Bitcoin Forum
May 17, 2024, 01:25:58 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 ... 463 »
2021  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Air Gapped Setup Versus Hardware Wallet on: February 14, 2021, 07:15:23 PM
You need to be careful of your computer not to have malware that can attack your hardware wallet during bluetooth connection for transaction signing. While I still believe more in electrum cold wallet signing with QR code generating from the watch-only which is malware resistant. Although, we still need to totally do all necessities to avoid malware.
An air-gapped is not malware resistant. It is possible to infect an airgapped wallet though transferring information from an air gap is hard. Hardware wallets are not susceptible to malware attacks. They are designed to not be compromised through any malware as the private keys should never leave the device.

About malacious attacks, there are some vulnerabilities reported in some reputed hardware wallets, while also they can be attacked if your wallet extension device (the computer you use to access it) is having malware. An example is the malware that changes recipient's address to hackers address, that is why you need to check and recheck the address you inputed before sending. The malware can be trasmited through the USB while QR code is still resistant to such which is safest for transaction signing.
An important note, hardware wallet attacks are often fairly sophisticated, save for a few of the less developed ones. They often take advantage of any sidechannel vulnerabilities which can be evasive or costly and often comes after loads of research. In comparison, the main protection against any attacks is the airgap and the airgap only. Hardware wallets are designed to resist any malware attacks and would be alright to be connected to a computer infected with malware.

Hardware wallets would always have a confirmation before signing such that the user is aware of the addresses that is in the transaction. The similar case can be made for an air gapped wallet if the user doesn't check the transaction properly.
2022  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum Air Gapped Setup Versus Hardware Wallet on: February 14, 2021, 06:36:24 PM
If this is correctly set up, is the hardware wallet inherently more secure?
I'm compelled to say yes. Hardware wallets are specifically designed to be secure with convenience at the expense of their price tags. There are also hardware wallets which are able to be airgapped efficiently just like what you can do with Electrum. The only problem that I can see is with the leaks like Ledger's, telling everyone that you own a hardware wallet. I don't send any HW wallet to my residential address so that's fine with me.
- Hardware failure?
Similar. Both can be imported into another wallet easily.
- Malicious attacks?
Hardware wallets are mostly hardened against side channel attacks which most computers are not designed specifically for. The secure element present in some of them also prevents people from brute forcing or extracting the seeds out of the hardware wallet in the event that it gets stolen. AFAIK, some has limited attempts which will brick the entire device once that threshold is reached and thus making brute forcing pins ineffective.
While the hardware vendor client database can be hacked, allowing criminals to come knocking on my door, can the same happen with Electrum?
No.
Also, looking longer term, what would be the consequences of developers ceasing to maintain Electrum?
Nothing. You can extract the private keys from the HD seed generated with Electrum very easily and just import it into another wallet. It's open source as well so I highly doubt that it would just stop development and not create a fork from it and someone else taking the helm
Should I also export my private keys, in addition to the seed phrase (with appropriate safety and storage precautions)?
No. The 12 word seeds is all you need. You can of course do that but you'll be having to secure more things and have to continually update that list if you use your wallet frequently.
2023  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: 25BTC damaged paper wallet - Fake? on: February 14, 2021, 02:17:03 PM
You actually can generate compressed keys in v1.6, just not on the paper wallet itself. You'll have to generate it first and then convert it in the wallet details page. Don't think it matters if it's fake or not, unless the person is selling it?
2024  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: How to redeem lost forks from Casascius Coin on: February 14, 2021, 01:46:19 PM
The amount that you have depends on the amount of coins that you have at the point of fork. When did you move your Bitcoin Cash?

BSV was forked on 15/11/18 at the block height of 556766 from Bitcoin Cash. Did you move your Bitcoin Cash before that?
2025  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Ever wondered about the lowest transaction fee that you could ever pay ? on: February 14, 2021, 11:11:39 AM
No. 1 Satoshi/vbyte is the absolute minimum for it to be a standard transaction for which Bitcoin nodes are willing to relay. You can obviously make a transaction without fees but that would only work with the participation of a miner.

There are thousands of transactions with 1 sat/vbyte fees right now. The order for which the transactions are confirmed at the same fee rate is unknown and other transactions which are paying the same fees can get confirmed sooner than yours, if you're unlucky. It's likely going to be pushed out of the mempool quite frequently given the current state, would be good for you to rebroadcast it periodically.
2026  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Do btc blocks have private keys? on: February 14, 2021, 10:34:40 AM
People going in different directions. Your crazy if you think genesis keys don't control the chain. You can make any changes and implement new features mint new coins if you hold genesis keys.
They don't. If you think they do, please provide evidence as to how this address (1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa) can do anything other than spending the coins which are not from the genesis block.
2027  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: The paradox of small block size on: February 14, 2021, 10:24:03 AM
Most laptop aren't designed to run 24/7 and people who run Bitcoin Core on their laptop usually just need wallet functionally where they could use pruned mode or SPV wallet.
Besides, most laptop i've seen have storage size between 0.5-1.0TB where blockchain size surpass laptop storage size in few years.
I think it's more of an anecdotal statement for me, I've been using my laptop to run Bitcoin Core for a while now and my use case is not always only for the wallet functionality. I think of SPV wallets as a (partial) substitute but not a full replacement for full clients. I was coming from the POV that any reasonable increase in block size to counter the current high fees would result in exponential growth of the blockchain. For which, most users wouldn't really consider purchasing additional disks for that or bother opening up their computer to upgrade.
2028  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Bitcoin Core 0.21.0 no incoming peers over Tor on: February 14, 2021, 10:18:20 AM
As far as I see I have installed the latest version:

May be i'm missing something ? It is Ubuntu 18.04, not latest Ubuntu BTW
That Tor version appears to be quite old, I think that was about the time they started incorporating Tor V3 addresses.

You want to download using the guide provided above. APT isn't always up to date and in this case appears to be unmaintained (from 2018).
2029  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Do btc blocks have private keys? on: February 14, 2021, 09:34:18 AM
That is interesting it's a physical block lol so he's selling private key to a block? I know that private key to the genesis block can control the entire blockchain.
No. You can't even spend the block rewards from the genesis blocks.
Their isn't much info about it. If the priv key has a nonce which it does it must have a private key but it's weird because it doesn't seem to have a public key on the curve.
Private keys do not have a nonce.
There are 2^256 priv keys and only 2^160 addresses does that leave priv keys for blocks or am I reading too much into lol
Blocks do not have private keys and blocks also do not have a public key. The main thing that uses a private-public key pair are your addresses, P2PKH, P2WPKH, etc.
2030  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: To be careful of the private key wallet we are using these days on: February 14, 2021, 09:27:43 AM
They are not the only ones Infinito Wallet give you 12 wallet seed words that cannot be used elsewhere.
You can extract the private key from these wallets
the problem is if the wallet suddenly stops.
That will negate any benefit of HD wallets. They are designed such that anyone can derive the keys given a HD seed. By making the users manually extract each individual private keys, then they might as well not use HD wallets. Having a known derivation path is indeed useful. You can bruteforce the derivation path given a known address and the seeds though.
2031  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Finding nonce in historical transactions / blocks on: February 14, 2021, 09:00:45 AM
It turns out that the extraNonce is not included in the block or block header formats. This is a reply from theymos:
Correct. It's in the Coinbase transaction and since it's not a protocol standard, it can be a bit ambiguous, any changes in the transactions will alter the merkle root though I think using an extranonce makes it simpler.
I'm kinda clueless here, but if it's private, it's not on the blockchain, right?
The r and s values are 32 bytes each and located in the signature. If you want to parse it but I imagine that will take sometime, not sure what this can yield though. They're meant to be completely random under normal circumstances.
2032  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Finding nonce in historical transactions / blocks on: February 14, 2021, 03:18:55 AM
LoyceV very nicely compiled all of the nonces used in the blocks here: https://loyce.club/blockdata/nonce.txt.

I'm not sure where to find the extra nonce though, they're located in the Coinbase transaction.
2033  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: What is the cleanest way to recover from an abruptly terminated Bitcoin Core? on: February 14, 2021, 02:59:50 AM
1. Is -reindex-chainstate enough to fix the corrupted block files, or do I have to do a full -reindex? (Bandwidth is not an issue).
Reindexing the chainstate is faster, Bitcoin Core doesn't have to validate and reindex all the blocks in addition to the chainstate. It took me 2 hours to finish reindexing chainstate as opposed to the 6 hours it took for me to do a full reindex. It would depend on your type of corruption to the files to determine which option you should run. Does it throw an error when reading the chainstate or the blocks?
2. Is there anything else I need to do to gracefully recover an interrupted bitcoin core?
\
Database corruption is the only issue that I have during an unclean shutdown. Nothing else should be affected.
2034  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Bitcoin Core 0.21.0 no incoming peers over Tor on: February 14, 2021, 02:47:06 AM

I upgraded to 0.21 on January 14. Tor only node. I dont get any inbound connection. Was running good on 0.20 with plenty of inbound connections.

Restarted today, catched an error message that could be the reason of this issue:


Quote
2021-02-13T15:08:33Z tor: Successfully connected!
2021-02-13T15:08:33Z tor: Connected to Tor version 0.3.2.10
2021-02-13T15:08:33Z tor: Supported authentication method: COOKIE
2021-02-13T15:08:33Z tor: Supported authentication method: HASHEDPASSWORD
2021-02-13T15:08:33Z tor: Supported authentication method: SAFECOOKIE
2021-02-13T15:08:33Z tor: Using HASHEDPASSWORD authentication
2021-02-13T15:08:33Z tor: Authentication successful
2021-02-13T15:08:33Z tor: Add onion failed; error code 513

What does that error code 513 mean ?


That Tor version is very old, I think it's from 2018. Can you try upgrading your Tor and try again?
2035  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Lost BTC? i am missing just 1 word from 12. on: February 13, 2021, 05:12:52 PM
Thanks for the reply; Yes, i t was created on an Exodus wallet, the only infos i have are my 11 words.

Allright https://github.com/Coding-Enthusiast/FinderOuter/releases/tag/v0.7.0.0 this is a src to complie in windows right?
Yeah. BTCrecover works as well.

For either, Exodus does use BIP39 seeds. The derivation path for Segwit (bc1) is m/84'/0'/0' and for legacy (1) is m/44'/0'/0'.
2036  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Lost BTC? i am missing just 1 word from 12. on: February 13, 2021, 04:13:22 PM
Not too big of an issue. What client are you using?

If it's a BIP39 compatible wallet, you can find out it's derivation path and use this program[1] to search for it.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5214021.0
2037  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Vanitygen: Vanity bitcoin address generator/miner [v0.22] on: February 13, 2021, 03:58:58 PM
I did 10.000+ searches and not even 1 1EEVEE!, must be something in the bitcoin address structure that doesnt allow this combination, if u dont belive me try it yourself.
The difficulty to compute 1eevee with case sensitive is roughly 264104224. Which makes it 1 in 264104224.

I tried running it with vanitysearch (more optimized than vanitygen) with my 1080TI and I found like 7 of them within 5 seconds. You won't be able to find any of those vanity addresses if you only generate such a small space of addresses.
2038  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: The paradox of small block size on: February 13, 2021, 03:35:43 PM

Drives are cheap enough, and if you are running a node that is doing processing for yourself / business then you should have good enough bandwidth to handle a few meg burst here and there. With compression it's getting even better.
I have a client running a eth node AND a BTC & Lightning node on a 768/128 DSL line with no issues. Needs many TBs of SSD to run it because of the ETH but don't tell me you need massive bandwidth to do it after the initial sync, I can drive you out to his office in Islip and point to proof that you don't.
Drives are cheap, yes. Not everyone can upgrade or have space for upgrades. Laptops are fairly limited in disk size and it can be a hassle to upgrade to a bigger drive and there are plenty of heavy users who just needs that disk space. Bandwidth isn't the main problem. The time it takes to propagate and validate the blocks will be the main problem. Having a long propagation time introduces the problem of forks and they would have a lower security when getting any confirmations.

As to how much block size should the increment be, I'm not too sure. Segwit is a block size increase, it's not right to say that the block size hasn't been increased before. Though with the current mempool, perhaps 4MB blocks wouldn't be enough.

And yet here I sit running 2 of my own lightning nodes for my own use, so I can fill them when fees are low and slowly spend them. But I still have to do on chain transactions because a lot of places still don't take lightning payments.
Unfortunate. I find that a common issue as well.
2039  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum address beyond the gap limit on: February 13, 2021, 03:30:21 PM
No I am not restoring anything. But I read that Addresses beyond the gap limit are red. If money is sent to one of them but never to the g addresses before them, Electrum will not look for it does that mean I will not be able to see the total balance if I will receive money on that red marked address? Ok is I if I will use use the new receiving address will be I able to send the total amount received on both addresses? I do not want to lose my BTC.  
Only if you are going to restore your wallet. Once generated, it functions like any other addresses. Yes, you will be able to use those receiving addresses like how you would use any other normal addresses.

Electrum not looking for them only applies if you are restoring your wallet. You have to manually generate those addresses or increase the gap limit. The way Electrum works when generating a wallet is to follow a gap limit of 20 (for normal receiving addresses), which means it will keep generating addresses for the hierarchical deterministic seeds until it reaches 20 unused addresses. If the address is generated after the gap limit, Electrum will not generate those addresses. It is not lost, however just not generated yet.
2040  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum address beyond the gap limit on: February 13, 2021, 02:32:54 PM
Yes. Just remember if you're restoring from your seed that those addresses are not generated with the default gap limit and you'll have to change the gaplimit settings or generate the addresses on your own. They're still generated from your seeds so you won't lose it.
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 ... 463 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!