Thank you for telling! I am using Linux Lubuntu. Is there a way to fix this if this is misconfiguration?
How can anyone help you without you posting the very detailed information about your setup? You'll probably also need at least temporary access to another computer and/or another ISP. |
|
|
|
Without VPN: traceroute to bitcointalk.org (186.2.165.183), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
=snip=
4 223.196.1.77 (223.196.1.77) 5218.928 ms 6140.400 ms 7061.777 ms
5 223.196.7.161 (223.196.7.161) 7983.013 ms 8803.091 ms 8803.280 ms
6 223.196.6.253 (223.196.6.253) 8803.259 ms 8793.376 ms 8793.183 ms
7 62.208.252.225 (62.208.252.225) 8792.849 ms 7681.464 ms 6964.936 ms
8 * * *
9 * * *
10 * * *
11 * * *
12 * * *
13 10.10.48.5 (10.10.48.5) 2463.142 ms 2974.825 ms 5016.395 ms
14 ddos-guard.net (186.2.165.2) 1431.839 ms 1841.873 ms 1842.262 ms
15 node-186-2-165-183.reverse.x4b.me (186.2.165.183) 1842.012 ms 931.474 ms 1852.168 ms
This trace reads like misconfigured equipment. I see about 6 seconds in the 4th hop then the final is reached in around 1 second. My best guess is this is a misconfigured firewall doing reverse DNS on every packet and letting them through only after RDNS failure. Notice that the packets without explicit reverse DNS address take several seconds whereas the packets with a set reverse address only take 1 or 2 seconds. This used to be a known bug with Microsoft Proxy/ISA/Forefront Server. There's no physical reason for this type of ISP latency on Earth, it would only make sense for some space communication. |
|
|
|
I know how it works and found a way to make it work with my application, but my question is what would be better in terms of performance and stability. How do others do it when developing wallet functionality? I found a few code examples but seem to be using the account feature instead.
Thus far any business that claimed to understand and utilize the built-in account functionality turned out to be either: 1) incompetent (they only thought they understand) 2) fraudulent (it was just a convenient scapegoat for a premeditated scam) 3) some combination of above with the end result being the loss of the depositor's funds. |
|
|
|
For a PC in one's workplace, in a hotel convenience room, cash register desk, or internet cafe, the part that needs to be inside the PC is the resistor and two shielded probe cables leading to a digital oscilloscope hidden somewhere else. Othwerwise one would need a small circuit that includes the A-D converter, some memory, and some means to transmit the data out at a suitable opportunity, e.g. by bluetooth. It may be hard to fit that inside a laptop, but perhaps the physical hacker can remove a speaker or some other component whose absence will not be noticed.
Recall that the whole point of a hardware wallet is to keep the keys safe even when using an untrusted machine to sign transactions or hand over a public key. Requiring the host to have trusted hardware would be a significant restriction to its scope.
How about a quick&simple workaround for this somewhat advanced attack? When a drug-dealer bitcoiner wants to use Trezor on a really untrusted computer then connect it through a small powered USB hub than one can carry together with the Trezor. Would that defeat this attack? |
|
|
|
OT: Does anyone remember 'E-Machine' computers, $299 desktops what a POS  I still have one working almost continuously since 2003/2004. Around 2012/2013 I tried to order replacement parts (mechanical,cracked plastic) and I found out that many places are still using it. Gateway may be still providing support for them. Runs Bitcoin & Litecoin just fine, although mine was way more expensive. |
|
|
|
|
I think they are mostly lost. There was a lot of test attacks/bug-hunts done on the testnet and even two machines side by side on same ISP had vastly different stored blockchains.
|
|
|
|
I use a direct PPPoE connection, no router in between. And from the info provided above, my IP is reachable on 8333.
You maybe suffering from an MTU issue. PPPoE has MTU 8 bytes less than the Ethernet standard of 1500 bytes. See if you can reconfigure your modem from PPPoE to PPPoA which would then support full 1500 byte MTU. I don't have time to give you a full lecture on the MTU, path MTU discovery, MSS, etc. Start here: http://www.dslreports.com/tweaksEdit: If your ISP gave you a NAT router/gateway and you reconfigured it to the bridge mode, then most likely this router was transparently adjusting MSS to be 8 bytes lower to accommodate PPPoE overhead. |
|
|
|
|
Some of older computers (older Macintoshes) can no longer access bitcointalk because they can't establish a secure connection HTTPS/SSL.
Can you tell us what did you change at that time?
Can you maybe re-enable some lower security transport protocols?
Edit: Hmm, it is back to loading pages and working OK. The current date stamp is 2015-03-31T20:21 .
Edit2: Editing just a title to refer to the reoccurrence of the errors.
|
|
|
|
My question is moreso if I were to somehow make a blockchain that instead of exchanging bitcoins exchanged files. Would that mean that in that network, once that file is sent to another party, that I no longer have access to said file (assuming that I have not copied it)?
Maybe in the universe from the film "Interstellar" or "Blade Runner" or "In Time" you can make an assumption that you looked at the data but did not copy it. In the real world we live you can't make such assumptions. I can't and won't try to prohibit you from fantasizing or dreaming up alternate realities. In the real world we all live you could learn how any sort of digital media player/reader works and stop conceptualizing "somehow" magical DRM (Digital Rights Management) devices. There's no point of getting into details of peer-to-peer and distributed technologies. |
|
|
|
so in theory, one could make a torrent network whereby via a block chain, you send a file and then lose the ability to access that file? Assuming you don't copy it of course.
No, with my understanding of the word "theory". On the Bittorrent network the copy of Sylvester's Stallone film is still playable and valuable no matter how many copies are in existence. On the Bitcoin network people value only coins that are "unspent" as marked by the "the most current and heaviest blockchain". The "spent" coins continue to exist, but nobody gives them any value. You may have other meaning of the word "theory" on you mind. |
|
|
|
|
Actually the difference is very simple to explain:
1) When I send you a file via Bittorrent protocol we end up with the situation where both you and me have a copy of this file;
2) When I send you a coin via Bitcoin protocol I lose my coin and you gain one, the blockchain is a shared resource that keeps track of the coins so they don't multiply like rabbits or copies of an unreleased Sylvester's Stallone movie.
Everything else is just an implementation detail.
|
|
|
|
|
Can your code handle testnet coins?
|
|
|
|
Yeah, $30K around the house sounds like a lot.
It not just "$30K around the house". He was widely known for doing cash deals nearly daily for a long time. Keeping cash at home in a safe or under the proverbial mattress, when nobody knows about it is safe and sane. It is a completely different story when everyone and his dog knows that he was a cash operator. What kind of miraculous force protected him from robbery for all those years? |
|
|
|
30K IS NOT A LOT OF MONEY THESEDAYS
if you live in a good area and are wealthy its not unreasable to think some people have cash or even gold well in excess of 30k
maybe he took precautions ,had it stashed in a safe or split up in various locations around the house
someone who is practically famous for doing big deals face to face for the last few years would need to have operational cash on hand in case the phone rings and someone wants to dump some cheap btc ASAP to take advantage of the situation and make a profit etc
Yeah right. Personal face-to-face trades with anonymous people, done nearly daily for couple of years. With no single instance of violent crime. Maybe someone will dump some bricks on your head to make you understand what's wrong in your picture. |
|
|
|
When did she say it was "hidden?" I heard "from around the house."
In my house, at this moment, there's cash in my wallet, in my wife's purse, in the safe, in a drawer and probably a couple of other places I've forgotten about. The amounts are all under $1000 but I'm sure if I was targeted as Burt was it would all be confiscated and I'd describe it in the same way.
There is a miscommunication going on in this thread. I'm going to guess that most of the posters here don't remember the days when the delivery vans used to have "Driver doesn't cary cash" painted on them. Again the interesting and unusual part isn't whether it is "legal" or "illegal" to keep that much cash at family residence with small kids. The question is: is it safe and sane? The people who really handle that cash on the daily basis treat it in a way similar to dangerous explosives. Because cash first of all attracts crime. I'm thinking that maybe BurtW wasn't telling his wife everything, maybe he kept additional job for cover, maybe he tried to keep double and/or cooked books and gotten over his head in it? Keeping $30,000+ in cash on hand when you're trading bitcoins makes sense to me.
At a family residence with wife and small kid? I think you are either unmarried/childless or homicidal/suicidal/infanticidal. Edit: OK, one possible thing came to my mind. Maybe BurtW was sane, wore body armor when going Bitcoin trading, had a armored car with run-flat tires, and other accessories of the cash operator. But maybe he hired/cooperated with non-licensed body guards or two-timing body guards. And those guards were involved in something obviously illegal and BurtW looked to the investigators like he's working for them as a bagman and not vice-versa? |
|
|
|
It's also, from what I've seen, not clear how much protection ECC actually provides... all data covered by the protection is in the same domain for row aliasing, and typical protection only provides single error correction; soo...
Single Error Correction is usually Double Error Detection (SECDED) or even better (Chipkill) For the intECC case I presume that the internally-erroring chip/module will return something obviously outrageous (all ones, 0xDEADBEEF, maybe something configurable?) so at least the crashes should be obvious and harder to exploit than bitflips. For the classic ECC all hardware that I know will do Machine Check Fault/Non-Maskable Interrupt and then SIGBUS or equivalent. I hope this exploit will get sufficient publicity that I can stop having to think about such things like bitsquatting and similar nonsense. Ever since the first paper on this subject was published I've been running hosts doing anything important with overspec memory running underclocked, as an additional mitigation. A couple percent performance isn't worth any risk of corruption.
I've been fortunate enough to be bitten by the bitflip early in school, and after that I never did any serious work without parity or ECC RAM. I always take care to verify the operation of machine check exceptions and properly configure memory scrubbers. The copy of yaccpar in my project lost one bit in this line ("!" became " ", 0x21 to 0x20): for( yyxi=yyexca; (*yyxi!= (-1)) || (yyxi[1]!=yystate) ; yyxi += 2 ) ; /* VOID */ changing it to for( yyxi=yyexca; (*yyxi!= (-1)) || (yyxi[1] =yystate) ; yyxi += 2 ) ; /* VOID */ which still compiles and even kinda-sometimes-runs. After that I was inoculated to ever trusting a computer without memory error detection or correction. The school computer that produced this error actually had parity DRAM chips, but the school's vendor did a "leg lift" on it, i.e. bent a pin upwards to disable parity error interrupts. |
|
|
|
Well you obviously want to be discrete about having that kind of cash in your home. I am sure they were not advertising the fact that they had cash.
His wife also mentioned her testimony against civil forfeiture laws that the money was taken from various parts of their house and from their safe, which implies that they had money hidden in multiple places, so if they were to get robbed then the criminal might find some small amount of money, take it and then leave.
Without additional information my suspicion is on some marital problems or addiction or something other cause that I can't think right now. Money hidden in multiple places at home? With young/early school-age kids living in that home? It just doesn't compute. Kids at that age are so nosey that you cannot hide anything from them, if you raise them normally. The fresh-flower market that I've mentioned before had one/two nearby jewelry/watch/buy-sell-gold kiosks. One day one of my elementary school classmates came to school with gold bars and started giving them away (I'll say 1/4M$ at the current prices). Some observant janitorial/custodian lady collected them back and alerted the administration. The real reason was alcoholism of the parents of that kid. People and families handling cash/cash-equivalent-valuables have everyday rituals that assure their safety, mostly from common crime. I just can't seem to find such "safe-normalcy" I would expect in the BurtW's family or any other family that lives with and runs cash-intensive occupation. |
|
|
|
Well I would say that would not be all that uncommon for people with a lot of money, as much as they apparently have, to keep such a large amount of cash at home. A 'sane' reason to keep that much money at home would be for bitcoin trading purposes, as it would probably be a bit of a hassle to have to go to the bank every time burt wanted to buy or sell large amounts of bitcoin, plus the fact that making a lot of cash deposits and withdrawals out of a personal account (he wouldn't have a business account because he was only doing it as a 'hobby') is a good way to get your bank account closed. I am not sure what exactly Burt's wife's company does, not what the client does. Both the businesses names were redacted (and the locations  ) in a letter that she wrote and published in a different section on her site. I would say there is a good chance that it would be difficult/impossible to determine exactly what they do. I understand not using banks. I grew up next to the wholesale fresh-cut flower market that was open 4am-7am, for the delivery at 8am-9am, which was also before the bank hours. I think I mostly understand people dealing "cash only" and having suitcases full of them. But never at home! This is dangerous, you paint a target sign for yourself and the family. And I'm not taking about "jackbooted government flunkeys", just a regular old-fashioned violent crime. Neither BurtW nor his wife seem like random naives or Bitcoin cultists/evangelists. I don't think there ever will be enough information available to determine the sanity of their actions. The best we can hope for is to determine legality.
Well, legality is rather boring (to me) subject. The legal details could change in an instant. I'm interested in "what they were thinking", what kind of operation they were running. |
|
|
|
The amount of bitcoins is more impressive: equivalent to $ 200,000 at current price. So, this doesn't surprise me. Also, you should consider Bitcoin is cash too (this affirmation is in the whitepaper).
I'm not about the current market value. I know families who have way more than that hanging on the walls in the open as painting which appreciated in value. I'm trying to find a sane reason to keep this amount of cash at home in their circumstances. If I can't find sane reasons I'll have to look for insane ones. |
|
|
|
There are a number of legit things that would have caused them to have that kind of cash in their home. Primarily it could be for bitcoin trading. They also apparently have a lot of money so it could be the equivalent of their "emergency" fund.
His wife said on her website that one of her client's (work) sites were searched which caused the client to fire her company which cost her company millions of dollars. If they have millions of dollars to lose then they probably have enormous amounts of money. If your company makes millions of dollars then $30k really doesn't sound like that much.
I do think that they probably do have the resources to make heads roll, assuming that Burt really was not involved in anything that was actually illegal (meaning he was not involved in SR2, or any other dark market site at all). It appears that a number of people make mistakes throughout the case, most interestingly the magistrate who apparently authorized search warrants without probable cause to seize attorney-client privileged information, and then the proper procedures were not followed when such information was taken
I kinda don't mind "legit" or "illegit". I'm interested in "sane". I can fully understand the grey market economy and life (all the way back to the plight of European Jews during WWII). Keeping 30k$ at home with no obvious use or as an "emergency fund"? This just doesn't seem sane. Or it is a symptom of being disconnected and alienated from the extended family, neighbors, friends, etc. Is there any more information about "wife's client's (work) sites that were searched"? I don't care about specifics, just the general business sector and the purpose of keeping funds in cash there. Again, I'm not interested about legality or illegality. I'm more about the sanity and purpose of the lifestyle. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
