|
I think they are probably equally safe. The wallet uses SHA512 and openssl to derive a key from your password before doing AES256 using the derived key. BIP38 on the other hand uses Scrypt to derive the key before encrypting with AES256 with the key. I think they both work just as well but BIP38 might be a little safer since scrypt is specially designed for key derivation and is designed to be slow.
|
|
|
|
|
The bootstrap is no longer necessary. It will actually take longer with the bootstrap since you still need to download all 20-30 Gb of it. The new headers-first synchronization with 0.10+ will sync faster and shifts a lot of the bottleneck to your cpu since the node needs to process and index all of the blocks.
|
|
|
|
|
It can't really be prevented. Due to the way that Bitcoin mining works, sometimes there are large outliers from the average and blocks are either found extremely quickly or extremely slowly. The "problem" can't really be solved since the mining is random.
|
|
|
|
How would I go about that? Trying some Googling now, but this may be over my head.
Also, the receiving wallet isn't showing these pending transactions anymore. They disappeared from the transaction history there, but they're still stuck on pending in the sending wallet. What does that mean?
Can you see the transaction in block explorers like blockchain.info or blockr.io? Check a couple of them. If the transactions aren't there, that means that the Bitcoin network has "forgotten" your transaction and it is essentially as if it never existed. Switch your client to another server since the transaction is probably in its cache, and then, just resend your transaction with a higher fee and it will be confirmed. Yes, I checked 5 block explorers, and the transactions do still appear on Blockchain.info, Insight, TradeBlock and Blocktrail, but they don't exist on Blockr.io. On Blockr.io I get "this transaction is unknown." So what does that indicate? I tried switching servers anyway, but it did nothing. That means that your transaction was not forgotten by the network. If you want to use CPFP, you need to use Electrum console commands, specifically createrawtx. Do you know how to do that by any chance? In searching for help, I'm not really finding any info on how to actually use Electrum console commands, and whatever info I have found is way above my pay grade, so to speak. I don't know how to do it in electrum, but I can do it in Bitcoin Core. For a small fee, I could create the transaction for you then you sign it on electrum (I can tell you how to do that) and then one of us can broadcast it. |
|
|
|
I have Bitcoin Core on two systems. One is synchronized the other still a few weeks behind. I know I can copy the blockchain from one to a properly configured external drive then load the blockchain to the newer system using the command line switches. But, can I add the complete system as a peer to the incomplete system? It's only a few weeks behind but getting data slowly. It will probably be complete by tomorrow morning regardless but just wondering.
You can start up the incomplete one with the flag -addnode=<your other system's ip> This will let it connect to your other one, although it may not download the blockchain from it. If making the complete blockchain system a node and using said switch to add its ip as a node to the not yet complete system, presently up to block 364402 Jul 8, 2015, why not? Isn't that a node function? If it connects to other nodes as well, it may download the blockchain from other nodes. To prevent it from connected elsewhere, use -connect=<your other system's ip> instead. -connect will make it only connect to the specified node(s). |
|
|
|
I have Bitcoin Core on two systems. One is synchronized the other still a few weeks behind. I know I can copy the blockchain from one to a properly configured external drive then load the blockchain to the newer system using the command line switches. But, can I add the complete system as a peer to the incomplete system? It's only a few weeks behind but getting data slowly. It will probably be complete by tomorrow morning regardless but just wondering.
You can start up the incomplete one with the flag -addnode=<your other system's ip> This will let it connect to your other one, although it may not download the blockchain from it. |
|
|
|
How would I go about that? Trying some Googling now, but this may be over my head.
Also, the receiving wallet isn't showing these pending transactions anymore. They disappeared from the transaction history there, but they're still stuck on pending in the sending wallet. What does that mean?
Can you see the transaction in block explorers like blockchain.info or blockr.io? Check a couple of them. If the transactions aren't there, that means that the Bitcoin network has "forgotten" your transaction and it is essentially as if it never existed. Switch your client to another server since the transaction is probably in its cache, and then, just resend your transaction with a higher fee and it will be confirmed. Yes, I checked 5 block explorers, and the transactions do still appear on Blockchain.info, Insight, TradeBlock and Blocktrail, but they don't exist on Blockr.io. On Blockr.io I get "this transaction is unknown." So what does that indicate? I tried switching servers anyway, but it did nothing. That means that your transaction was not forgotten by the network. If you want to use CPFP, you need to use Electrum console commands, specifically createrawtx. |
|
|
|
Just wait for it to finish synchronizing. Since it says that it is 2 years behind, any transactions that take place after that, e.g. things from today, won't be seen. Wait until the green bar goes away. This will indicate that it is up to date. Then, you should see you transaction and be able to send the Bitcoin elsewhere. To import the wallet into blockchain.info, you need to use pywallet and dump the wallet to a text file. Go here: https://github.com/jackjack-jj/pywallet to download and install everything you need for pywallet. Then run it with the --dumpwallet flag and copy the output text into blockchain.info's import wallet section. |
|
|
|
How would I go about that? Trying some Googling now, but this may be over my head.
Also, the receiving wallet isn't showing these pending transactions anymore. They disappeared from the transaction history there, but they're still stuck on pending in the sending wallet. What does that mean?
Can you see the transaction in block explorers like blockchain.info or blockr.io? Check a couple of them. If the transactions aren't there, that means that the Bitcoin network has "forgotten" your transaction and it is essentially as if it never existed. Switch your client to another server since the transaction is probably in its cache, and then, just resend your transaction with a higher fee and it will be confirmed. |
|
|
|
|
What was the error message? Maybe you are running out of disk space?
|
|
|
|
Thanks. I think I understand a little more what I'm supposed to do. The issue I'm facing at the moment is related to the particular client I'm using, I think. In the Electrum client that I'm sending from, I see the option in the preferences to "Check transaction before broadcasting," so I know what I'm looking for, but I don't see that option in the version of Electrum that's on the receiving end of the pending transactions. The original transactions were from a wallet on one computer to a wallet on another, and the second computer is using the Linux Electrum client, which apparently doesn't have this option? Hopefully that makes sense. Long story short, I don't see any option for signing or checking transactions or exporting them. All it appears I'm able to do, as far as I can tell, is send a transaction directly using the "send" button.
You will have to do it through the console and console commands. This is more difficult, but allows it to be done. Unfortunately, it seems like Electrum doesn't allow you to choose which transactions to spend so you need to find the txids and use console commands to create and sign the transaction. |
|
|
|
|
What is the address and txid of the unspendable tx?
|
|
|
|
|
You can't, at least, not for certain unless you are the sender. The whole point of a new change address is so that people cant find out how much Bitcoin someone has left. You can guess by looking at which address is receiving the weirder number. If a transaction has two outputs, 0.15 and 0.124575, you can assume that the not even number 0.124575 is the change.
|
|
|
|
Hello All, I am the dev for this coin. If you find any issues open an issue in the github or PM me. JSON-RPC call failed: Method not found  For what? |
|
|
|
in my coin.mx account wallet.
Contact their support. I'm sure they will help you. This isn't related to Bitcoin but rather coin.mx. They said that it is still in blockchain and if it hits them it will immediately be credited to my account. Ive never heard before that after 130 confirmations bitcoins wouldn't reach the address. I wanna know why If they said "it is still in blockchain" they don't know what they are talking about as that is a meaningless statement. Bitcoin works on inputs and outputs, not addresses. The inputs are either spent or not. Given it looks like there are more than 200 confirmations so far, this is a problem with coin.mx and the only people who can help are at coin.mx since they are not crediting the transfer to you. This is what they replied: Eric Bruaw (Coin.Mx) Jul 12, 11:04 AM Hello, http://motherboard.vice.com/read/wikileaks-is-now-a-target-in-the-massive-spam-attack-on-bitcoinarticle explains the delays with BTC transactions lately. As long as you've done it correctly the coins will arrive. Definitely not our fault. Regards, Eric Heh. That's funny. Try again and explain that your transaction has over 100 confirmations. Include a link to the txid and point out that the transaction spends to the address that they provided. |
|
|
|
In simple terms, I'm trying to run a hot wallet where I can query through JSON-RPC. Is that possible on bitnodes.io ?
It is possible on any VPS, provided that you configure the firewall and the Bitcoin config file properly to allow JSON-RPC queries. However, it is not recommended to make the RPC server publicly accessible since it could be vulnerable to attack and having someone steal all of your Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
ok, I figured out how to do the get notification about transaction, but there is one more thing - how to match payment request and transaction?
Deductively, transaction should contain some unique id by which it will be possible unambiguously identify the payment request. There is something called OP_RETURN which is advertised as a way to add a small junk (80bytes) of random data to the bitcoin transaction.
Is it a way to go?
Ideally each payment request returns a new Bitcoin address so that no addresses are reused. Each Bitcoin transaction has a unique ID which is a sha256 hash of the contents of the transaction. Thus, the transaction that sends to a particular address which was generated for a particular payment request is the transaction for the payment. The txid is not really necessary, but can be used to confirm that the payment was actually sent to that address if the customer provides the txid of their payment. |
|
|
|
|
Just wait. There was a spam attack and that was causing delays. Since you have a low fee on the transaction, it is lower priority and less likely to be confirmed. Next time, use a higher fee. Just wait and it will eventually be confirmed. You can also delete the transaction from your wallet and wait a few days for the network to "forget" your transaction. Then you can just send it again but with a higher fee.
|
|
|
|
I don't know if this has been discussed, but here it goes: what is the best way to spend the outputs that spammers are leaving on well known private keys? We could try and drain their funds, a bit like f2pool did.
I tried that already with 2 of the addresses that have been spamming. It would cost 2.4 BTC fee and the transaction would be so large it wouldn't even fit in a block. |
|
|
|
If that is the idea, it does not work for reasons:
- further spend attempts will not be broadcasted by a node after one of the attempts is included into the mempool
- people will figure soon that miner have advantage grabbing the outputs and stop trying.
Therefore the attack, if that is the purpose, is pretty lame.
I don't think that was the purpose of the attack. However, there are thousands of those dust transactions, all of them the same size, so the client can just select inputs that haven't already been spent. Even if it double spends, it is still spam that clogs the network, which might be the idea here. Also, why would miners grab the outputs? In order to spend all of those transaction, they need to create a transaction that is larger than 1 Mb and it wouldn't be worth that much. It would be more effective for them to mine other transactions that have higher fees and they can both earn more money and confirm and clear more of the backlog. I tried to claim those BTC along with another address that was used for spamming but the transaction required a 2.4 BTC fee. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
