Mozilla is considering pinning keys on first site access. So the only way to MITM false certs is during the first access (which makes it same to ssh's flaw on server fingerprint (aka ~/.ssh/known_hosts)).
I would love it  The only way to provide this sort of pinning with any browser is to delete all trusted CAs before browsing any HTTPS site. |
|
|
|
Forging a SSL cert only enables the possibility of a man-in-the-middle attack from being transparently obvious when it's no longer signed properly. However, you still have to accept the change in certificate for the forged-SSL MIM attack to work. Did you log in to MtGox from strange internet connections in shady places? Or did MtGox get their DNS forged as well?
No, a forged cert from DigiNotar would allow to transparently execute a MiTM attack against an end-user, without her seeing any security warning whatsoever. Except in 1 scenario, see below... Is there actually a browser that will remember a certificate and complain if that cert is replaced with a different valid CA-signed cert?
...only 1 browser would warn you: Chrome, because Google hard-coded hashes of the public keys for a small number of high-profile websites certificates keys. This is called public key pinning. |
|
|
|
Most of the pledged pool will be from exactly that, from a pool operator with an axe to grind with Vinced, that has pledged to help.
You jest, vinced hardly ever talks to anyone and waits weeks before sending responses. It'd take years to build up enough of a conversation to get a decent grudge going. Don't have any knowledge of why, but they approached me to help out. "Nearly 1Th/s" you said this pool's capacity was? Only ArsBitcoin fits that description at currently 700 Gh/s. All other pools are either smaller or much larger. Unless it is a private pool... Or a larger pool who will commit only a fraction of its capacity... (Cue the "I told you so we shouldn't let the big pools control x% of the network"). |
|
|
|
Now the even worse news. NMC has a lame network speed of less than 35 GH/s and the 51% mark is only is 17.51 GH/s.
No. You need to add 35 Gh/s to be at 50% of the total. |
|
|
|
After a lengthy conversation with MagicTux, unless it does turn up that mtgox has been hacked, neither of us can figure out what happened. Its obviously not me and I didn't fall for a phishing expedition, and Im pretty sure its not on his end. His description of security on the new post-hack mtgox is pretty decent. Its not perfect, but he has gone to great lengths to prevent a repeat.
Your compromise may be linked to a huge mystery that was never solved during the MtGox hack of June 19, 2011: many supremely strong passwords were cracked, but no one, not even Mark Karpelès, knows how it happened. One of the theories I posted in this comment is that the MtGox infrastructure has been deeply compromised, and attackers still have access to it. (I hope this is not true.) If not that, I know that we, security-conscious people, like to think it would never happen to us, but you may have fallen to sophisticated targeted attack. There are occurrences of paranoiac security guys who do get compromised. For example even if your Linux workstation is relatively secure and updated, all it would take to compromise you is a Flash 0-day and to entice you to visit a malicious site. You may say you won't fall for it, but you do it all the time: you hang in #bitcoin-mining, someone posts a URL, you click on it. Bam! User-level X11 keylogger now running on your fully patched Linux machine. Flash is by far the scariest client-side attack vector these days... |
|
|
|
|
I have lots of 5970s, so my (hopefully temporarily) devalued sale does not affect me so much.
On the other hand, I hope my experience prove a point to all the people who said "there is not enough liquidity to buy 50k": ensign_lee, Trini8ed, etc.
|
|
|
|
This was my first "high powered rig", circa August 2010
Where did you get the OpenCL-miner on August 2010?  I work for Apple in Cupertino and that's how I originally got involved with Bitcoin. A friend of mine, An Apple OS Engineer is one of the earlier adopters and got me involved. I used his version until the better ones came along. Contrary to what ArtForz claims he was not the first GPU miner nor did he ever control 25% of the network. I know personally of a three 4850 rig in May 2010. In May 2010, the hashrate of the global Bitcoin network varied from 70 to 150 Mhash/s: http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed-ever.png3 x HD 4850 are capable of 225 Mhash/s with the most optimized miners as of today: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparisonSo, assuming that this person he knows wrote a poorly optimized miner running at only ~2/3rd this speed, and was online only half the time throughout May 2010, he was contributing ~70 Mhash/s, which could explain the jump from 70 to 150 Mhash/s. BitcoinEXpress's claims sound plausible. |
|
|
|
Some people only have one computer and that must suck. Fortunately I have multiple so I can use some of my alt-miners to do this safely.
People with only one computer can still securely isolate different wallets & apps from each other by using privilege separation. For example on Linux, run bitcoin/namecoin/i0coin/etc under separate user accounts, and chmod 700 their home directories. |
|
|
|
|
Perhaps Syke is taking cgminer's best 5s peak averages instead of the all-time average? Perhaps not and he is right. I don't care enough to argue about 2.4% to send him a free copy of my miner... *shrugs*
|
|
|
|
|
I will eventually open source hdminer, but not until I test a few more optimization ideas. The high price tag is mostly because I can't afford to have its source code leaked today. On your 6950, in its current shape, you can expect a speed +2.4% faster than cgminer/phatk.
|
|
|
|
|
It is not free. I still charge for hdminer. And I am still faster than today's best on HD 69xx. I benchmarked cgminer w/phatk at 691 Mh/s on a stock 6990, compared to my 708 Mh/s.
However my speed advantage is now so thin, that I doubt anyone is interested in spending 250 BTC on hdminer... The rich feature set of cgminer probably outweighs any performance advantage I have anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
The most insightful comment to Krugman's blog so far is the one suggesting that a very simple Bitcoin fork could address the only "flaw" that Krugman noted: one could change the cap from 21M coins to a slightly inflationary model where, for example, the coins supply would inflate by +2% every year. (I put "flaw" in quotes because the cap was specifically not seen as a flaw by Satoshi.)
Think about it people. If all it takes for a decentralized crypto currency to be successful (according to this prominent economist), then this fork of Bitcoin is bound to happen.
|
|
|
|
|
That videocardz.com piece (of crap) is the worst article ever. Full of errors.
- they quote 12.16 SP TFLOPS which would be 138% more than the 6990, but they say 58% in the text (and both numbers are wrong anyway, see below)
- the 7990 is more likely to be around 8.2 SP TFLOPS with 4096 ALUs @ ~1000MHz, which would be ~61% faster than the 6990
- they write 6400 stream processors in the table, but 3200 in the text (and both are wrong, see below)
- the 7990 is more likely to have 2*2048 ALUs, certainly not 6400 (which would imply a VLIW5 5970-like manufactured in 28nm with a doubling of the # of ALUs)
- typo: s/Steam processors/Stream processors/
- etc
|
|
|
|
{'amount': 20500000, 'assets_paid': 2304, 'payment_per_share': 8897}
Dividends are paid! The miniscule amount is because this was the week I switched the meter cycle to Wednesdays from Sundays, so we're paying for a week and a half of usage with one week of production. Next week will be back to normal. Also, got one rig up today, the others should be up before tomorrow is over, then we'll be back up to full capacity. The electric bill was $230.74, and total mined BTC was 28.21.
Your cost of production is 230.74/28.21 = $8.18/BTC
This mean your mining operation is losing money at the current Bitcoin exchange rate of ~$7.
I am curious as to what is your plan to become profitable again?mrb shouldn't post while sleeping |
|
|
|
|
The buyer contacted me. Hopefully he will post in this thread to demonstrate that the sale truly happened.
First tangible good ever to be purchased with i0coins!
|
|
|
|
He said B1-A17. The right pins are A1-B17. If you can't pay attention to these details, maybe you shouldn't even be trying to short them  |
|
|
|
Woot! A buyer actually did take the offer and sent me 50k i0coins, barely 1h before the time limit! This is the first time ever that a physical good is being purchased with i0coins to my knowledge. At current exchanges rates, that's 40 BTC or 288 USD for that new AMD Radeon HD 5970. That will prove to all the pessimists above that it was possible to grab this deal without too much trouble. On a second thought I should have priced it higher. Oh well  For the record the txid was a3a387066cdad641f71c318993301f662f192765cb5a240e0ff46385e5998cca However the mystery buyer hasn't yet attempted to contact me... Please reply to this thread! |
|
|
|
|
1.85 -> A fair 15% error margin.
7950 -> No. I made a prediction NOT on this specific card, but on the 7xxx series as a whole, which you contested, therefore that's what I am betting on. It seems you once again misunderstood me (feel free to reject the bet then).
|
|
|
|
Ok. So even after these fixed taxes, your effective rate is $0.024/kWh assuming the official VEF/USD exchange rate, or $0.012/kWh assuming the black market one. This is indeed heaven for a miner. You can thank your country's gigantic petroleum reserves for that I guess the only risks/unknowns of setting up a massive mining operation in Venezuela would be availability of GPUs and other computer hardware (I know nothing of it), and stability of hardware & electricity prices (I heard of a +20% inflation rate?) |
|
|
|
how the hell you got that I don't want to bet I don't know. read...
for your purpose its on, at stock, no oc as someone else who can't read above commented. what you said stock is, its got to double that for 2 btc, and if.it lands at less than £240 you've got.yourself 4 btc. anyone got a release date?
You misunderstand my posts and you think I am claiming that "the 7xxx successor to the 5850 will overclock just like my freak 5850 by +38% and will achieve 800 Mhash/s and will be priced at <240 GBP". This is wrong. Read again: the predictions I am making are https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=32215.msg505289#msg505289 IOW Mhash/Joule at stock clock and voltage and nothing else. This is the post I want you to reply to, and you are ignoring it a 2nd time. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
