Hmm, solo mining stopped working for me yesterday. Benn getting up to 2 blocks per hour. Now not a single block in 12 hours.
And diff is not so greatly increased. Does anyone have any luck soloing last day?

guys, any nodes?

Yep, it fails with Assertion failed.

And

$git pull
Already up-to-date.

That's the end of the log. Here is what I have at the beginning:
Initializing Device: Juniper
ERROR: -30, CL_INVALID_VALUE, This depends on the function: two or more coupled parameters had error
s.
ERROR: -44, CL_INVALID_PROGRAM, if program is a not a valid program object.
ERROR: -44, CL_INVALID_PROGRAM, if program is a not a valid program object.
ERROR: -44, CL_INVALID_PROGRAM, if program is a not a valid program object.
--- Build log ---
7
---  End log  ---
ERROR: -44, CL_INVALID_PROGRAM, if program is a not a valid program object.
Platform 00: AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing
  Device 00: Juniper
  Device 01:         Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2400 CPU @ 3.10GHz
ERROR: -48, CL_INVALID_KERNEL, if kernel is not a valid kernel object.

i'm getting  ERROR: -48, CL_INVALID_KERNEL, if kernel is not a valid kernel object

Yeah, good idea. Put me in. I'll keep the pool up.

For some reason it doesn't want to connect to yours:
Handshake timed out, disconnecting from 46.36.218.180:9372

Nah, it is different pool. Your one runs on 46.36.218.180
We can try to connect though. What is your P2P port?

One more P2P pool:
http://5.9.116.22:8372/static/

minerd  -a qubit -o http://5.9.116.22:8372

You can use it as failover

Not yet. Should I?
And it is not about hate at all. That's about the idea of decentralization and security which is being ruined by large pools. like ypool of ghash.
What is the reason for people to invest if they see a coin which is controlled by a single party?
I think the fact ypool has over 51% in XPM and PTS lead to price decrease.

With ypool owning 100% of MTC network and GPU miner coming soon. Do you think there is a feature for this coin? How does it differ from hundreds scrypt clones?

4788:      if (allowedBotHosts != null && !allowedBotHosts.contains(req.getRemoteHost())) {
6700:       if (allowedUserHosts != null && !allowedUserHosts.contains(req.getRemoteHost())) {


I wouldn't rely on getRemoteHost, in some cases it's not providing legit info. It can be spoofed.
Or it can be proxy/balancer address.

Does security flaw count?

This is a good example of Often Misused: Authentication (see https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Often_Misused:_Authentication)
5995: if (allowedUserHosts == null && !InetAddress.getByName(req.getRemoteAddr()).isLoopbackAddress()) {
6030: if (allowedUserHosts == null && !InetAddress.getByName(req.getRemoteAddr()).isLoopbackAddress()) {
6065: if (allowedUserHosts == null && !InetAddress.getByName(req.getRemoteAddr()).isLoopbackAddress()) {

This is a bad idea to rely on remoteAddr (which can spoofed) when you do authorization checks.
I didn't do any risk assessment of removePeer, removeActivePeer and removeBlacklistedPeer so have no idea how critical are these functions. But it looks like the idea was to restrict this functionality only to requests coming from localhost. And the way it is done... Bit insecure I'd say.

OK. Here we go:

1209:   ObjectOutputStream objectOutputStream = new ObjectOutputStream(fileOutputStream);
same story here. If Exception is thrown - stream stays unreleased.

2877:    OutputStream outputStream = connection.getOutputStream();
there is a catch block at 2919, maybe close it there?

2883:          InputStream inputStream = connection.getInputStream();
same as above

3299:    static void loadTransactions(String fileName) throws Exception {
FileInputStream fileInputStream = new FileInputStream(fileName);
         ObjectInputStream objectInputStream = new ObjectInputStream(fileInputStream);

and

3437: saveTransactions

805:   static void loadBlocks(String fileName) throws Exception {
         
         FileInputStream fileInputStream = new FileInputStream(fileName);
         ObjectInputStream objectInputStream = new ObjectInputStream(fileInputStream);
         blockCounter = objectInputStream.readInt();
         blocks = (HashMap<Long, Block>)objectInputStream.readObject();
         lastBlock = objectInputStream.readLong();
         objectInputStream.close();
         fileInputStream.close();
         
      }
Streams are about to close at the end of the method. But if there is an Exception thrown (any of .read* can do that) - they are not.
Unreleased resources in servlets => DOS.

I've found few more such things if you're interested.

6098:                String recipientValue = req.getParameter("recipient"), amountValue =  req.getParameter("amount"), feeValue = req.getParameter("fee"), deadlineValue = req.getParameter("deadline");

6109:             deadline = (short)(Double.parseDouble(deadlineValue) * 60);


deadlineValue comes from HttpServletRequest and passed to parseDouble which is vulnerable to DOS prior to JRE 6.23

see http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/alert-cve-2010-4476-305811.html

Yeah, this is irritating a bit. Registered here to participate in Nxt code flaw hunt (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=397183.0).
Took some time to dig out why I can't post