 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
|
1
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Bitcoin core import p2wpkh
|
on: October 23, 2022, 06:43:08 PM
|
For descriptor wallet, you can try this ( to import your whole Electrum wallet): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5399337.msg60178631#msg60178631But instead of " xpub" key, import the " xpriv" key that you can get using the command in Electrum's console: getmasterprivate()Also, you must add \"active\": true, to the 'receiving' and 'change' descriptors to set those as the active descriptors. Very helpful! Thank you. I removed the \"watching-only\": false, from the descriptors also. Would this work also on a non blank wallet? Or will it cause problems to have multiple active descriptors? |
|
|
|
|
2
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Import Electrum to Bitcoin Core Descriptor Wallet
|
on: October 23, 2022, 06:40:58 PM
|
Importing each xpub key via "descriptor" can be time consuming but after setting it up, that specific wallet.dat will be able see all of the imported master keys' transactions and total their balances.
These are the steps:
Super helpful. Thank you! To make this work for a full wallet (non watching only), I did a few modifications: Instead of "xpub" key, import the "xpriv" key gotten by using the command in Electrum's console: getmasterprivate() Add \"active\": true, to the 'receiving' and 'change' descriptors to set those as the active descriptors. Remove \"watching-only\": false, from the descriptors also. Would this work also on a non blank wallet? Or will it cause problems to have multiple active descriptors? |
|
|
|
|
3
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Avast quarantined Bitcoin-QT.exe 0.13.0 binary
|
on: August 25, 2016, 03:26:29 AM
|
For someone that is concerned with verifying file checksums, state sponsored attacks, etc... I'm surprised you are using Avast! Good antivirus, but I had to remove it when they started snooping on users encrypted traffic. (MITM traffic interception using pre-installed certificates) Heres a good write-up for anyone interested: http://www.thesafemac.com/avasts-man-in-the-middle/OT maybe, but interesting nonetheless! I just verified my Google SSL certificates in Chrome are signed by GeoTrust Global (not Avast), and BofA by VeriSign. And Avast is blocking https://revoked.grc.com/ (revoked certificate test mentioned in that article). On Firefox, it is blocking the revoked certificate, but it *is* using its own certificate on google.com! Just disabled HTTPS scanning. Bad Avast! Thanks |
|
|
|
|
4
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Avast quarantined Bitcoin-QT.exe 0.13.0 binary
|
on: August 25, 2016, 02:59:40 AM
|
Hey thanks! No, it wasn't whitespace but it was email obfuscation formatting that was done on that first page! < laanwj@gmail.com> BECAME <laanwj at gmail.com> Well, it seems like a bad link for the security notice to be asking people to verify, because it's NOT going to verify! Hope someone can share this with the devs still. They should provide better, working instructions for verification if people are going to be able to fend off potential attacks. With the "raw" URL you sent, the verification is now working: *** PGP SIGNATURE VERIFICATION ***
*** Status: Good Signature
*** Signer: Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@gmail.com> (0x2346C9A6)
*** Signed: 6/24/2015 1:45:06 PM
*** Verified: 8/25/2016 4:56:28 AM
*** BEGIN PGP VERIFIED MESSAGE ***
Hello,
Starting with 0.11.0rc3, SHA256SUMS.asc will be signed with the following key:
pub 4096R/36C2E964 2015-06-24 Wladimir J. van der Laan (Bitcoin Core binary release signing key) <laanwj@gmail.com>
Primary key fingerprint: 01EA 5486 DE18 A882 D4C2 6845 90C8 019E 36C2 E964
For gitian and commit signing I will keep using this key.
Wladimir
*** END PGP VERIFIED MESSAGE ***
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Avast quarantined Bitcoin-QT.exe 0.13.0 binary
|
on: August 25, 2016, 02:07:11 AM
|
Thanks. I'm getting concerned though... On this page, there is a message posted and signed by Wladimir: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/009045.html-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Hello,
Starting with 0.11.0rc3, SHA256SUMS.asc will be signed with the following key:
pub 4096R/36C2E964 2015-06-24 Wladimir J. van der Laan (Bitcoin Core binary release signing key) <laanwj at gmail.com>
Primary key fingerprint: 01EA 5486 DE18 A882 D4C2 6845 90C8 019E 36C2 E964
For gitian and commit signing I will keep using this key.
Wladimir
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJViphCAAoJEHSBCwEjRsmmtRoIALBzJMGXzoj5t9OQSedxjnjP
sxfHuBwQxeuPYXbRlMjY5UZhmabbt0/mLRfVSdscnCzp0YxbMRwD7I6MdHqXyBtd
oS+TUfMNir5lk7Ti2hRStgvxqsAbHUJ08LlqpJXV5dq3QgeJyJwZM76a6yyaGwxP
SwqvKklQZ/qdrKOgjjn6d5HywgsmybJSDzEDR3k+ogkLsfM1jcpqZhwFeRVpk94m
SgZGLLx5zAIKcLHn4I1FaZ+OAmmS0ukYcmotMOUk6NBEjHTDfjEFBrbrlwvL4G7r
kjd1mRxkaJMxX3nJicXiEQClVoeUrMVyJrrsTGyPixSicdQbItuyLWXm37fAfE0=
=4v49
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
For some reason, when I try to verify this message with PGP (Symantec Encryption Desktop 10.3.0), using the same key, I signed **years** ago in my PGP keyring, and that still shows as verified, I am getting a mismatch: *** PGP SIGNATURE VERIFICATION ***
*** Status: Bad Signature
*** Alert: Signature did not verify. Message has been altered.
*** Signer: Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@gmail.com> (0x2346C9A6)
*** Signed: 6/24/2015 1:45:06 PM
*** Verified: 8/25/2016 4:03:21 AM
*** BEGIN PGP VERIFIED MESSAGE ***
Hello,
Starting with 0.11.0rc3, SHA256SUMS.asc will be signed with the following key:
pub 4096R/36C2E964 2015-06-24 Wladimir J. van der Laan (Bitcoin Core binary release signing key) <laanwj at gmail.com>
Primary key fingerprint: 01EA 5486 DE18 A882 D4C2 6845 90C8 019E 36C2 E964
For gitian and commit signing I will keep using this key.
Wladimir
*** END PGP VERIFIED MESSAGE ***
The key signature matches! Is there some possible incompatibility between PGP and GPG? Some whitespace / line endings mismatch? Given, that "state-sponsored" attackers are suspected to be a risk, I'm starting to get paranoid now!!! This is the first time I think I've ever seen verifications fail. Can anyone else verify the signature on that message with Wladimir's key? |
|
|
|
|
7
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Avast quarantined Bitcoin-QT.exe 0.13.0 binary
|
on: August 25, 2016, 01:29:09 AM
|
|
I just upgraded to Bitcoin-QT 0.13.0 on Windows 7 64 bit.
Before anyone asks, yes I verified the download signature against the SHA256SUMS.asc file, whose signature correctly matched that of Wladimir J. van der Laan's PGP key (that I downloaded long ago, before the recent threat announcement).
When I tried to run it for the first time, Avast did a deep scan and quarantined the binary.
Is anyone else having this issue or found a solution?
Could a file that passed signature verification still have an infection?!
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Bitfinex.com HACKED ??
|
on: August 02, 2016, 10:30:23 PM
|
Perhaps they were noticing something suspicious when the exchange halted its trading engine in the previous times. And right now they are hacked. Coincidence?
It's an easy assertion to make, but of course correlation does not prove causation. Nonetheless, NOW they're hacked.  And if *they* got hacked, with all the security layers they had in place, I really fear for the Bitcoin ecosystem. This is no MtGox rookie player. It's one thing to assert the axiom that every system is hackable. But with digital money, if that means that every dollar in crypto is hackable, well that's not good for the use of said crypto. |
|
|
|
|
10
|
Economy / Games and rounds / Re: CoinWallet.eu Stress Test Cancelled + Bitcoin Giveaway
|
on: September 10, 2015, 06:55:06 PM
|
People really need to stop it. You are suffocating the network! It is only becoming worse.
They've successfully made their point though, haven't they? Just a relatively few people increasing the transaction volume and the network becomes "suffocated." The community should address the capacity issue in one way or another. |
|
|
|
|
11
|
Economy / Games and rounds / Re: CoinWallet.eu Stress Test Cancelled + Bitcoin Giveaway
|
on: September 10, 2015, 03:14:06 PM
|
My Bitcoin Core isn't synched to the network. Should I just not bother?
It will take 3 days to sync, when you sync all coins will have been spent already. I'd say start sync'n now - can't hurt to try - who knows how long this will go on.... I'm glad I thought ahead and got synced up last night and left it running. ;-) |
|
|
|
|
13
|
Economy / Games and rounds / Re: CoinWallet.eu Stress Test Cancelled + Bitcoin Giveaway
|
on: September 10, 2015, 02:24:35 PM
|
Transaction too large to be send  In Bitcoin Core you need to use coin control. But coin control crashes my bitcoin core and it keeps loading forever. I'd say use bitcoind but that's not easy for someone without much experience. bitcoind, or bitcoin core (bitcoin xt?) w/lots of RAM |
|
|
|
|
14
|
Economy / Games and rounds / Re: CoinWallet.eu Stress Test Cancelled + Bitcoin Giveaway
|
on: September 10, 2015, 01:43:46 PM
|
|
IT WORKED!
I just managed to get some Bitcoin out of one of the recent addresses. =)
I know, I know, I'm helping the stress test by even trying. But I do think the blocksize issue has stagnated for too long. I support the idea of prioritizing a solution to this problem more urgently.
In another note, I see the estimated block delay for free transactions on cointape has shot up from 10 to >100 in the last couple hours. Seems like there is an effect.
|
|
|
|
|
20
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Tracking BitCoin in Quicken
|
on: May 25, 2015, 10:52:09 PM
|
I named my security "mBTC" because bitcoin denominations have so many decimal places. I just multiply all my trade quantities by 1000 and divide the price by the same. This works well because Quicken is setup to handle lots of decimal places in a security's price, but not so many in its shares.
For example, buying 5 bitcoin for $250.45 would go in as:
5,000 mBTC @ $0.25045
The other difference in what I do is that I mark network transfer fees using ShrsOut transactions in the investment account. This workaround isn't ideal because they show up as cost basis related transactions when you generate a capital gains report, but it's the best I could come up with. I'm curious to hear if anyone else has a better solution here.
An update to my suggestion here... I have found a very workable solution for the last point on withdrawal fees, network transaction fees, etc. Instead of using ShrsOut, I now enter these as ordinary SellX transactions. I enter the number of bitcoins taken in fees as the amount for "shares sold" and use an approximate price based on a historical quote service or another transaction the same day. Then, the key point is that I enter the full value of the transaction into the commission/fee field so that the transaction amount ends up as $0.00. This way Quicken correctly recognizes that I've lost some bitcoins, asks me to identify the lot(s) for cost basis purposes, and then shows that the whole profit went to fees. It works out perfectly for accounting at tax time. |
|
|
|
|
