the hex of this transaction looks like this: 01000000
02
====Inputs====
94f81d179223e038fbf1e76c09d8608331600bcf7a1c663815f7a46e9aabebd8
00000000
6b
483045022100d029210b20d53ec9a0da976d33eb3d0146628486269bd8c10cdb3143ea6a51d602200d5dc939e007da966a81e298dce8e4c9968805c8e222c31514c03da3ce582dcd0121025ecf9ca0513c44de19ddeab85ed18ebd0fb10f6c0ab084cbba4bcb62a09ee78c
ffffffff
9d54f354fcaada936937ced57cbcb1a47784a48a0874cd975e6f933fe125af6f
00000000
6b
483045022100f3d01afb691b22098f15aacd408f212475a248cb5b228689e24bb78e70fea4e9022074f0d3b8d6138b673aa2a07cbc24721f87320e31ec2ce0cadb1d00f3c2007cfd0121025ecf9ca0513c44de19ddeab85ed18ebd0fb10f6c0ab084cbba4bcb62a09ee78c
ffffffff
03
====Outputs====
b80b000000000000
19
(1) 76a914759d6677091e973b9e9d99f19c68fbf43e3f05f988ac
0000000000000000
09
(2) 6a0743430215002014
b80b000000000000
19
(3) 76a9143d7bc1cd8ff921d6bddbd6c7107d78c7f406446688ac
00000000
(====input output and numbers in parenthesis was added ====) (1) is 1BitcoinEat.... hash (2) is the part BC.I can not decode OP_RETURN : 0x6a (3) is the other address output 16c6U.... |
|
|
|
♯♯
i reported that fake github repo to Electrum via email as soon as i saw it yesterday morning and also looked around and reported abuse to github too. glad to see it is removed. ♯♯ Good thing that i've asked about this before download it  I thought everything in github is real and looks it it has been removed. when in doubt just look around:  look at the red boxes in the above pic. even if you don't know the real repository is spesmilo/electrum you can see there is already 6825 commits with 135 contributors and also there are 840 stars (some sort of bookmark) and 465 forks |
|
|
|
What's a hex format, and could it be used to confirm the transaction?
Is there a way I could get a miner to confirm it?
here is the hex format of your transaction: 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
you can either use a bitcoin wallet or any of these links to push this format to the network (at the moment i think only blockcypher lets you push zero fees transactions others will reject. * i said this to show you even if the transaction is dropped out of memepool (like the error you saw on blockchain.info page) you can still send this transcation even if you have lost access to your previous wallet since this tx is already signed. |
|
|
|
I have loads of paper wallets all over the place, with small amounts stashed in them. I might suggest some Paper wallet tracker, that would keep a total of all your combined coins. < A offline version for more privacy would also be useful, like Bitaddress.org >
This could also be helpful with people doing Bitcoin Air drops. They could see a instant summary of all paper wallets created to determine which paper wallets were used and funds transferred, and at a pre-defined time, they could claim all the unused paper wallets, to re-use it again. < Explanation = You create 1000 paper wallets and start to distribute them, with the requirement that the bitcoins on these paper wallets should be moved within 3 months from the event. If it was not moved, the funds within these paper wallets would be re-claimed and used for the next Air drop >
With this App, you could monitor all 1000 paper wallets in one go. ^smile^
correct me if i am wrong but that App is called a simple bitcoin wallet with the ability to import private keys  and as for spending the safe way of doing it is to spend each of those coins by creating the transaction with the lock_time=(60*24*6 + currentBlockHeight) and signing it with the private key, destroy the pk and keep the hash to broadcast in 3 months. if you are really doing this yourself i can make you a simple code to make these transactions (you should sign with a real wallet though) and as for pushing it can also be done with a simple function to push all of them at once after the 3 months. |
|
|
|
i have 2 thoughts: - you can still broadcast this transaction as long as you can get the hex format if it but it is highly unlikely that it can get any confirmation ever with zero fee. - @achow101 is CPFP implemented yet or not, i never understood this if so he may be able to use this feature to spend that unconfirmed tx |
|
|
|
hello friend  i am currently working on this (click to enlarge):  a simple tool to make a raw unsigned transaction. i mostly am doing it for fun and to learn more about bitcoin protocol. but it can have some practical usages too for creating the rawTX and transferring to offline computer to sign with a bitcoin wallet. it is in C♯ if you know anything about it you can contribute when i published it on github (soon) also i currently have 35 active projects in my VS project folder and some of them are for publish. |
|
|
|
|
when someone has access to your computer with Electrum wallet installed on it but he doesn't have access to your private keys if you have set a password so he doesn't have access to your coins (can not spend them),
he has access to the following :
- your bitcoin addresses and how much bitcoin you have
- your wallet.dat file which is encrypted with your password
- your computer so he can install a key logger to steal your password next time you type it in and then de-crypt your wallet with your password and gain access.
- also if your password is week it can be brute forced and it would be as if you never had any password.
|
|
|
|
If you are working on testnet, then you can try out your transactions without worrying about losing money.
ok thanks for the suggestion. i made myself an address and claimed faucet, ♯readyToMoveForward |
|
|
|
thanks a lot for the help - snip -
It is rather useless to populate the scriptSig with large placeholder values, and I don't know why Electrum or coinb.in would be doing that. - snip -
- snip -It appears that Electrum and coinb.in are doing that so that when signing happens, they know what to put in the scriptsig without having to find it in the blockchain. Ok, I guess that makes sense. When calculating the scriptSig, you'd need to know which private key to sign with. This can be determined by looking in the blockchain at the output that is being spent, but if you store this information in the scriptSig space of the unsigned transaction, then you can save yourself the time of needing to go back and look it up again. i made a little code to serialize the raw txs to understand it better especially this demo on wiki and the rawtx you made with core and now i see exactly what you mean. they are filled with zero. so i suppose this is why you spoon-feed "scriptPubKey":hex bitcoin core offline when you want to signrawtransactioni was looking for the example 515=0xfd0302 which was not available on wiki for some reason! thanks, i guess i have to start reading both from now on
i have spend a couple of days on understanding only a raw "unsigned" transaction and make a little code for it and i have not yet started on the signing part and that is the scariest, not because of losing money (i am just testing things here) but because it is so complicated and also since it is cryptographic, it is very unforgiving! but it is at least good kind of scary+enjoyable |
|
|
|
OK, i got some more time to work on this. Look closer, in all three cases (Electrum, coinb.in, and your raw UNSIGNED transaction) the scriptPubKey is exactly the same.
What you are describing in your post is not the scriptPubKey, it's the scriptSig. Since your transaction is UNSIGNED, it doesn't yet have a scriptSig. Therefore you, coinb.in, and Electrum appear to have put some placeholder garbage in there. Eventually, when the transaction is signed, this placeholder data will be replaced with the actual scriptSig.
i understand it now but i am still confused about how can this have meaning and still be different: yeah i understood that it is a temporary placeholder to be filled with scriptSig later. but what confuses me is how can it be garbage when it has a meaning and has to be parsed when passed into the code to validate and then sign. reading the Script page: OP_DUP OP_HASH160 <don't know what 0x14 is, couldn't find> ... OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG
2 more questions: - it is said that the In-counter and Out-counter are "Variable length integers" can anyone give me an example of an In-counter with "3", "5" and "9" byte so i know how it is going to look like. also is This how you get the size then value of the VarInt
- are all the numbers (amount, lengths, lock time,...) Little-endian?
|
|
|
|
maybe the message you are trying to check is wrong. here let me give you an example: -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- This is Coding Enthusiast and current time is 1474355769 -----BEGIN SIGNATURE----- 1Q9swRQuwhTtjZZ2yguFWk7m7pszknkWyk IHgdAFlvDvGq+hijJezWWm7MMHaT3P5sVU7hu5Cm9ACIQOkWyPmjdEYKULvRMlJtdDTmGnMvFVDgcm+irLhXqCE= -----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- i signed this message: This is Coding Enthusiast and current time is 1474355769 with this address (with my private key but you only need to know which address): 1Q9swRQuwhTtjZZ2yguFWk7m7pszknkWyk and the signature is: IHgdAFlvDvGq+hijJezWWm7MMHaT3P5sVU7hu5Cm9ACIQOkWyPmjdEYKULvRMlJtdDTmGnMvFVDgcm+irLhXqCE= now click on Tools > Sign/verify message fill in the boxes with the information above and click verify button. if the signature is good you will see a messgebox telling you "Signature verified"  |
|
|
|
you can do it with all the wallets that let you export the private keys. you can even use bitcoin core for this. https://bitcoin.org/en/choose-your-wallet- download the code from the main source - check the signature of downloaded file - disconnect network cables. - boot up with a live linux - generate a random address and back it up |
|
|
|
I simply used Electrum to double check and see if the TX that i generate myself is right, since i don't have any other wallet. I am trying to learn the code and next step is Bitcoin the hard way + developers guide for me to learn more about signing that raw tx. |
|
|
|
Update 2016-11-29: Since this example helped me I decided to add it here for anyone else who may be interested in the future.
Scroll Down to new questions
following this: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/32695TL;DR: what is "76 a9 14" and "88 ac" which is being added to the hash160 and why is it different when using other wallets to make the raw tx.i have gone as far as creating a raw unsigned tx myself: 01000000
01
902dbe4ae9a20b85f53cb6813396e6aae272ee4e3b699e8c2498d2ce8f5833ee
00000000
19
76a914 fdf8bdeae5fe5fb35328dc04a95b17b8ed70bed1 88ac
ffffffff
01
c027090000000000
19
76a91437ba8314fcd8bbbf49ed9a1d6d27f9797e7d60f188ac
00000000
i also get the same thing with https://coinb.in/#newTransactionbut with Electrum (since that is the only wallet i have) i get this: 01000000
01
902dbe4ae9a20b85f53cb6813396e6aae272ee4e3b699e8c2498d2ce8f5833ee
00000000
19
01ff16fd00 fdf8bdeae5fe5fb35328dc04a95b17b8ed70bed1
ffffffff
01
c027090000000000
19
76a91437ba8314fcd8bbbf49ed9a1d6d27f9797e7d60f188ac
00000000 so as you can see first method is using 76a914 {hash160} 88ac format whole Electrum is using 01ff16fd00 {hash160} format - so why is it different? and how can both of them be valid? |
|
|
|
♯♯ Please check your PM. replied! I am using an old i5-3570k... 8 Gigs of RAM... Windows 10, Python 3.6... nothing really special... and it turns out I was waaaaaay off with my estimates... my code is still running after I got back home tonight from work... so it probably has another day or so to run  thanks, do you have any estimate of how many pk are you checking per second with that cpu? As for checking the privkey against the address... I'm using the privkey_to_addr() function from the pybitcointools python library... basically you pass in a privkey and it returns the address (or generates an exception for a 'bad' privkey)... I either catch the exception (and basically ignore it) or compare any returned address against "1qkCBiEjY4GAUFBcrsDXqyM6EPbZKTqCW" which is the published address. i say this from my own experience but i may be wrong: throwing exception and catching/handling it will slow down your loop drasticallyI should probably do the Base58CheckSum thing, and looked into it briefly, but got confused by all the math and couldn't see any obvious "Base58Checksum()" type function, so I went with the first function I found that looked like it could tell me if the generated privkey matched the bitcoin address  that would be the best idea. i have zero knowledge of python but check this out: https://github.com/jgarzik/python-bitcoinlib/blob/master/bitcoin/base58.pyor https://github.com/petertodd/python-bitcoinlib/blob/master/bitcoin/base58.pyand whatever you do first check your code with some correct private keys to see if it works |
|
|
|
Yeah... I saw that c# code and how you were building your char arrays... I've basically done the same thing, but with some slightly different assumptions for a couple of the clues... I've written it in Python (was fun learning the syntax and structure for python this afternoon) and it is currently grinding away testing my privkeys against the public address that was published.
how do you check it against public key? are you trying to generate the pubkey with different combinations using the code? i don't know how can that even work but i feel like you are taking the long route if my guess is right. i used a simple Base58CheckSum on each combination which i think it is faster My spreadsheet tells me that with my assumptions (uppercase for Surname and company name clues etc) I have 1,811,939,328 keys to test... will be interesting to see how long it takes to complete the run...
i would like to know about your CPU power and also the time it takes to complete it for science you can see mine here: |
|
|
|
Is anyone still actively working on this puzzle? I see the prize is still unclaimed... but it seems like the discussion here has slowed down. I have a couple of ideas that may or may not help for a couple of the clues...
Is there a list of the most recent "guesses" for each tile somewhere? I see a couple of lists in this thread, and the nicely annotated picture with the green/red dots etc... but they seem a little old and there has been discussion since then... I was hoping that I might be able to work on a code based solution that might be able to brute force the solution if we can narrow down some of the "unknown" ones.
that would be my picture and here is the gist and to be honest i worked on it for a while and moved on to new projects like the wallet in my signature and This OHLC Chart one. i am planning on doing a fresh run working from scratch though i would love to hear any idea. and as for brute force i made my own code and checked a couple of 10s of million private key variation and even found one but never the answer. you can see the build that use in the gist to get an idea about what i am doing. |
|
|
|
♯♯
also we do not know if the miners might be losing money but still operate. maybe they speculate that the price will go up again or some other competitor will drop out.
it might take up to one year until a big miner will go bankrupt.
♯♯
Once you get into mining/bitcoin its harder to get out you might aswell stay in. You get emotionally + materially invested into the success of bitcoin. This is why over 7 years all we have done is grown overall as the blackhole sucks more people in.
you two aren't making any sense! mining is a business and if you don't make any profit from it, you will be forced to close down shop. at the end of the month you can't tell Electric company "i am sucked in" so i don't pay my electric bill. so it must be profitable enough that they continue doing it like any other business. what are goint to happen if this happens on 9th of november is bitcoin to be dead?but its like halving right? halving seems really like nothing happens and its like normal it basicaly that people buy more bitcoin thats why bitcoin price riseee
read again! it is the 5th of November was in the original lyrics, and 9th of July is the time of bitcoin halving (2 months ago) |
|
|
|
The problem is nobody apart from the people in North Korea who do not know about it, still click on those URL shortener links. Most of these links redirect you to viruses and other bad sites. So, this should not be very effective, if people know what they doing. Nice try, but no... we do not fall for this anymore... when it was new.. yes, but not anymore. there is a simple solution for short urls: {google how to see long url for more info} but generally you can use a site like this: http://www.checkshorturl.com/ to see where link redirects you and some additional information about it e.g. https://goo.gl/ahGcc0http://checkshorturl.com/expand.php?u=https://goo.gl/ahGcc0Long URL https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1617532.0
Delay 0.87 second(s)
Short URL https://goo.gl/ahGcc0
Redirection 301
Search long URL on Yahoo | Google | Bing | Twitter
Check if safe on Web Of Trust | SiteAdvisor | Google | Sucuri | Norton | Browser Defender
Title This is probably the most amusing thing I've seen on Bitcointalk this ye ar
Description This is probably the most amusing thing I've seen on Bitcointalk this year
Keywords bitcoin, forum, bitcoin forum, bitcointalk
Author N/A
also here is some code for those interested: https://github.com/hrbrmstr/longurl
p.s. this method does not work on this particular site in OP because it is not a regular shortner. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
