, then createrawtransaction allows you to specify which of those outputs you want to use as inputs, so you don't have to use all of them if you don't want to. If there is only one output, then you have to use the entire output. That's how bitcoin works. It is not possible to only use a portion of an output. The output is spent completely as an input, and then you have to create a new output that sends any excess back to your wallet. If you forget to create the output that sends the "change" from the transaction back to your wallet, then the miner will get all of it as a transaction fee. The problem is I don't want to use all of the input under that private key, just half here and half under the private key.
As DannyHamilton said, you pick whatever outputs you want. listunspent just shows you your options. Remember you have to spend an output's entire balance at once, though. To clarify on automatically finding keys, you give createrawtransaction the outputs you want to spend, which embeds them into the hex string it returns. signrawtransaction looks at those outputs, figures out the associated key, and signs them if it has the associated private key in its wallet or specified on the command line. None of these steps will automatically add outputs/inputs, they only do what you tell them to. Yes I understand that, what I'm asking is whenever I can create a raw transaction with inputs from the current listunspent and add another input which isn't on listunspent but from a different wallet and then just specify the private key on createrawtransaction? |
|
|
|
Assuming you're already dealing with a raw transaction, the signrawtransaction command lets you specify additional private keys as an optional last parameter. I think for keys already in your wallet (and referenced by the raw transaction), it will find them automatically. createrawtransaction takes arbitrary outputs and address:amount pairs and creates a hex transaction string. listunspent will show you the unspent outputs for keys that are in your wallet. The problem is I don't want to use all of the input under that private key, just half here and half under the private key. |
|
|
|
|
Say I use the standard bitcoin-qt, how can I sign a transaction with public keys from the currently loaded wallet and other specific inputs from private keys without importing them?
|
|
|
|
Anarchism is atheism in regards to politics. Or you could just say that "anarchism is atheism". Worshipers of the State called their god "the common good" and refer to their prayers as "voting" but choosing different words to describe what they are doing doesn't make it any less of a religion. It's quite hilarious how similar these systems are, e.g. Christians, Buddhists, Muslim, Hinduism all have even more groups within them, Protestant Christianity, Theravada Buddhism and hundreds of cults within every group, west baptist church etc. And what really boggles my mind is the fact that the vast majority of cults believe that their God is the only true God and everyone else should abandon their current lifestyle and adopt theirs instead, since they are the chosen people, their lifestyle is the ultimate lifestyle, their blood is worth more than others and so on. Just seems ridiculous to me. |
|
|
|
How do you deal with the thought about taxes? Generally I smoke a joint and the thought goes away. And then they use your tax dollars to bust in your door, steal your dope, kidnap you, and ruin your life. The thought returns. My point exactly, Anarchism is atheism in regards to politics. |
|
|
|
|
The problem was resolved in the end but it still left me curious on my idea, would it be possible to implement in a pool without modifying the clients?
|
|
|
|
|
Still looking for a solution...
|
|
|
|
Well to add it you have to be able to find blocks.
What I mean is that I could implement this feature into a pool but obviously I am not a pool owner, otherwise I wouldn't be here. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
