Something is borked.. It looks like that for some hours now, on my side:  I still have open swap demands, so it wasn't some madman emptying the whole list. I'd love such low FRR though ;-) Ente |
|
|
|
So, what would be more secure, an "airgapped" usb-stick, which would be the only thing ever touching both the offline and online computer, or a direct connection via serial cable? How about a network connection, but the only service reachable on the (formerly) "offline" computer is a locked-down ssh daemon? The "offline" computer obviously wouldn't be airgapped nor offline, but the attack vector might be much smaller than with usb?
Ente
The serial line is probably as safe as it gets. The direct network connection would make me worry, it seems far far more risky than a USB. In particular if you only use your own USB stick that is never used for anything else, and a different OS on the online and offline computer. Theoretically, someone could write a USB virus to infect just the particular setup you are using, but if they go that specifically after you the " rubber hose attack" seems far easier to pull off. Any network connection will be vulnerable if there is a bug in the TCP stack or in the libraries the locked-down ssh demon uses (OpenSSL?) Edit: spelling These are precisely my thoughts as well. Still, for my gut, a cable going to the "offline" device feels less secure than swapping a USB key back and forth. My head tells me the serial cable would be the way to go. Eventually I'll play around with all that on a raspi. Ente |
|
|
|
Hi everybody. I am new to bifinex... and i'm sitting in germany this means its actually UTC/GMT +2 hours... her it is in them moment 12:06 noon (it is not +1 due to the so called summertime in germany) What i would like to know if possible... what are the main trading times here at bifinex.... when is the most volume coming through? Best would be if you could translate this to my timezone. Thank you very much
You can have a closer look at the charts: http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitfinexUSD#rg5zigHourlyztgSzm1g25zm2g10zvWhen looking at enough "days", you might see a pattern in volume. Being a fellow German, I feel a bit like all the action went on when it's nighttime here. Which correlates with the US daytime. I mostly follow the margintrading and lending/borrowing stuff, though. Ente |
|
|
|
For an idea of why USB might not be secure, even if you disable AutoRun: http://superuser.com/a/709302/252526 (TLDR: it looks like a USB flash drive, but tells the computer it's a keyboard, and it stores and runs arbitrary commands upon insertion) Some USB drives could also, just by reprogramming firmware, appear to the computer as a CD drive, which may have different auto-run rules (and boot priority, if you happen to reboot with it in). http://www.allarghiamoci.it/usbcdrom/index.php?lang=enUsing a CD is a safer approach, for the above reasons (although at first glance, I'll admit that it looks utterly unnecessary). A CD is just data, no firmware or chips, so it can't (AFAIK) pretend to be anything else. You could even use a single CD-RW over and over without compromising security: just make sure that the offline computer says you're signing the transaction you think you are (visual inspection of address and amount), and you should be good. Realistically, unless you're storing millions in bitcoins, you're probably being overly paranoid by worrying about using a USB key. But if it's not too much trouble to use a more secure thing, it may well be worth it! So, what would be more secure, an "airgapped" usb-stick, which would be the only thing ever touching both the offline and online computer, or a direct connection via serial cable? How about a network connection, but the only service reachable on the (formerly) "offline" computer is a locked-down ssh daemon? The "offline" computer obviously wouldn't be airgapped nor offline, but the attack vector might be much smaller than with usb? Ente |
|
|
|
I will be getting married this year, and will need to buy a diamond ring. No, you choose to buy a diamond ring. There is no need. it's a (very wasteful) ritual you are choosing to engage in, like marriage and reproduction. You could instead choose to do something creative and unique for your loved one, such as personally diving for pearls until you've gathered enough of them to make her a necklace, but you opt for the "oh I'll just spend a bunch of money, so she knows I love her" route. The exchange of these tokens, these "rare" (not really!) stones for marriage is a tradition that, like capitalism itself, is left over from the feudal age. Now go watch Blood Diamond. ..and then about the DeBeers scam. Yes, diamonds are not really rare. Their supply is heavily limited by the DeBeers cartel. A pure red ruby, on the other hand, is *really* rare. And still less expensive than an equally sized diamond. And oh so much more beautiful! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=123503.0Dave (tiptopgem) is your man, should you want something really special, world-class league, to good prices. He has many other stones too. Except diamond, as far as I know :-) Ente |
|
|
|
https://code.google.com/p/ghost-usb-honeypot/Ghost USB honeypot
Ghost is a honeypot for malware that spreads via USB storage devices. It detects infections with such malware without the need of any further information. If you would like to see a video introduction to the project, have a look at this Youtube video.
The honeypot was first developed for a bachelor thesis at Bonn University in Germany. Now development is continued by the same developer within the Honeynet Project.
Ghost was recently selected for Rapid7's Magnificent7 program (see the press release). Our goal for the next year is to extend the honeypot to a USB protection system, i.e. a system that protects networked computer environments from the threat of USB malware. Interesting approach, I like! Now, where's the source and linux version? :-) Thank you for the link! Ente |
|
|
|
I could agree with you or not, but it's a fact of the world that many would rather trust their money with banks, then with their friends.
True. We have indeed been conditioned to reject family values and rely on the state and other institutions with a totalitarian streak and consume soma (TV) like the good slaves we are. But it seems enough people have woken up to the fact. Indeed, Bitcoin is proof of it. But I agree. This is the issue Zero Reserve may fall over. And chances that this will happen are pretty good, considering the deafening silence Zero Reserve has met so far. Frankly, I am coming to the conclusion that the community does not want an OpenSource distributed exchange with no strings attached. What they really want is: - Centralized exchanges that are more trustworthy than your friends, like MtGox
- Banks that take better care of you than your friends, like Laiki Bank or Lehman Bros
- Centralized exchanges where withdrawed Bitcoins can be assigned to a name and address by the government, so the government can keep us safe.
- Centralized exchanges that can be shut down by either the banks or the government so money laundering can be prevented for our own good
- Keep their money in Banks where it is safe, until the government feels the need to confiscate it for the good of us all like in Cyprus last year
- the government to know exactly how many Bitcoins you have so the IRS can tax you on it, for the good of us all
Further, if you can have a cryptographic proof of transfer, why the need for IOUs?
You don't, in a world where crypto currencies are dominant. This is not our world, though. We are living in a world where debt is money. A distributed FIAT<->Bitcoin exchange therefore MUST have a debt leg to each deal. Once legacy fiat money has been phased out, ZeroReserve is obsolete. I understand your feelings here. Alas, don't underestimate the thousands of lurkers here! I, for example, didn't contribute a single word here, but am following closely. This time, I didn't feel like actively testing the system yet, the shock of what ripple turned out to be was too much for me I guess.. There are 35k views here. It will gain more momentum when people actually play with the code. This one will have, and has to have, an even stronger network effect than Bitcoin itself. Thank you for what you are contributing to this world. Ente |
|
|
|
I like it! Will it replace, or merge into the current view? Or will it stay separated?
when it's ready I will replace the current BTCUSD/LTCUSD and LTCBTC order books ( http://www.bfxdata.com/bitfinexOrderbookBTCUSD.php) with this new one. Or would you prefer to keep the old order book pages over this new one? Do you miss something in the new layout? see more bugs? let me know I, personally, use bitcoincharts (for static) and bitcoinwisdom (dynamic) for my charts, and follow the bitstamp charts. Until now, I used bfxdata for monitoring the swap rates. I didn't update my charts and links for a while, I guess I should! :-) I'd suggest you start your own thread on bfxdata. It's too good to be lost in here :-) (Sorry if I missed an already existing such thread, please link!) Ente |
|
|
|
Have you yet developed an option to remove the 6 confirmation limit?
if you are a frequent user of your wallet, waiting for 6 confirmations to spend coins can be a huge waiting process.
That's a securty critical part and should not be customizable. Eh, put a warning on it, make it an advanced/expert-only feature. You should wait until the whole chain has 6 confirmations before you trust it with anything too valuable (e.g. handing over a car), but if you know the (small) risks, there's no reason to keep you from sending coins before 6 confirmations. I fully agree on that! I don't think you have to wait, it just looks like that
Oh, interesting! I never tied, actually. Normally, I either have several inputs on one address, or spend the whole address anyway, or won't do another tx in the next hour.. And I *always* do coin control too. So I never even tried to spend the change or fresh inputs before six confirmations! "Dorian - an unconfirmed transaction" :-) Ente |
|
|
|
Nice!
Will this come for other exchanges too? For example Bitfinex? :-)
Also, the two "Sell/Buy ratio" both say "24h". I guess one has a different timeframe. I like that indicator!
Ente
Oops  Chart is was wrong of course, I intended to insert a bitfinex btcusd chart, messed up a bit clearly lol . All other data on the page is bitfinex, I will insert the correct chart. Top ratio chart displays last hour, label is wrong was wrong. Maybe I was a bit too fast in sharing the link to the new orderbook page. I thougt Ialready found most bugs, but clearly i still missed a few  Hey, you did label it as a sneak preview! :-) I like it! Will it replace, or merge into the current view? Or will it stay separated? Cheers! Ente |
|
|
|
From at least September 2011 to September 2012 (“relevant period”), Shavers, operating under the Internet name “pirateat40,” offered and sold BTCST investments over the Internet, raising more than 700,000 BTC in principal investments from BTCST investors, or more than $4.5 million based on the daily average price of BTC when the BTCST investors purchased their BTCST investments. http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2013/comp-pr2013-132.pdfDuring the relevant period, Shavers obtained at least 700,467 BTC in principal investments from BTCST investors, or $4,592,806 when converted to U.S. dollars based on the daily average price of BTC when the BTCST investors purchased their BTCST investments. During the relevant period, Shavers returned at least 507,148 BTC to BTCST investors as withdrawals or purported interest payments. During the relevant period, Shavers transferred at least 150,649 BTC to his personal account at an online BTC currency exchange which, among other things, he then sold or used to day-trade (converting BTC to U.S. dollars and vice versa). As a result of this activity, Shavers suffered a net loss from his day-trading, but realized net proceeds of $164,758 from his net sales of 86,202 BTC. During the relevant period, Shavers transferred $147,102 from his personal account at the online BTC currency exchange to accounts he controlled at an online payment processor and his personal checking account, which he then used for, among other things, his personal expenses, including rent, car-related expenses, utilities, retail purchases, casinos, and meals. If this is true, there's nothing left to take. Well, except the pleasure of seeing him in jail, of course. Doesn't it hurt to see 200k BTC wasted? I wonder what Trendon mumbles in his sleep: "I'm the greatest", "I fucked up", "I wasted 0.6 billion USD wort of BTC"? :-) Ente |
|
|
|
Nice! Will this come for other exchanges too? For example Bitfinex? :-) Also, the two "Sell/Buy ratio" both say "24h". I guess one has a different timeframe. I like that indicator! Ente |
|
|
|
Have the people who were scammed by this guy formed a group yet? I'm not an expert in law, but would they be able to form a group and then have one case instead of several different ones? Nobody has sued probably because it's just low amounts from a lot of people and they don't feel like going through the hassle to get their money back.
I didn't follow up too closely, but I believe the SEC is the only one who really works on getting Trendon's butt to jail. No lawyers or groups of victims are working against him. At least not in the open. Ente |
|
|
|
Ich glaube nciht, dass es in der Geschwindigkeit weiter geht. Spätestens bei Halbierung des Block Reward wird die Hashrate stagnieren, bzw. sogar erstmal stark zurück gehen.
..History tells us differently. Es gab bei der Halbierung ein kurzes Plateau, und dann gings munter weiter. Natürlich kann man das alles im Graph schon lange nicht mehr erkennen, da muss man schon weit zurückblättern :-) Ente Ich glaube trotzdem, dass es spätestens dann zu einer Stagnation kommen wird. Bei der letzten Halbierung konnte die quasi Halbierung der Profitablilität noch dadurch ausgeglichen erden, dass die Entwicklung spezialisierter Mining Hardware noch vollkommen am Anfang stand. Mittlerweile ist diese aber soweit fortgeschritten, dass ich cniht glaube, dass beim nächsten Halbierungsschritt noch einmal eine Effektivitätssteigerung möglich ist, welche das auch nur annähernd ausgleicht. ..und deshalb die sauteure Hardware abstellen und verstauben lassen? Ich vermute wir sind immernoch weit oberhalb der Profitabilitätsgrenze, wenn man nur den Strompreis und Bitcoinkurs sieht. Und da die Hardware schon bezahlt ist.. Na mal sehen! Ente |
|
|
|
..ist zwar nicht der erhoffte Leak des ersten Girls-Only-Bitcoin-Meetup, aber trotzdem erfreulich! ;-) Ente |
|
|
|
Ich glaube nciht, dass es in der Geschwindigkeit weiter geht. Spätestens bei Halbierung des Block Reward wird die Hashrate stagnieren, bzw. sogar erstmal stark zurück gehen.
..History tells us differently. Es gab bei der Halbierung ein kurzes Plateau, und dann gings munter weiter. Natürlich kann man das alles im Graph schon lange nicht mehr erkennen, da muss man schon weit zurückblättern :-) Ente |
|
|
|
Generate as many address/key pairs as you can, continuously, using any method you think someone else might employ to generate their future wallet. Flit some coins in and out to get it's address showing up in your coind. Set up a script to watch your wallets. You'll need a farm of them. There is going to be some bumps with millions of accounts in 1 wallet. Each wallet gets a daemon to track the balance of the wallet, if it increases, withdraw the funds. Script the creation of new wallet nodes, deploy, expand. wait. Maybe you get lucky, maybe you waste a few thousand a year on hosting and electricity for generating endless keypairs. As more people create/move/transact, more addresses get used, the likelihood of success with this type of method increases as the coin becomes more adopted, which likely would increase it's value. If you hit a lucky address, it would be quite worth the effort. You probably never will, but again, with rpc calls, image deployment, cheap plug computers and botnets and ever decreasing hosted compute/cheaper arms coming along, there's very little investment in just creating endless keypairs and hoping for a rich twin one day. People bet on long shots all the time. On occasion they get lucky.
Just my random thought.
I should probably add the point of my mind exercise was not to advise you to actually do this, but to encourage not using a 'method' in building something that should provide security based on obscurity. It might also encourage more people to investigate multisig addresses.
Possible, but not be best way. 1) It would be more efficient to hunt for already used addresses, as the older addresses have more coins than the addresses in the future. 2) You don't need to actually send funds to an address to "watch" it. You generate billions of addresses, and check in the blockchain if any of those has funds on. 3) It is completely senseless to "mine" for random addresses. It makes more sense to hunt for weak brainwallets. The address space is 256 bit. This is what that means, practically:  Ente |
|
|
|
No, it is not suppose to happen like that.
What lender sets is the minimum days which he/she is willing to offer swaps for. This is how the system is normally registering such swaps, once they are taken. The same goes for trader. The only difference between trader and lender offers is that trader will get swaps matching his minimum days AND the ones that are longer (because longer duration swap offers are inclusive from trader's point of view).
If this part (days matching) does not work, there will be no point operating with days at all.
This is not the case. The lender sets the maximum time. After that time, the loan is closed automatically. At *any* time, the taker can close the loan. He pays for every hour, with one hour minimum. The taker may enter "10k USD for 2 days", and will scoop up all offers there are, until he has 10k USD lent, or the offers are too expensive. If there was a 7 day offer, he takes it with a 2 day runtime. That loan will be closed after 2 days, no matter what. Which gives me an idea - how about taking the loan for 7 days, in this example, nevertheless? The taker is free to close it after 2 days anyway! Ente |
|
|
|
I see 2 days swaps are going out instead of the number of days offered. This is for sure system's mistake/glitch as such swaps were entered via auto-lending feature. Could the team check this please.
That appears to be what happens now if a swap offered for, say, 30 days is matched against a demand for 2 days. Which I suppose makes sense - it was always set as a maximum allowed time, and the trader can cancel whenever they want... so why not let them define that up front. I prefer to know their intention than have it say "30 days" if they're only ever going to keep it for 2. Either way, it's out of control of the provider, and only the taker's decision. Which reminds me of the old feature-request to "renew this loan another x days"! :-) Ente |
|
|
|
Thank you, Bruno, Rassah and the rest of you, for keeping this up and running!
Absolutely, thanks to you guys. Is it time for readjusting?
Just an idea I always wanted to see come to life: 1. make charities accept bitcoin over a public address. 2. top all donations toward that particular address with some more bitcoins from our funds, based on the ratio of received donations. E.g. you have 2 organizations who accept bitcoin donations over addresses 1abc… and 1xyz… In one month, charity 1abc… receives 6 BTC in donations, charity 1xyz receives 4 BTC in donations. Out of our funds we donate 1 BTC per month (or some percentage of whatever we have) to all the charities, so 1abc… will receive 0.6 BTC from us and charity 1xyz.. will receive 0.4. That way, we'd not only incentivize charities to accept bitcoin donations, we would also incentivize them to do so in a very transparent way over a public bitcoin address, which is one of the things I'd like to see from charities anyways. Also, donators would be incentivized to donate bitcoins rather than Euros or Dollars, since that would result in a higher donation from us chipping in. Well, just an idea and probably a lot of hard work (which I'm definitely not going to do), but what do you think? I like your thinking! In effect, this would "make the rich more rich", and small NGOs with little donations receive little.. I guess the readjustment, should that be in the books, is defined by the manpower bitcoin100 has.. Ente |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
