I find it hilarious that they wave around some random 'tainting service database website' evaluation as if it was definitive proof of anything.  This is so unprofessional - either the people behind OpenChange are clueless of how all of this works or they are actually malicious. In both cases definitive signs of a service to avoid. I don't have to explain why such a website link is no proof of anything. But just to reiterate: anyone can set up a little web server that does basic parsing of transactions and give them some random score. For all we know, such blockchain analysis can be (and often are confirmed to be) close with governments and other authorities; meaning they can directly censor people if we accept such websites' opinions as truth. Most probably in this case, they flag anything that looks like it comes from ChipMixer as '95% risk' or whatever. I will check later with a ChipMixer withdrawal. Even if someone tumbled stolen coins through CM, there would be no way to return those funds to the legitimate owner, so there is no legit use in freezing them. To OpenChange; if you're reading this: if the exchange you work with, uses such explanations to steal your funds; and then you try to pass these costs on to your customers, I'm sorry, but you're the stupid party in this business relationship. Your customers know that all this 'tainting talk' and 'risky transactions' is bullshit. Like: how is a Bitcoin transaction risky for you? It's the most irreversible way of transfering money; you got your coins, you're done. No amount of 'alleged risk' will result in an actual risk to your company. It does bring up the question as to why exchanges are relying on third parties to define tainted vs. clean bitcoin. Who gave these third party companies the authority to decide other than the exchange, and why do these exchanges think they're entitled to break the law based on some random third party's claims? If Openchange was operating in the US, they would have their asses handed to them in their own hat for pulling this kind of shit. The AMLbot they purport to be using is registered to a company that's based in the UK. The UK must have some laws that protect consumers' funds from being frozen by rogue financial services. It seems that if the OP decided to sue, the company behind AMLbot could be held liable for providing misleading, or downright false information. It's starting to look like any exchange that contracts with a third-party AML "authority" is only doing so to shift blame when they decide to abuse their power. |
|
|
|
So it is concluded that open source wallets are safer to use as compared to close source wallets.
Let's not conflate safety and trust, but generally speaking the answer to this question is "yes." Open source software removes the need to trust the developers. Even if you are incapable of auditing the code yourself, you can relay on a large and unaffiliated group of coders who will audit the code to ensure the developers have no ill intent. Does that make it safe? Not necessarily, it could still be full of bugs or difficult to use, and cause all kinds of trouble even though it's "trusted" to not steal your coins. But then hard wallet Ledger is closed source too. So it is recommended to use the Trezor hardware wallet instead of the ledger? Why do people trust Ledger wallet even though it's closed source firmware?
I tend to agree with BHC; Ledger is great at marketing and tend to pursue the latest shitcoinery fads to remain at the top of the hardware wallet market. But just because their firmware is closed-source it's not necessarily unsafe to use their hardware wallet. The Ledger is probably not as good of an example as the ColdCard, which is also closed source. Due to the way the ColdCard works (or can be configured to work) it may be (arguably) the safest hardware wallet on the market despite the fact that the firmware is closed-source. It's not perfect, and has had some vulnerabilities exposed in the past, but so to has the Trezor and other open-source hardware wallets. |
|
|
|
55 hours have passed mate
Trofo is correct, you should contact the on-site support team. They should be able to clear up your issue pretty quick.
Never forget also to check all the predictions threads for Wimbledon, UFC, Brasil football and more  I have not been picking it right recently but many great chances for freebets! jeremypwr's prediction threads are a lot of fun. I'm not a tennis fan at all, but the UFC and Sao Paulo predictions are keeping my Premier League withdrawals from getting too bad. |
|
|
|
|
11) Rafael Fiziev
10) Caio Borralho
09) Said Nurmagomedov
08) Jared Vanderaa
07) Jamie Mullarkey
06) Cynthia Calvillo
05) Ricky Turcios
04) Antonina Shevchenko
03) Tresean Gore
02) Kennedy Nzechukwu
01) Ronnie Lawrence
Match 80 Total Strikes?
|
|
|
|
I know everyone in this thread hates the Cowboys, however, what is everyone's analysis and opinion on Dak Prescott?
Probably a better Bet than Lance but just.  Hey now! That hurts my feeling.
I think Dak Prescott will probably have a pretty decent year if he remains healthy. His upside potential is really high but he seems to never capitalize on it for a lengthy period of time, always coming up short. It certainly doesn’t help that he lost Amari Cooper to the browns. CeeDee Lamb is pretty good but losing that 1-2 punch going to hurt.
Dak will have a very good year, statistically speaking, and so will the 17 opposing offenses he faces. The Cowgirlies will finish 10 and 7, and win the East. I think that's a safe prediction.
This is pretty crazy and really sad. I simply do not understand how people can get this badly addicted to slots machines. The lesson here certainly doesn’t just stop with slot machines, this really goes to anyone for any type of gambling addiction. Hopefully he can get his life back together at some point.
Wrong thread, dude. Don't make have to clean up after you.  |
|
|
|
Bisq is my favorite exchange, but in the OP's case he may not have enough BTC for the security deposit and to sell the amount he needs. Those are likely to work better for the OP, as well as Localbitcoins and Paxful, but the risk of chargebacks is what keeps me away from those exchanges. On this forum, you can try to sell your coins on Currency exchange. You can use escrow. This is another good option, but if you use this method make sure you only deal with reputable members. Again, the risk of chargebacks is real. Most escrow providers here on the forum won't touch crypto to fiat transfers, there's too much risk and no where near enough reward if thing go sideways. |
|
|
|
i run a shortcut without any wallet parameter just prune parameter
I seem to recall running into this issue with BitcoinQT on Windows some time ago. I don't remember exactly how I fixed it, and I'm at work right now so I don't have a node to play with to show some examples, but here's what I would try first: Open a terminal window (CMD or PowerShell,) and cd into the directory where you have Bitcoin installed, example: > cd "C:\Program Files\Bitcoin"
Then try the loadwallet command to load a wallet that does exist, and set the optional load_on_startup flag to true. Example: > bitcoin-cli loadwallet "C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Roaming\Bitcoin\wallets\<walletname>" true
|
|
|
|
@jamyr, I opposed the flag. I don't think this justifies the flag at all. The report page, to which you provided a link, makes a very vague statement about what the reward will be, and specifies that you must be the first to report it. Rewards may vary depending on the bug, and they will be given in BTC if you are the first one to find it on our website.
In the email chain they claim their developers are already aware of the bug, and I don't have any reason to doubt them. If you like the site, and want it persist, then reporting bugs shouldn't be dependent on being rewarded. Reporting bug is noble thing to do, and offering a bounty is also a noble thing to do, but making a stink about what the reward is, or how it's delivered isn't a good look, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
The e-mail account I use on this forum I generally don't use for much else, but I happened to check it just a little while ago and got three e-mails from bitcointalk stating that someone had used the "forgot password" function for my account, and all three attempts were over the course of about an hour.
Send the big man a PM with the time stamps of the emails, he might have the IP of the culprit. Of course it could just be a tor exit node or whatever, but it could be not. I'm not crazy, right?
Um, no comment, but that's off topic.  That means someone is trying to get into my account, right? What I don't understand is why that person would try to do that if they don't know what my e-mail is.
Sounds that way to me. And after giving it a little thought, I have exposed a few e-mail addresses to members of the forum in the past, whether through deals or by becoming acquaintances with those members. I'm wondering if one of those people thought I used whatever e-mail they had as my forum e-mail....and that's a frightening thought.
You should change all the passwords on those email accounts, pronto. If they've been compromised you may not know unless the culprit sent an email. Or changed the password.  So if you should happen to see my account start posting in the Russian section or if my English deteriorates to brain-vegetable bounty hunter quality, just know that I got hacked and neg my account to high hell until I get it back.
This is the first time something like this has happened to me since I've been a member. Yikes.
Honestly, it sounds like an amateur attempt. Still you may want to assess the strength of the passwords for your forum account and the affiliated email account, and take action if needed. |
|
|
|
After several attempts old version of GPG4win or the newest version in Kleopatra, I can't seem to make it work when trying to use the lookup on the server. It's loading and nothing comes up.
Interesting. Honestly it's been a while since I've had Kleopatra installed on my main rig. I have it installed a Win10 VM and I must have already changed the default server because I didn't have that issue. I just fired up my Ubuntu VM, installed Kleopatra, and sure enough on that system the client couldn't connect to the server. There was no server set in the defaults. To set a preferred server as the default, click on the "Settings" menu, then click on "Configure Kleopatra."  Once set it seems to work just fine. 
This is the audit log from Kleopatra after verifying signature and Electrum installer gpg: Signature made 28/05/2022 9:03:12 pm Malay Peninsula Standard Time
gpg: using RSA key 637DB1E23370F84AFF88CCE03152347D07DA627C
gpg: Can't check signature: No public key
gpg: Signature made 27/05/2022 11:19:37 pm Malay Peninsula Standard Time
gpg: using RSA key 0EEDCFD5CAFB459067349B23CA9EEEC43DF911DC
gpg: Can't check signature: No public key
gpg: Signature made 27/05/2022 9:54:11 pm Malay Peninsula Standard Time
gpg: using RSA key 6694D8DE7BE8EE5631BED9502BD5824B7F9470E6
gpg: Good signature from "Thomas Voegtlin (https://electrum.org) <thomasv@electrum.org>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Thomas Voegtlin <thomasv1@gmx.de>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "ThomasV <thomasv1@gmx.de>" [unknown]
gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
Primary key fingerprint: 6694 D8DE 7BE8 EE56 31BE D950 2BD5 824B 7F94 70E6 That's normal. The critical thing is that it says " Good signature from "Thomas Voegtlin (https://electrum.org) <thomasv@electrum.org>"." This indicates you have the ThomasV's key in your keyring, but the "Warning" means you haven't signed the key with your own GPG key. |
|
|
|
Is the reason the DMG (and possibly the EXE/MSI windows binaries as well - tar.gz does not support signatures anyway) is not signed because of the complexity of getting and maintaining a code-signing certificate from a 3rd party? I would like to hear the developers' stance on this.
The Windows binaries for release 23.0 (and IIRC 22.0 as well) were indeed signed by a Microsoft code signing certificate. One of the recent release wasn't signed because the certificate was expired at the time of release (if I remember correctly,) but that's an exception not the rule.
1 questio - Why after -Why did a lot of participants appear in the keys after 3 actions if I added only 1 -Michael Ford?
The .asc file has many signatures in it, including Michael Ford's signature. The GPG verification process checks all the signatures in the .asc file, regardless of how many (or few) developer keys you've imported into your keyring. 2 question - the shazam -256 SHA256SUMS.asc command what does it have to do with checking the "bitcoincore" installation file? I can 't get the gist of it .
the output of the command: a valid user signature gives additional confidence that the installation file "bitcoincore.dmg" is really good?
I'm sorry if I misunderstand you, there might be some confusion due to a language barrier. You don't need the sha256 hash of the SHA256SUMS file. Use GPG to verify the SHA256SUMS file with the signature file, which is named SHA256SUMS.asc. Once the SHA256SUMS file has been verified with GPG then you know the sha256 hashes within the file are authentic. Now you can check the sha256 hash of the bitcoincore.dmg file, and it should match the corresponding hash you find in the SHA256SUMS file. 3 question -checking the sha256 installation file is not enough to make sure that the file is good?
No. That only provides half of the verification to ensure the file is good. |
|
|
|
Looking good to me! I like how from the side and back it keeps the same black-gold-white 'sandwich' design aesthetic. Being a little larger is also welcome, since v1 is really really small. With the reduced thickness it may be possible to put in a small purse, pocket or similar without it sticking out. That's something I will test out in the real world when I get it.
I like that it's slightly wider and taller, and even though it's not much thinner it makes the thickness more proportional over all. The form factor makes it look like a small, cheap phone, which camouflages it from the uninitiated. That's a good thing. Still not a fan of the golden buttons on the front; I consider taking them out and spray-painting them..  Not to stereotype my own race, but it looks like they have Arabs running their aesthetic design team. Color display wasn't really needed for me and the UI looks more cluttered; but I'm by far most curious to see what battery life it will have. It's a little funny 'anecdote' that the v1's batteries are actually almost empty when they took that picture. Really the biggest issue with v1.
The display looks much brighter in the photos, but I wonder how much of that is due to the battery level on V1. Anyway, my aging eyes are likely to appreciate the colors, sometimes it's easier to see contrasting colors other than black and white. Anyway, I'm patiently waiting for your review... And a Black Friday sale.  |
|
|
|
Thank you I had the time to try it again and it indeed worked this time. I think the first time I simply didn't correctly choose testnet. Now that everything works I will try some stuff with multisig which is very nice implemented if you have access to more than one ColdCard.
You don't need a second ColdCard to play with multi-sig, you can have one signer from on the ColdCard and the other on a desktop wallet or a different brand of hardware wallet. Have you had a chance to play with the Bip85 seed generator? That's a pretty darn cool feature, and perfect for secondary seed phrases. I didn't even know about that bip until I got my ColdCard and started researching the implementation of that feature. |
|
|
|
It looks like wasabists don't think users would care (and they're probably right) so it's not worth splitting scarce liquidity into multiple services. And it doesn't look like there are any competitors lining up to ridicule them for chain analysis and to take their non-caring users.
It might still be too early to count out any competition, but Wasabi's dwindling download numbers suggest that customers do care. BTW Mercury is dead and Mazda is not owned by Ford anymore Say What? Next your going to tell me that Fiat owns Jeep!?!?!  |
|
|
|
|
Introducing HorseRadish, the CoinJoin/JoinMarket privacy wallet that doesn't cockblock any UTXOs...
Really, what's wrong with offering two or more products that provide different services? Lincoln, Mercury, Ford, Mazda... They all compete against each other, but they're all owned by the same entity. How difficult would it be to have two separate products/services that offer different types of obfuscation?
|
|
|
|
Some of us were lucky to get two. Even nutildah got one, despite being absent for a long time and (AFAIK) not joining the ridicule of nullius' latest sockpuppet.
Uncle nutildah had three before it was cool to have two. |
|
|
|
I wanted to know if it's enough for me to simply backup the wallet.dat file on an encrypted USB stick? This way I can practically remove Bitcoin Core from my desktop and if I ever wanted to send my funds elsewhere I can re-import the wallet.dat file again, but I can still send funds to this wallet. That's a perfectly reasonable thing to do, and as others have alluded you should make multiple back ups, on different types of media such as CD and USB/MicorSD. I also wonder, if this wallet.dat file is stolen by someone, but my wallet was encrypted, is the wallet.dat file encrypted? Or was that just a local encryption for my desktop.
If you need a password to spend from the wallet, then it is indeed encrypted. Even a wallet with exceptionally strong password/encryption that's been stolen should be considered compromised. Don't wait, move all funds immediately. And perhaps it's also possible, or necessary to store individual private keys in text on a seperate device such as an encrypted USB stick? I was thinking the private keys could be encoded in an encoding language to make them slightly extra secure incase any thief has no idea what he's doing.
Recent releases of bitcoin core are hierarchical deterministic (HD) wallets, and you can use the HDSEED to backup and restore the wallet. An easy way to obtain your HD seed and back up several private keys (including imported ones) all at once is to use dumpwallet. That will create a clear text file with a bunch of your private keys and associated addresses, but one key is of particular importance; it'll be labeled "hdseed1." It's a WIF private key, and it can be used to restore a bitcoin core HD wallet with all the other addresses and change addresses. It will not restore any private keys that were imported using importprivkey or importmulti. Generally speaking I shy away from storing my backups digitally. I don't trust the archival longevity of digital media. The backups I trust most are seed phrases written on paper. A private key or a QR code on paper is also extremely robust, in my opinion. The most important thing, however is redundancy. |
|
|
|
Are you sure there is no personal problem between you guys ?
nullius has a personal problem with everyone who doesn't suckle at the fountain of nullian superiority. Be careful, you might get a red-tag (or two) for every post you make in this thread that questions his convictions, or (god forbid) his sanity. |
|
|
|
I believe keys.gnupg.net is still the default keyserver for gnupg??
I don't think so. Recent releases of Kelopatra seems to be using hkps://keyserver.ubuntu.com/ as the default server, which is my favorite to use. It seems to be the most reliable and responsive. I've had good luck with hkps://keys.openpgp.org/ as well. The GnuPG core service doesn't actually have any defaults set, as far as I can tell. It's supposed to search a bunch of servers by default, although I seem to recall reading that specific key servers can be set as defaults in one of the configuration files. I've never messed with it though, so I'm not sure. |
|
|
|
That wasn't my reasoning for starting that poll and making that suggestion, but yes, that would indeed make it much harder for trust system self-scratchers to pad their scores. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
