Conveniently, they do not mention that DoH does nothing for your privacy when someone can monitor your traffic. Let's assume you used DoH to resolve a domain to its IP. Now you can be happy because your ISP (or any middlemen) cannot see where you go, right? Wrong. 1a. If the target website has a dedicated IP, the bad guys can try a PTR lookup for the domain name, 1b. or just check the certificate for the domain names it is valid for: echo | openssl s_client -connect 1.1.1.1:443 2>&1 | openssl x509 -noout -text | grep 'DNS:' 2. If the target website is a virtual host (shares the same IP with other websites) then the bad guys just have to watch the traffic, because in order to offer the correct certificate, the server first needs to know where you want to go. And because you cannot have a TLS session without the certificate, your client sends out the server_name in plain over HTTP first to tell the server which certificate to send back. 3. Thanks to OCSP (not stapled), the browser will send a request to the CRL-URL of the CA via HTTP (not HTTPS) so it can be seen in plain text in your traffic. 4. If you use Firefox, the bad guys just need to reply to a DNS query for use-application-dns.net with NXDOMAIN to disable DoH (for now). So, to sum it up, you get no additional privacy, but less. Having 99.9% of all DNS requests centralized will sooner or later get the attention and interest of not only data-analysts and advertising networks, but also governments. DoH theoretically protects you from forged replies, but only if you really trust Cloudflare. However, DNSSEC was specifically designed to let the zone-master sign the reply and is already fully functional and available. |
|
|
|
What is happening? I really do not like this cloudflare thing.
Somewhere I read theymos is too lazy to code a script that will save us from DDOS without cloudflare, my memory is not serving me well though.
You cannot just write a script to stop a DDoS. If it was that easy, every CMS system and OS would have it already implemented. DDoS works mostly by saturating your uplink; while a script on a server can still filter requests, it cannot reduce traffic before it reaches that server. DoH is long overdue, but unfortunately has many downsides that weren't remedied properly. It's all good though, 99.9% of you guys are sheep.
It only has downsides. 1. Supporters say that it stops your ISP from snooping, but DoH would concentrate 99.9% of all requests at Cloudflare. If you do not trust your ISP, why trust Cloudflare? Because they promise not to spy? Yeah, sure. 2. Since DoH is just a HTTP request, every piece of software/malware can contact its own hardcoded resolver and ignore system DNS settings. That's a bullet into the head for most DNS based adware/malware filters. Yes, you can define your own resolver in Firefox, but how many average people will do that? Right now you block udp/tcp port 53 to stop access to resolvers except those you allowed. 3. If it would really be about securing DNS with encryption, Mozilla/Google/et al would support DoT which is already defined in RFC7858 which would smoothly integrate into current networks instead of risking to break a core functionality of the Internet. 4. DoT provides the same security as DoH, and still leaves users all the filter/blocking options DNS currently has. You would only enforce DoH if you want all user data concentrated at a single point, ripe for analysis, profiling, censorship, tracking and spying. There is no reason to trust Cloudflare more than your ISP, so the trust argument is entirely void. |
|
|
|
the Antivirus gave the error as "Dangerous Web Page Blocked"
You may disable Antivirus from my website
Starts thread as cooltoadfrommoon Replies as IamGB On a board about cryptocurrencies Looks totally legit |
|
|
|
do you read post? this is not my address, btc is for listing to exchange So, two questions then: 1. Who gets the 0.5btc in the end? 2. Why don't you send 0.5btc to get the 500 votes? Someone who is serious with a new coin should be able to invest that much. |
|
|
|
I have been talking with few developers and they like idea, but it will be hard core coding. We will see if there can be an agreement on timeframe for timestamping TX
Will you give us any names so we can invite them to share their opinions here, or were these talks super-secret with you only and under the premise that you must not under any circumstance reveal who they are? |
|
|
|
Obviously you have no idea what bitcoin is. Nor do you understand macro economics and why is important for cash to flow. Stop fool yourself and living in a 100$/satoshi world. What you gonna do if all developers will agree with this implementation and most of miners and nodes will implement this solution? You sue the bitcoin?
It's pretty pointless to discuss this with you because you keep ignoring the arguments which render your suggestion pointless. You can add new digits and split satoshis if needed, so your "problem" of lost coins is non-existant.Besides, there is no need to sue. People can then simply switch to a fork which does not steal your coins and does not make you pay fees for holding. Please go troll somewhere else. |
|
|
|
@Bitsky,
You mean arguments like people cannot use their private key because they simply can't do it?
If in 100 years a wallet cannot make an output transaction u think after 100 years he remember where he wrotte his privatekey?
No, you want to force users to make transactions. That includes paying fees for something you don't even want to do. In essence, you suggest a "please let me keep my bitcoins" tax. If I buy one ton of gold and bury it, do I have to prove ownership every x years? No. Will it be taken away from me? No. If I get 1 million fiat and keep it under my bed, do I have to prove ownership every x years? No. Will it be taken away from me? No. @Kakmakr
What makes u think bitcoin developers that invented bitcoin cannot make an output Tx from their early mined wallets?
The rest who wannabe just like those people that find a problem to any solution , well, be my guest!
I can bet this solution will be implemented in bitcoin core, maybe not in the next upgrade of core. But a similar solution will be implemented. It needs only majority of nodes and miners to implement it.
I would not be surprised to be implemented in other alt coins first.
It will not be implemented, simply because people understand that what you suggest boils down to expropriation and control over your money by a 3rd party. Bitcoin was created to make exactly that impossible. The problem is that if more will lose wallets and bitcoins, network itself will suffer, now you do not feel lost bitcoins because demand is low. When demand will increase in 50 years, then all those 4mil coins will matter . I do not offer a solution for owner that lost money, i offer solution for healthy of network. The owner of lost wallet have no chance to get back money, but network will keep entire coins in circulation.
Anyway i do not see bitcoin as a single global currency. So, for me personal i do not gain anything . I think even those who lost wallets will agree to let those coins return in circulation as a reward for mining blocks.
Wrong, because if demand at some point will be so high that single Satoshis are worth hundreds of dollars, devs can simply add more decimals and split Satoshis. And if you don't think that's possible, look at the stock market where it is pretty common to split and join stocks to make them better trade-able again. |
|
|
|
Yeah, timeframe 2 years was just used as an example, it can be 100 years and it will be healthy for network. Supposing that someone 100 years old will have enough time to make 1 single transaction output on those funds to reset timestamp. Even if the algo will be written after last 1 satoshi will be mined to take in place the timestamping. And move those funds back into circulation.
Congratulations for conveniently ignoring my other arguments. Again, dropping hundreds or thousands of BTC into a system where people deal with millionth fractions of a single BTC can easily cause an inflation. That's similar to what irresponsible countries do when debts go through the roof: print money. We've seen those results more than enough times; it never works. Just forget what you consider lost. What you think is lost might be someone else's long-term investment. Also, your proposal is not free for users. They are forced to either pay a transaction/keep-alive fee, or loose their money. And we have seen fees that were higher than the actual transaction amount. Lost coins are no issue because remaining coins can be split infinitely. You are beating a dead horse. |
|
|
|
This is not a proposal of forking network!
By timestamping first wallet transaction with real time date/hour/seconds into ledger history, bitcoin core software nodes can make an agreement that if, for example:
during the next 2 years the wallet's public address that was timestamped do not output any Tx, bitcoin nodes take those funds and place them into next block header.
If a public address will make a new output tx with any amount of tokens will be re-stamped with date that was realized the last tx.
If the public address won't put a minimum of 1 transaction in 2 years, those funds from public address will be moved into next block of transactions.
I know it sounds easy. But to translate into coding, it is very hard to accomplish.
In bitcoin is harder to be implemented due to multi-sig public keys .
I cannot see another solution to this problem, which can become very important in far future.
I would call this process (Proof of owner's wallet)
As interesting as it may be to bring lost coins back into circulation, there is no real way to proof that the key for an address has been lost. Two years are way too short; for example, I have coins in cold storage which are much older, and I don't plan to move them in the next two years. Also, what happens in case you are unable to access your funds just because you can't? Imagine you have a really bad accident and are in coma for two years: you wake up and all your money is gone. If you want to keep using the age of coins, better consider something like 100 years instead. However, even that might be a very bad idea: assume there is an address with 100BTC which is really lost. Based on your proposal, in 100 years those 100BTC would come back into circulation and some miner would be very happy; but, at that point the network most likely has gone to a level where single Satoshis are the normal amount and worth maybe $1-$10 each. Now you drop 100BTC what will crash the price and effectively make all BTC users have less. If there is a point where Satoshis are getting too expensive, the better idea is to just add more decimals and create eg Minitoshis, Microtoshis or Nanotoshis. |
|
|
|
|
A few hints/ideas:
- cron runs as its own user with its own ENV, so $PATH etc differs from other users
- try running it in cron as your own user (kullanici)
- cd into your homedir before trying to start the bot since it seems unable to find modules ("No module named Trading")
- set the directory for the modules (PYTHONPATH or sys.path.append)
If you know someone who is good with Linux, let him have a look directly at your system. It's hard to debug something if you cannot do anything yourself.
Only let that do someone you really trust and look over his shoulder to see what he is doing at any time.
|
|
|
|
|
How about doing a little research first? There are tons of tutorials on how to add a crontab entry.
You need to learn how to handle the basics of your Linux install if you want to rely on it.
|
|
|
|
|
Why don't you try to put it into crontab with /home/kullanici/restart_script.sh?
I thought you had it working with cron already?
|
|
|
|
Instead of keeping a terminal open, send it to background and redirect the output into a logfile. I would try something like this: #!/usr/bin/bash
if [[ ! $(pgrep -f "rtgferfd.py") ]]; then
echo "Bot down"
python rtgferfd.py --solid --r --fr --quantity 35 --wait_time 34 > /var/log/rtgferfd.log 2>&1 &
fi
if [ "$(grep -c "LINE LINE LINE" /var/log/rtgferfd.log)" -gt "0" ]; then
echo "Bot died"
pkill -f "rtgferfd.py"
python rtgferfd.py --solid --r --fr --quantity 35 --wait_time 34 > /var/log/rtgferfd.log 2>&1 &
fi
But really, fix the bugs in the bot instead of trying to bandaid them with workarounds. |
|
|
|
|
1: No, it only checks when you execute it. It's a one-time check. If you see more processes, maybe your bot uses forks/threads.
2: Adding it to cron means the script will be run in the intervals you define, 24x7. So if you want your bot to be checked even when you're asleep, add it. But you will have to use full paths or it will fail via cron. As long as the bot runs you won't see anything, but when it gets restarted, cron should send off an email to you (if it's configured that way) and restart it.
Or, you could find out what causes the bot to crash and fix that.
|
|
|
|
If the command pgrep exists, try this: #!/usr/bin/bash
if [[ ! $(pgrep -f "rtgferfd.py") ]]; then
echo "Bot down"
python rtgferfd.py --solid --r --fr --quantity 35 --wait_time 34 &
fi
If not, this: #!/usr/bin/bash
if [ "$(ps ax | grep "rtgferfd.py" | grep -vc grep)" -eq "0" ]; then
echo "Bot down"
python rtgferfd.py --solid --r --fr --quantity 35 --wait_time 34 &
fi
Make sure you use full paths though, or you might run into troubles with restarting. This script should run fine via cron. Put it into a file and tell cron to run it eg every minute. Try it manually first: name it test.sh or whatever you want to call it and execute it. If your bot is running, you should see not output. If it is not, your bot should appear in the processlist afterwards. |
|
|
|
Your code will look for that PID but that PID will disappear and wont exist anymore.
No, the code checks either if a pid exists (given via eg a pidfile) or if a given process exists by name (as in, has a pid). You don't know the pid before you start a process. From the top of my head, you could try something like that as a cronjob: #!/usr/bin/bash
if [[ ! $(pidof yourbot) ]]; then
echo "Bot down"
#command to restart your bot
fi
Look into the processlist to see under what name your bot is running (with "ps ax" for example). Let's say it's "yourbot": then "pidof yourbot" will always return a pid, unless your bot has crashed and its process is gone. As a side note: I assumed your bot is running only once; otherwise the approach needs to be changed a bit. |
|
|
|
|
Well sure it does. You get a new pid assigned every time.
When you check it and see that it's not running, then your watchdog script just needs to run the command which starts your bot again after it crashed.
If your bot is running as a service, you might want to look into systemd; afaik you can set in a unit file that it automatically restarts a service.
|
|
|
|
|
Does your script create a pidfile in eg /var/run? If so, you can use a cronjob to see if the pid still exist ("kill -0 `cat /var/run/myprocess.pid`").
If there is no pidfile, you can use top to see if the process is still running ("pidof myprocess" or "ps -x | grep myprocess | grep -v grep | awk {'print $1'}")
|
|
|
|
|
You might want to take a look at pywallet too. You need to install Python first (unless you're a Linux user where it's most likely already there).
Make a bunch of copies to different media first just to be sure and play around with pywallet.
I suggest you exhaust all your own options first before handing your wallet over to someone else.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
