It looks like there is a problem with localbitcoins. This is exclusively their services problem, not Electrum's and not Bitcoin's. The money is safe, it will either remain with lbc or it will reach your wallet. You just need to wait for them to fix their problems I just tested a send and I got the following message: Outgoing transactions are currently not working due to hardware problems. In case you initiate a transaction, it will stay in pending status until the problem is fixed. After the problem with outgoing transactions have been fixed, your transaction will be broadcasted to the network. So you probably have been affected by the same thing. Just wait and hope that they fix the issues. You can also try to contact their support. |
|
|
|
|
WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED TO YOUR WALLET!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
You can still use OP_RETURN. I highly doubt that it will be dropped. Try pushing it through other pushtx options like blockcypher or blocktrail's. You can also try pushing the transaction through your own full node, that should work. Blockchain.info is just being stupid as usual.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe you are spending more than the input provides?
What exactly is the error you are getting?
|
|
|
|
I used open source bitcoin-php library to create a rawtransaction hex code and sign it. When send it to bitcoin network, get an error An error occured: Transaction rejected by network (code -26). Reason: 16: mandatory-script-verify-flag-failed (Script evaluated without error but finished with a false/empty top stack element) Library: https://github.com/Bit-Wasp/bitcoin-phpCode: $private_key = PrivateKeyFactory::fromWif('address1 wif private key');
try {
$transaction = TransactionFactory::build()
->input('unspent hash of address1','2')// unspent hash value : 147900, vout : 2
->payToAddress('39479',AddressFactory::fromString('address2'))
->payToAddress('97200',AddressFactory::fromString('address1'))// Give change
->payToAddress('1221',AddressFactory::fromString('address3'))
->get();
$hex = $transaction->getHex();
$myTx = TransactionFactory::fromHex($hex);
$hex = TransactionFactory::sign($transaction)
-> sign (0, $private_key, $myTx->getOutputs()->get(2)->getScript())
-> get() -> getHex();
echo ($hex);
} catch (Exception $e) {
echo $e->getMessage().PHP_EOL;
}
Issue: https://github.com/Bit-Wasp/bitcoin-php/issues/166The author have another library bitcoin-lib-php , Still have the same error You need to get the output from the previous transaction. What you have is that you are getting the output script for signing from one of your outputs in the transaction. It actually has to come from the transaction which the input references, and it needs to be exactly the same output. |
|
|
|
Maybe I'm having some issues.
"The last posting from your IP was less than 360 seconds ago. Please try again later. The thing you were trying to post was saved as a draft. This limit decreases substantially as your account becomes more established."
That is a standard error for newbies. There is a time restriction on how soon you can post or pm someone. Just post slowly and as you rank up, the level decreases to the point where you can post almost instantaneously. This happens around member or full member. |
|
|
|
With new versions, the torrent is ABSOLUTELY NOT FASTER. It is faster and easier to allow Bitcoin Core to sync normally, no need to download a massive file, and the sync is faster due to headers-first synchronization. |
|
|
|
Yes, they are supposed to be regular things. The IRC meetings happen every Thursday and G1lius posts the "in layman's terms" summary every monday to Reddit and the mailing list as well as here. Maybe all of those should have their own consolidation thread which you can link to. |
|
|
|
There are many possible interpretations of these statements, but it is clear that the world's leading expert on cryptography just put out a gentle (but very public) warning that ECC may not be as secure as we believe. This being the case, which cryptocurrencies might be affected by this? Bitcoin? Cryptonotes like Monero? Ethereum?
Every single cryptocurrency would be affected. They are all based off of bitcoin which uses ECC. The obvious solution is to switch to a quantum resistant algorithm for generating private and public keys. I do not know if one exists yet. However, if you use bitcoin as it should be without reusing addresses, then the argument that ECC is broken is not as valid. In order for ECC to be broken by quantum computers, the public key needs to be known. The public key is only known when a transaction sends Bitcoin out of an address. Thus, if each address is only used to send one transaction which spends everything to other newly generated addresses, then everything will be fine since even with the public key known, there is nothing to steal. Will those blockchains eventually have to radically change their encryption algorithms? Are there any steps that should be taken now to preserve privacy and legitimacy before this happens?
Just to correct you, cryptocurrences DO NOT USE ENCRYPTION. The only crypto part are for key generation and signing, and the hashing of data for txids and blocks. Hashes are considered quantum secure. The security of hashes can be easily increased by doubling the bit length to have the same security we have now, e.g. SHA512 is as secure as SHA256 when quantum computers come around. |
|
|
|
Since Trezor's firmware is open source, people can audit that ...
The point is, I can't. How can I know that the firmware on the device is the same as on github. Exactly. This is why I compile Armory from source. (It's quite easy, so why not just do it?) Armory seems to be the only really solid thing out there for bitcoin security. Nothing else comes even close. The way I see it: If Armory dies, Bitcoin dies. I applaud goatpig for committing to maintain the FOSS if the company abandons it. Someone said somewhere that goatpig is the king. I agree. The same goes for the trezor firmware. You can compile it from source and flash it to the trezor yourself. |
|
|
|
upload your wallet.dat here : https://blockchain.info/wallet/import-wallet and try to login using your password that you remember.If you are able to login then you can find the prv key in the settings of your wallet.Hope that it helps. That site no longer works. Op, unfortunately, it is very difficult to recover the password. There are services that can recover your wallet password, but be careful because they can sometimes steak you're money if you give them too much information. There is a way to send them parts of your wallet so that they can get the password but not all of the private keys. |
|
|
|
|
Interesting project, I will follow, and perhaps help out with it if I have time. I can code, but only proficiently in java.
I left a few comments on the procedural outline which I would like you to look at. They are just clarification questions.
Also, I have few other questions:
1. Who are the reviewers and auditors and how are they determined?
2. Why must there be two addresses created and funded for each job?
3. How will this be decentralized?
4. Is there any way to prevent people from pretending to be multiple people at once? E.g. job creator is also the mediator or a reviewer for the same job.
|
|
|
|
I'm interested in testing this. Do I need to use your signature tool or can I just use my own bitcoin wallet and post the information in the following format: -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
<message>
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
<signing address>
<signature>
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- Edit: finished job |
|
|
|
I agree that this may be unduely paranoid...
I don't see how you're being unduly paranoid. It's a hardware device and you don't really know what's inside of it. Unless you open up the hardware and look into it (which 99% of the users who claim its trustworthy never do), you are trusting the manufacturer that built this thing. Worse, you connect this hardware to your online computer via USB! The risks of USB are widely known and have been discussed on this Armory forum before. Again, they say this is fine because the thing inside the hardware that stores the private key is supposed to be isolated. But again, unless you open the hardware (which nobody does in practice), you are trusting the manufacturer. I still can't understand why people trust this thing. I just don't get it. What am I missing? In computers, firmware is required to make hardware actually function. While the hardware does whatever it needs to do, it needs firmware in order to actually perform instructions. Since Trezor's firmware is open source, people can audit that to determine that there is no hardware or any part of the software that can compromise their keys (besides bad hardware and hardware based attacks). Even if such hardware was inside a Trezor which could reveal your private keys to SatoshiLabs, the firmware for it would not exist on the device so that hardware does nothing. Another things is that the people in the company are known and trusted (e.g. slush). The company is registered so if there is a problem with them stealing keys from Trezor's, then users can sue the company and bring about legal action against them. Disclaimer: I neither trust nor distrust Trezors or hardware wallets. I don't use commercial ones, or any at all. I plan on rolling my own with a raspberry pi at some point. |
|
|
|
Guys.
All working.
I just imported my private key in a installed electrum wallet.
Bow I have a last doubt...
What should I do with the blockchain wallet? That wallet stills working?
The wallet will still work, but you can just forget about it since all of the private keys are now in electrum. Isn't there a way to erase my wallet from blockchain? If my wallet stiils working into blockchain.info I'm not secure because my wallet is accessible from the internet yet... I don't think there is any way to delete the blockchain.info wallet. You can enable all of the other security settings to make it really difficult for anyone to login though. That should help, but wallet deletion is not possible. |
|
|
|
Guys.
All working.
I just imported my private key in a installed electrum wallet.
Bow I have a last doubt...
What should I do with the blockchain wallet? That wallet stills working?
The wallet will still work, but you can just forget about it since all of the private keys are now in electrum. |
|
|
|
|
Can't you just use port forwarding? On Linux, you can just use iptables to forward whatever port your users connect to to the actual pool's stratum server.
|
|
|
|
If this forum closed, we'd just migrate to another forum/platform for discussion... And the chance of bitcointalk closing is quite low  Exactly. Even if bitcointalk closed, another forum would just take its place. Forum.bitcoin.com looks like one that could also become popular soon |
|
|
|
ok i did that and it started to load up at the reading new blocks header screen. It should just load back up in a short while?
yes. |
|
|
|
Hi, i was participating in this campaign but i was inactive for a long time, i see your spreadsheet is not updated since 2nd october, am i still on the sig campaign? If not can i re-apply?
There is a second tab, from Oct 3 and later. Check that to see if you are there. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
