Bitcoin Forum
April 27, 2024, 08:25:27 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 [61] 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 ... 113 »
1201  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Transaction fees magically appearing, how to account for them? on: June 25, 2011, 03:15:55 PM
I created the fork.

Read here:
http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=22434.msg281703#msg281703

Binary Linux packages will be soon built, also I am currently looking for Windows & MacOS maintainers.
1202  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / [UPDATE: 2015-05-10] Bitcoin Core soft-fork "No Forced TX Fee" v0.10.1 available on: June 25, 2011, 03:14:24 PM
Warning: Only use this fork if you know what you are doing.
Otherwise, there is a low probability that some coins sent without a fee will be
lost stuck in a limbo and difficult to recover.
Read details below.

-------------------



2013-03-24 WARNING !!
PLEASE NOTE THAT UNTIL MAX BLOCK SIZE PROBLEM HAS BEEN SOLVED BY DEVELOPERS, SOME FREE (WITHOUT FEE) TRANSACTIONS CREATED BY THIS FORK MAY CONFIRM VERY SLOWLY OR NEVER.
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED, THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION.




-------------------

Okay, here we go.

So as I promised, I created the "NFTF" (short of No Forced TX Fee) section on Github.
This isn't going to be anything big & professional, just few lines of code changed comparing to the standard client.

I did it, because i was unsatisfied with standard client forcing people to pay fees, even when they are not necessary at all.
I wrote many complaints about this on multiple topics on this forum, and for unknown reasons the main developers do not want either to remove this broken algorithm, or to improve it. Mining cartel ? CIA-related conspiracy ? Who knows & Who cares. I don't know and I don't care so I am going my own way.

So here you are.

Full list of branches & tags is avaiable here:
Code:
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/branches

Branches contain code of older versions (from 0.3.21 to 0.3.24).
Tags contain newer versions, 0.4.0 and up.

----------------

Warning: Use this fork with following precautions (the same as if you would use mainline client v0.3.20 version):

- Make sure you get at least 7 confirmations first when resending the money without a fee.
- Sending small amounts (< 0.01) without any fee may be risky.
- Include a fee when sending money received from a lot of inputs.


----------------

2011-09-22 Update:

Today I have merged back the commit from trunk which fixes an unfairly high fees that have to be paid to the miners sometimes due to a bug re-introduced in 0.3.24.

For details see the discussion here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=45259.0

The patch is/will be already present in 0.4x version of official client, but i have also merged it back into 0.3.21, 0.3.22, 0.3.23 and 0.3.24 versions - for people who like to use older and more tested apps.

https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/commits/nftf-0.3.21
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/commits/nftf-0.3.22
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/commits/nftf-0.3.23 (that version already contained the patch)
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/commits/nftf-0.3.24

If you have used trunk version, it already contained the patch, merged back from official client.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/

Enjoy your no-unnecessary-fee transactions !
As always, wait for at least 7 confirmations before re-sending money so you lower the risk of transaction not being accepted by the network.


----------------
2011-09-24 Update:

NFTF - version 0.4.0 released.

Also:
- Removed all the messy git tags merged previously from the mailine client
- Created new, clean tag for NFTF-0.4.0
- Minor cosmetic changes in comments

So from now on, code will be organized in tags, not versions - as it should be from the beginning.

0.4.0 code is avaiable in the tag:
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tree/nftf-v0.4.0/

And trunk code is avaiable from the trunk, as always. I usually only update it on major version changes or important features/bugfixes, so don't expect me to keep up with mainstream client developers all the time.

Trunk: https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tree/

Also, i have performed few tests, sending back and forth small amounts of BTC (0.01) having only 2 confirmations, and it seems that my fork is stable enough for the payments to get confirmed easily (up to 2 hours) without using any fees.


----------------
2011-12-03 Update:

NFTF - version 0.5.0 released.

A fresh tag - nftf-v0.5.0 is avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

Trunk code was also updated:
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tree/


----------------
2012-01-07 Update:

NFTF - version 0.5.1 released.

A fresh tag - nftf-v0.5.1 is avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

Trunk code has also been merged back:
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tree/


----------------
2012-02-12 Update:

NFTF - versions 0.5.2 & 0.6.0rc1 released.

NOTE: From now on i will also include release candidate (rc) tags in my fork.

Fresh tags - nftf-v0.5.2, nftf-v0.6.0rc1 are avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

Trunk code has also been merged back:
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tree/


----------------
2012-03-21 Update:

NFTF - version 0.5.3.1 [critical security vulnerability hotfix] released.

Fresh tag - nftf-v0.5.3.1 is avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

More updates (other tags, trunk) should follow soon.


----------------
2012-03-25 Update:

NFTF tags for mainline client versions v0.5.3rc1, v0.5.3rc2, v0.5.3rc3, v0.5.3rc4, v0.5.4rc1, v0.6.0rc2, v0.6.0rc3, v0.6.0rc4 released.

https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

Trunk/master has also been fully updated to the latest mainline version.


----------------
2012-05-08 Update:

NFTF - versions 0.6.0.7/0.6.1 & 0.6.2 released.

Fresh tags -are avaiable for download as usual.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

Trunk code has also been merged from mainline client:
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tree/


----------------
2012-08-15 Update:

NFTF - version 0.6.3 released.

Fresh tags - nftf-v0.6.3, nftf-v0.6.2.1 are avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

Also, I may be making a new repo with Gentoo ebuilds avaiable soon, since I am creating them anyway for my Gentoo.
So stay tuned.


----------------
2012-11-04 Update:

NFTF - versions 0.7.0 & 0.7.1 released.

Fresh tags - nftf-v0.7.0, nftf-v0.7.1 are avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags


----------------
2013-01-27 Update:

NFTF - version 0.7.2 released.

Fresh tag - nftf-v0.7.2 is avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

MASTER branch was also updated to latest Bitcoin version:
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf


----------------
2013-03-24 Update:

NFTF - version 0.8.0, 0.8.1 released.

Fresh tags - nftf-v0.8.0, nftf-v0.8.1 are avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

MASTER branch was also updated to latest Bitcoin version:
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf


----------------
2013-06-23 Update:

NFTF - version 0.8.2 released.

Fresh tag - nftf-v0.8.2 is avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags


----------------
2013-08-19 Update:

NFTF - version 0.8.3 released.

Fresh tag - nftf-v0.8.3 is avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

MASTER branch was also updated to latest Bitcoin version:
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf


----------------
2013-10-07 Update:

NFTF - versions 0.8.4, 0.8.5 released.

Fresh tag - nftf-v0.8.4, nftf-v0.8.5 is avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

MASTER branch was also updated to latest Bitcoin version:
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf


----------------
2014-01-26 Update:

NFTF - version 0.8.6 released.

Fresh tag - nftf-v0.8.6 is avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

MASTER branch was updated to the last tag (0.8.6).


----------------
2014-06-01 Update:

NFTF - versions 0.9.0 & 0.9.1 released.

Fresh tags - nftf-v0.9.0, nftf-v0.9.0 are avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

MASTER branch was updated to the newest tag (0.9.1).


----------------
2014-08-10 Update:

NFTF - versions 0.9.2 & 0.9.2.1 released.

Fresh tags - nftf-v0.9.2, nftf-v0.9.2.1 are avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

MASTER branch was updated to the newest version (0.9.2.1).


----------------
2014-10-05 Update:

NFTF - version 0.9.3 released.

Fresh tag - nftf-v0.9.3 is avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags

MASTER branch was updated to the newest version (0.9.3).

----------------
2015-05-10 Update:

NFTF - versions 0.10.0 & 0.10.1 released.

Fresh tags - nftf-v0.10.0, nftf-v0.10.1 are avaiable for download.
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/tags
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/archive/nftf-v0.10.1.tar.gz
https://github.com/ShadowOfHarbringer/bitcoin-nftf/archive/nftf-v0.10.0.tar.gz

MASTER branch was updated to the newest tag (0.10.1).
1203  Economy / Economics / Re: Deflation and Bitcoin, the last word on this forum on: June 25, 2011, 01:24:29 AM
There has been a huge amount of tatter by the masses about how bitcoin is deflationary, how it's the next satan, and will end the world etc

I propose to you the new Bitcoin logo:

[image]

Actually, If something can be called a mark of the beast, then it is the crappy fiat currencies with their bank-controlled, crysis-causing & credit-powered baloon economy.
Today's monetary system is completely sick. It does not support wise investments, but only mindless spending.

Bitcoin is the cure.
1204  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: [ANN] Bitcoin v0.3.23 release candidate available on: June 23, 2011, 09:15:02 PM
Let's ask this question differently: Was the algorithm which decides what is spam and what isn't changed at all since 0.3.21 ?

No, but the minimum fee required in case it is considered "spam" was decreased to 0.0005 in 0.3.22 and to 0.0001 in 0.3.23.

Actually, i had the forced feee even when sending 10 BTC having 7 confirmations....
So i guess this wasn't fixed.
1205  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Transaction fees magically appearing, how to account for them? on: June 23, 2011, 05:01:16 PM
OK....

I shall be setting the fork on Github this weekend.

I will post details here (and in a new topic) once i create the fork.
1206  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Transaction fees magically appearing, how to account for them? on: June 23, 2011, 03:06:44 PM
And if you could do it for Windows, I would throw a bitcoin or two (at current rates) your way as a "Awesome! Thanks!"


The problem with fork is i can only compile it for Linux, somebody else has to compile Windows version.

Sad

For now, stick to the 0.3.20 version.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/

Unfortunately compiling for windows is not as easy as it is with linux.
Also, i don't have any windows installed at the moment.

I hope we find some maintainers for other operating systems.


1207  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Transaction fees magically appearing, how to account for them? on: June 23, 2011, 11:00:25 AM
Shadow, you mentioned that you downgraded to 0.3.20... is there still a link available somewhere to download a compiled version of 0.3.20?

I would 100% support a fork for a client that doesn't force transaction fees.

You should be able to select an older version via Github.
Of course, that's source-only.

Also, there are 0.3.20 (and older) binaries on SourceForge.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/

The problem with fork is i can only compile it for Linux, somebody else has to compile Windows version.

EDIT:

Completely forgot about MacOS.
I am not doing MacOS as well.
1208  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Transaction fees magically appearing, how to account for them? on: June 23, 2011, 01:09:39 AM
If transaction fees are going to be randomly enforced with no way to stop it, may as well just slap a tx fee on every tx.  Make the minimum tx fee 0.0005 BTC every time, with the option to pay more to potentially get a tx to go through faster.

But having the option to set tx fee to 0, then pay tx fees, that's just confusing, misleading, and frustrating.

+1

I don't want to keep putting band-aids on the transaction fee problem, so I'm against adding Yet Another Button to the client.

If you're impatient and can't stand the thought of paying half-a-millibitcoin for a transaction, then compile your own version of bitcoin. Just don't complain if you end up with a wallet full of 0/unconfirmed transactions that tie up all your funds.


Good that some people are making alternative clients.

I am starting to think seriously about maintaining a "No-Forced-TX-Fee" fork of the main client.
1209  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: [ANN] Bitcoin v0.3.23 release candidate available on: June 21, 2011, 08:29:05 PM
Polite bump.

Let's ask this question differently: Was the algorithm which decides what is spam and what isn't changed at all since 0.3.21 ?
1210  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: [ANN] Bitcoin v0.3.23 release candidate available on: June 21, 2011, 07:06:50 PM
But for example in 3.22 when trying to send a very low priority tx, you were forced to pay a fee. Do you now have the option to not send with a fee even though it will likely take a long time to be confirmed?

No, you have to hack the client in order to send spam.

In the future, people are considering a checkbox to avoid the recommended fee.

Was the spam-detection algorithm improved since 0.3.21 ?
In 0.3.21, even when i wanted to send some bitcoins having 7 confirmations, i had to pay the fee. Downgrade to 0.3.20 fixed the problem, and i could send the bitcoins (and later i got 2 confirmations after 45 minutes, so the transaction was OK contrary to what client claimed).

So is this finally fixed or not ?
1211  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Transaction fees should be raised to 1 or 10. on: June 21, 2011, 06:59:29 PM
The transaction fees should be raised to 1 or 10

You mean 1 BTC or 10 BTC ?
I don't understand how this could possibly work.

Is this a troll topic or am I misunderstanding something ?
1212  Economy / Trading Discussion / Re: About Mt. Gox flaw from a security expert on: June 20, 2011, 02:53:07 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

Especially when you're picking data as selectively as you do.

I'm not going to start a flamewar. Please respect my objective opinion. I will respect your personal belief.

http://people.freebsd.org/~murray/bsd_flier.html

http://www.cvedetails.com/vendor/6/Freebsd.html

http://www.cvedetails.com/vendor/33/Linux.html

Not only freebsd has less vulnerabilities, but they are also less serious (check exploit or data execution)
freebsd is also less used Tongue so there might be more bugs and exploits to discover.
i acatualy like that there has been more holes in linux, because it means that they are fixed.

+1

Everything that i wanted to say was already said here.

muad_dib, you have no idea what you are talking about. There isn't any 100% proof that BSD is either more secure or more reliable than Linux.

1213  Economy / Trading Discussion / Re: About Mt. Gox flaw from a security expert on: June 20, 2011, 09:09:44 AM
@muad_dib

At first your post seemed wise, but

1) Use the right software. IIS is a big no-no Smiley Also Linux should frowned upon. Unix is the way to go.

I stopped reading right here.

I don't know who you are, but you know nothing about security.
1214  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Deterministic wallets on: June 19, 2011, 09:27:57 PM
Definately worth of inclusion.
+1
1215  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Use .tar.xz instead of .tar.gz on: June 19, 2011, 09:18:30 PM
A lot of people don't know how to handle .xz though, so you'd still have to offer both choices in that case.

I'm not sure how much bandwidth of the download site is a problem at the moment.

On every linux distribution not older than 5 years there should be no difference for the user at all.

Bitcoin is not just linux.

You are not listening.
He is only talking about the linux package, not windows/macos.
1216  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: [PULL] Sign and verify message with bitcoin address and public key on: June 17, 2011, 06:19:15 PM
Agreed. This feature seems definately cool.

Bump for inclusion.

1217  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I just got hacked - any help is welcome! on: June 16, 2011, 07:03:14 AM
none of that helps against a compromised machine.

Actually, it does.
You may fool an attacker into thinking that he hacked all the layers, while he only hacked top 2 of them.

Maybe we are misunderstanding eachother, but what do you think gets captured by a keylogger running on the *host* where you open a VM in a VM in a VM via a VNC session and you type in a TrueCrypt password, anywhere? Bonus points for guessing the same for what happens if you press PrtScr.

Actually, i meant VNCing to the VM from a laptop.
VNCing from the same comp would have no sense as the keyloggers/screen capture/mouse movements capture would kill it.

But VNCing to the bottom layer from outside should be safe enough.

A hall of mirrors is so Commodore 64 Smiley The object of security is not complexity, in fact the simpler you can make the more secure, because the less components can contain additional vulnerabilities. This happened: firewalls containing problems which made the machine less secure than without them. Virus scanners that kill your data due to false positives etc.

Well, i didn't say this is the most secure way, i just said it is more secure than having single layer protection on a single computer.

The "separate minimal machine for Bitcoin only" is of course superior to everything.
1218  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I just got hacked - any help is welcome! on: June 15, 2011, 08:22:22 PM
none of that helps against a compromised machine.

Actually, it does.
You may fool an attacker into thinking that he hacked all the layers, while he only hacked top 2 of them.
Security by obscurity + surprise element.

It will still happily grab all of your TrueCrypt passwords, your mouse movements, all the fractal windows you have open etc.

Who needs mouse movements when you can connect to a (virtual) machine using  encrypted VNC connection ?
The possibilities are endless. VM is just the beginning of the things you can do.

there have been exploits for detecting and getting out of a VM (exactly because people expect VMs to be safe).

Not all of the exploits work on all kinds of VM's.
Also, a possible attacker may not be prepared for task of this level of complexity.

The only way you can be secure is by using a separate, clean, minimal installation on different hardware from the daily use, net connected machine.

This is certainly the best way, but having a hall of mirrors is also useful when you are only using single machine.
As I said, "the possibilities are endless. VM is just the beginning of things you can do".

Generally my thinking is that you can create multiple levels of complexity and every one of the makes it more difficult for the attacker to hack you.
1219  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I just got hacked - any help is welcome! on: June 15, 2011, 03:33:07 PM
This is the dumbest bullshit ever.

Of course it is, because you said so.
How can we ever doubt you, you are such a SMART-ASS !

Everybody please ignore this "advice."

Yes, and become easy prey to hackers of all sorts.
1220  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I just got hacked - any help is welcome! on: June 15, 2011, 03:01:00 PM
So what you're saying though is to encrypt the entire linux HD with trucrypt? right? not just create a truecrypt image on the VM's HD.

I am saying about a following scheme:

1. Create encrypted TrueCrypt hard drive.
2. Put a VirtualBox disk with VirtualBox Linux machine on it.
3. Install TrueCrypt within the Virtual Machine
4. Create encrypted TrueCrypt hard drive within the VM.
================== (LAYER 2) ==================
5. Create a VirtualBox disk with VirtualBox Linux machine on the VM.
6. Install TrueCrypt within the Virtual Machine in Virtual Machine
7. Create encrypted TrueCrypt hard drive within the VM in VM.
================== (LAYER 3) ==================
(...)
================== (LAYER 4) ==================
(...)

And so on...
Pages: « 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 [61] 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 ... 113 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!