Thanks for your response. I've been requested in the Github BIP 322 thread to forward this to the mailing list. I've taken care of it.


If you have any information or bitcointalk post about it, please let me know. Currently, I haven't found any way to sign a message with a n-of-m multi-sig (n != m).

Hey,

I just wanted to let you know that I commented this thread on Github: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1347#issuecomment-2090701376

If there's no response the next few weeks, I will send an e-mail to the Google Group mailing list about our use-case.

@ProfEduStream

Indeed.

On one side, I gonna talk with 2 Bitcoin developpers in May about this use-case. Maybe will they talk further about it.

On the other side, I thought Kallewoof was following this BIP322 thread. If he does not, sending this use-case in an e-mail is a good idea.
Would you like to do it, considering your started this bitcointalk post? If not, I gonna send him an message this week. (Just so you know: I don't have his e-mail.)

Hello guys,

In the past few weeks, I spent a few hours researching a way to sign a message with a multi-sig wallet. After a lot of tests, I discovered the Bitcoin #322 Proposal.


    
As a Bitcoin association, whose goal is to educate people about Bitcoin in our city, we enable everyone to become a member of our association for a few thousands sats per year. To do so, we use Swiss Bitcoin Pay.
It's an app' which enables us (and shops too) to export easily our accounting if needed. We also onboard merchants with this app', 'cause it's UX friendly, very easy to use too, self-custodial; and the accounting part is very usefull in lots of countries.


The problem is that we use a multi-sig wallet, as some other associations and companies.
However, as I previously said, it's currently impossible to sign a message with a multi-sig wallet, 'cause BIP 322 hadn't been pushed for a few months / years.

It also means that we can't prove that we own an address by signing a message with our multi-sig wallet; which is an information asked in some regulated countries (in Switzerland for example). It's not a KYC thing, just a "proof of addresses ownership".


Not being able to sign a message with a multi-sig wallet is also a lack in our Bitcoin ecosystem, and I hope it gonna change in the next few weeks / months.

    

Atm, I only spent a couple of hours learning about how Bitcoin signatures work.
My only discovery is that the ECDSA function is neither linear, nor commutative. If it was, the solution would have been very easy to implement.
Got a couple ideas, but I need to go further in my researches and understanding of ECDSA.


To sum up: if this thread (and BIP) was forgotten, please make it live again. We need that in our ecosystem.

Hi guys,

In the past few weeks / months, I studied the first few thousand blocks in order to tell future generations what happened during the first years of Bitcoin

To do so, I have developped some scripts, enabling me find direct links betweek coinbase rewards, consolidation transactions and some miners / Bitcoin personnalities (as D. Trammel, H. Finney, Patoshis, etc..)
I have done so deep on-chain links & analysis with Maltego's software too.


After tens of hours, I'm currently at block 2813; and I wrote 14 articles (called Bitcoin Blockchain Fun Facts - #BBFF) about my researches. Some are about first miners consolidations, others about the first transactions of Finney or Trammel, about weird stuff, Patoshis, the first use of fees, etc...
I also continued @Taras work from 2014: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=507458.40 ; finding new informations.


My goal would be to study the first 105.000 / 110.000 blocks deeply; then, to study datas about the 730.000 others with easy finding facts (first coinjoin, first musig, first inscription), with historical transactions (OP_RETURNs, ..); and a mathematical approach (block time averages, block fees averages, etc...)


I still have a job currently, and I also need some help 'cause I don't have enough time to do it alone:

1) I currently request the API of https://blockchain.info/rawblock/ for having block informations, instead of using my own nodes. Perhaps don't they list everything; I'm also wondering if I'm not "losing" datas.
I currently request: block number, block time, block height, block weigh, block base chain, number of tx in the block, sats output for a block, block fee, max fee tx, max output, max height output, max weight output, double depense. Is there something interesting to request too?

2) Requesting an API is a long procedure. How could I request my own node easily? (I searched that a few weeks ago, but didn't go further).

3) Which creterias should I use to decide if 2 adresses come from a same miner / person? (got my own, atm  )

4) Is there someone there who could be interested in my work? Someone there who could help me? I could share all my current spreadsheets and make them clear.



ith infinite time, I'ld already have finished; and shared all my work for the community.
However, I'm a meet-up organizer, I educate as much as I can about Bitcoin with youtube videos, talks and flyers (all "open-source"). Plus a job I like (I'm a math teacher). And I can't do everything.

My only goal is to help the community and to developp the ecosystem for our 2140 hyperbitcoinized world. I also hope to find some people interested in Bitcoin archelogy

---

NB: some pictures of my work

Hi,

Very big improvement today. WOAW !

PUR3 is in fact.. Dustin Trammel !

Bloc 956 > https://mempool.space/fr/block/00000000677e3263de6e6972545f43c9eec825a1d39acbfc5820a94519f1684a
> reward sent to https://mempool.space/fr/address/04946fe4f658ad101126dbe9ca1abbdf9af65caade82862704f8c6e449fe1fb67a24243913502cde52863fe97ffbbc13d3e22eee1a12d4ab6888fa8338c9322e1f
> sent to https://mempool.space/fr/address/12DLpSS6fEHqKmYeRcW4iqwAMjPx53U8mL
> sent to https://mempool.space/fr/address/16R6YGi83cS8nv3ECnV2SLA7AJS4eq6kM9
> this latest address is clearly linked to Trammel from this tx: https://mempool.space/fr/tx/4f2b1766198ff7d4902b7da87652682ffeb098c3f92cc69f4b736f03a0caed93
> and the 12higDjoCCNXSA95xZMWUdPvXNmkAduhWv address is known to be Dustin's one (if he didn't lied about the emails): https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/dustin-trammel/7/

Bloc 913 > https://mempool.space/fr/block/00000000eec9714483685a04a58d487d758eadf0b0b15d9db38dd632ccb106f8
> rewards sent to https://mempool.space/fr/address/04e53e82cea4edf62e6d5482c6a7922b97f40af780c86072cf7fb6db8a05e6e38e5328a6fd3c28cfcba9f8d00e9982d531fdcc07cd00fb9058db8b51a275b256f5
> sent to https://mempool.space/fr/address/1PUR3qV3zKcGYXDhmT8o7ekCJP7hnSGzwj
> this latest address is clearly linked to Trammel from this tx: https://mempool.space/fr/tx/6db71e70bd0e5b9f2cc0678ff2bdb47215e2adc68dc72bdac973d93c76a54b7b
> and the 12higDjoCCNXSA95xZMWUdPvXNmkAduhWv address is known to be Dustin's one (if he didn't lied about the emails): https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/dustin-trammel/7/

I got blocs 913 and 956 linked to Trammel. I can conclude PUR3 is Trammel (yeah !)

Hi guys,

@craigraw answered me. Once Sparrow is launched, you can export the config.ini lines from File > Export wallet.
Then, you add the right lines into your config.ini EPS file.

The problem was about the watch-only address in Bitcoin Core: there were 13 addresses to look at, and only 1 in Bitcoin Core.

Did make a video tutorial to help people about it. Here is the link: youtube .com/watch?v=YdY-x92K_cg


Have a beautiful day !

Hi guys,

I'm trying to link my Sparrow wallet (on Windows 10) to my Electrum Personal Server (which was at first well linked to my Electrum Wallet), though TOR. I'm stucked with a "failed to subscribe to path: ../0/0" error.



My Bitcoin Core Node (v25.0) is connected via TOR through a SOCKS5 (127.0.0.1 - Port: 9150).

In the config.ini file of my Electrum Personal Server, the master public key (zpub) is well entered, the bitcoin-rpc settings are 127.0.0.0 - Port: 8332, and the electrum-server setting are 127.0.0.1 - Port: 50002. Moreover, the tor settings are localhost and 9150.

In the bitcoin.conf file of my Bitcoin Core, there's:

Finaly, my Sparrow wallet settings are: Private Electrum Server / 127.0.0.1 - Port: 50002 / SSL / Use Proxy - 127.0.0.1 - Port: 9150.


When i launch my Bitcoin Core node, it's connected to peers through TOR. -> Everything seems okay.

When i launch the config.ini file of my EPS, the master key and the first 3 addresses are well written. It connects to the mempool, then is "listening for Electrum Wallet on ('127.0.0.1', 50002)" as it did when I used Electrum is the past. -> Everything seems okay.

When i launch the Sparrow wallet and i try to "Test Connection" into Files > Preferences > Server, it's written:
-> Everything seems okay.


However, once i click on the bottom right button to really connect Sparrow to my EPS / Node, my EPS control pannel says:
It's also making me stuck, 'cause the first 3 addresses from the master public key (zpub) are okay.

In my Sparrow wallet, it's written:
and

Deeper, in my Sparrow log file, it's written:



I checked everywhere on the internet and didn't find anything.
In this post: github .com/sparrowwallet/sparrow/issues/430, a guy had the same issue than me and said he succeeded by adding the 4th master public key of the Sparrow wallet in the config.file of EPS; which i did. However, i still had the same problem; even if i added the 13 master public keys (deposit, account #1 to #9, premix, postmix, badbank) in the config.file (with the following format):


In this same post, the EPS dev' said we should check if the 50002 port is opened.
I did so: when i run "netstat -a", i've got 2 TCP - 127.0.0.1:50002 lines:
And, when i run "telnet localhost 50002" in CMD, it's written:
Then a new window "Telnet localhost" appears in CMD, without anything written inside. After a few seconds, the "C:\User\ >" appears again in this window.



Perhaps did i missconfig something, i'm not a pro. However, i do not have any idea how to well connect Sparrow and my EPS:
-> my Node works well
-> my EPS is connected to my Node well
The problem seems to be between my Sparrow wallet and my EPS, i guess.


Also, have you already been stuck with Sparrow like this? If so, how did you succeed to make it run?
Just so you know: on my windows, all my clearnet input traffic is blocked; and all my clearnet output too. The only traffic outputs are through the 443 port, from TOR.

Any help will be appreciate; thanks guys

Hi guys,

I'm really enjoying searching deep into the begining of Bitcoin's timechain. I just wanna thank you for all your work (which i've checked myself); and I can add that block 752 had been mined by Hal: https://mempool.space/fr/tx/52b9d1bd1bda273869d0442d41b3244d45ef7f0a386b313dd56debf9485cb1fa

I gonna update my post aswell if I find anything else

Thanks again for your work, Taras !


EDITS:
- block 286 had been mined by Satoshi (cf the 25 BTC tx to D. Trammel)

Hi guys !

Thanks again for your replies.

@vjudeu:
I learned a lot about clearing all my traffic with my windows Firewall. I also learned that whonix and other OS exists, but i wanna continue to do it with windows for the moment.
I also decided to disable all the in-bound traffic, and disabled all out-bound traffic too.
Then I created a rule in order to open the 443 TCP port. All net traffic is also encrypted, through TOR.
The only weird thing is that I still had a weird ip that were sending and receiving things from / to my computer. After a few researchs, i guess it's the TOR node output.
I also think that, now, all my clearnet traffic is disabled and all my net traffic is encrypted, through TOR (this PC doesn't use an other browser / is especially for my node & ESP).


If you've any advice, it would be with pleasure Thanks again !


[EDIT] After lots of reflexions, i created video tutorials to help people having a Bitcoin Core node linked to their Electrum Personal Server through TOR (+ with all the clearnet traffic disabled). The goal is only to help the next wave of geeks who want to improve their privacy:
Link 1: youtube. com/watch?v=wxiH8hG9G-4
Link 2: youtube. com/watch?v=58RXxG9MArs

Hello guys,

Thanks for your answers, which are really clear.

@nc50lc: does that mean that BTC Pay server (i didn't use it for the moment) do not use the master private key, but only the scriptHash?


@vjudeu: i used Wireshark as i did few months ago and i can confirm that my EPS & Electrum wallet used TOR. Moreover, i will learn about clearing my all clearnet traffic on my node computer, which is something i don't know how to do.
Thanks for your clever answer

Hi fellows,

In the last few weeks, i worked a lot with Electrum Personal Server, set-uping my full node Bitcoin Core with my electurm 4.4.5 wallet. Everything had been done on Windows, 'cause i wanna try this instead of using Umbrel / Linux. I achieved that with some researchs, and did a video tutorial about it in order to help people to do the same: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxiH8hG9G-4

My electrum wallet is also only connected to my own node through TOR; and my full node is connected to the network through TOR too. It also enables me to have a private wallet which is not linked to my IP address, nor my identity IRL (via my Internet Service Provider).



During all those tests and set-ups, i achieved to understand how Electrum Personal Server works; and how a wallet works too.
However, something kinda shocked me: when you connect your Electrum wallet to your ESP, the ESP sends the master public key (from which all adresses are created) to node(s); enabling them to find all the UTXOs from all the adresses of your wallet (even the ones you never used). Once they find them, node(s) send them to the wallet, which shows transactions then calculates how much sats/BTC are available.

My first question is: is the master public key always used to update the wallet balance? Or is it only with ESP?



I also tried to use Lightning Network with this Electrum 4.4.5 wallet, connected to my full node with ESP. Everything worked fine, and my wallet was synchronised.

I also created a LN channel with 0.01 BTC (let's say i had 0.05 BTC in the UTXO before). The network found the transaction and added it in the next bloc: almost 0.04 BTC had been sent to an other address of my Electrum wallet due to miner fees (everything's fine also), and 0.01 BTC had been sent to an other on-chain Bitcoin address.
Quickly, after 3 confirmations, my channel was written as « Opened » whereas my wallet and my ESP started to bug: the synchronisation stopped, and couldn't go further. Indeed, my ESP was telling me that i had to check my master public key, and i should check all my addresses.

The explanation is that, when i opened the LN channel, the 0.01 BTC i've talked about had been sent to an on-chain address which hadn't been created from my master public key. It was like a « sleeping address », waiting something to send the 0.01 BTC to the Lightning Network.
I also checked on the internet and found that it's currently not possible to use the LN with ESP. I also force-closed the channel; and after 6 blocks and a resync' of my ESP / master public key, everything was okay. I only « lost » miner fees, which is nothing.

However, my second question is: where does come this address, at which my 0,01 BTC had been sent? I mean: this address wasn't a hash from my master public key. How had it been created?



To finish, i decided to understand by myself how in-bound and out-bound liquidity worked. It's kinda simple.
To use the LN, i also had to stop using ESP with this wallet; deleting « --oneserver –server 127.0.0.1:50002:s » in my Electrum wallet 'set-up'. It also didn't connect my wallet to my own full node (as expected), and leaked my master public key (i guess, as expected). This also means that all the addresses of this wallet are now linked together for – at least – some nodes; decreasing the privacy of this wallet.

As expected, LN worked perfectly. A new channel had been created, with out-bound liquidity.
In the network parameters of my wallet, it's now connected to 10 nodes automaticaly. About the proxy, the « Use TOR proxy at port 9150 » is stilled checked, and the SOCKS5 proxy configuration i used with ESP is still check too.

My third and last question is a bit stupid, but i wanna check: considering the last paragraph, does my Electrum wallet now use TOR to connect to nodes; hiddening my IP to them?



Thanks for your answers

Hi guys,

I struggled a lot to connect Electrum <-> EPS <-> Bitcoin Core, especially 'cause of the .cookie path, the certificat problem, the configuration of config.ini and the 127.0.0.1 cookie file of Electrum.

There aren't lots of helps on Windows. That's why i've decided yesterday to do a full-explained tutorial on youtube, which explains everything: how to do, how to resolve all configuration problems, etc...
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxiH8hG9G-4&ab_channel=ProfEduStream
It's in french, but you can add subtitles on your own langage.

Hope it gonna help the community.

Bye 👋

Hi guys,

I struggled a lot to connect Electrum <-> EPS <-> Bitcoin Core, especially 'cause of the .cookie path, the certificat problem, the configuration of config.ini and the 127.0.0.1 cookie file of Electrum.

There aren't lots of helps on Windows. That's why i've decided yesterday to do a full-explained tutorial on youtube, which explains everything: how to do, how to resolve all configuration problems, etc...
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxiH8hG9G-4&ab_channel=ProfEduStream
It's in french, but you can add subtitles on your own langage.

Hope it gonna help the community.

Bye 👋

If you're there from the only begining, you - at least - got some nodes (y)

I won't reply anymore. DYOR

Hi guys,
A friend, who's miner, talked about Kiiro with me. I also decided to watch about the supply, how tokens are made, etc..

The answer is:


DON'T MINE THIS SCAM.


First bloc was the 20th (july), at 7:27 am.
After 167 blocs, 1002 tokens were created; which means 1 node, in like 10 minutes.
After 331 blocs, 2004 tokens; 2 nodes, in like 17 min.
Etc..

B1   1   6
N1   167   1002
N2   331   2004
N3   495   3006
N4   659   4008
N5   822   5004
N6   985   6000
N7   1149   7002



The emission is easy to calculate if only one guy mined; which is the case 'cause this bitcointalk post was done the 20th at 06:54 pm whereas the first bloc had been mined at 07:27 am.



You'll easily understand that the first guy who had the info that the coin was created mined at the begining, won lots of tokens and is ponzi-ing the creation of nodes; which is enabling him to ponzi again the node system and is winning 60% of the supply at each bloc.

There are, atm, like 270 nodes on the network. I'm absolutely SURE that the creator (who posted this bitcointalk message a few hours after the first bloc was "pre-mined") is ponzi-ing nodes. He's like 50 nodes
It's also a SCAM.


Either you buy a node now, and hope you gonna survive 1 week to win a percentage of 60% x 30 = 18 tokens (which means a percentage of 72 USDT per bloc), either STOP MINING THAT SCAM.