Bitcoin Forum
July 16, 2024, 11:25:23 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 »
1  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [GIVEAWAY] Dogeaway, such generous, much reward so wow on: December 14, 2013, 10:35:03 PM

2  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Instawallet claim process on: November 07, 2013, 03:56:02 AM
I am also waiting on an InstaWallet claim.

I did accept my claim, though I was a bit late to do so since I was never notified that I needed to, and because accessing the domain without the www stopped working so every time I tried to check on my wallet it looked to me like Instawallet had gone offline.

It now shows my status as PENDING_PAYMENT.

I message Boussac a couple days ago, so hopefully he responds.
3  Other / Archival / Re: delete on: September 14, 2011, 07:56:11 PM
Namecoin has unique features which ArtForz and I both recognize that will make it almost impossible to patch.

No Namecoin doesn't use Time Adjustment, but other functions in NMC open this up. 51% is not required for Namecoin.

Could you point give us or point us to a description of the Namecoin problem? I haven't been able to locate documentation of it myself.
4  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Different format for blk*.dat on: August 29, 2011, 05:03:43 PM
Why does the blockchain format accommodate arbitrary text anyway? Who's idea was that? Mr Nakamoto.

If there's currently space for random text, couldn't the blockchain just be smaller instead?

It would be very difficult to prevent arbitrary text since it needs to store arbitrary data. A standard address is just a sequence of 20 bytes. What is stopping anyone from making those bytes an ASCII string?

As soon as you need additional tools to unlock the content, these tools themselves become problematic and can be blocked/outlawed much more easily and with less harm to Bitcoin itself.

How would we restrict the tools? As long as Bitcoin is open-source, the blockchain storage format is openly available. As far as I see it, it would be wrong to try to block or outlaw tools for parsing the blockchain. People should be able to freely analyze its contents.

If we have a problem with content in the blockchain, we need to either find a way to deal with it or learn to accept it. Hiding it won't make it go away.
5  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Different format for blk*.dat on: August 28, 2011, 05:35:51 PM
I see no reason to change the storage format over this. It might obfuscate transaction messages in the blockchain, but they will still be there. If people care enough to read the messages, they will use an old client or parse the new format.
6  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: MtGox spoof mail+site on: August 28, 2011, 05:28:29 AM
I received a response from the hosting company from which the email originated stating that the account has been closed. Unfortunately, the phishing site itself seems to be hosted elsewhere (
7  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: MtGox spoof mail+site on: August 27, 2011, 04:17:22 PM
Of interest from the email headers:
Return-Path: <>
Received: from ( [])
Received: from fewfewef by with local (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <>)

I sent off a quick message to the .TK abuse email letting them know about the issue.
8  Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: [ANNOUNCE] (free ad space for first 25 thread replies) on: August 27, 2011, 05:47:11 AM
#9999 and #10000
9  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Urgent: Where is the wallet.dat in XP? on: August 26, 2011, 01:57:34 PM
Do you have Explorer set to show hidden files?
10  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Urgent: Where is the wallet.dat in XP? on: August 26, 2011, 01:49:57 PM
Try C:\Documents and Settings\<User>\Application Data\Bitcoin. If that doesn't work, go to Start then Run and enter "%APPDATA%\Bitcoin". That should have the wallet and blockchain, just like .bitcoin on your Mac.
11  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Protecting privacy without generating and distributing new addresses. on: August 25, 2011, 04:36:06 AM
I agree with hashcoin's assessment. An investigator could collect public keys by agreeing to buy from people or pay them for some reason and/or by gaining access to an exchange, pool, or other service that pays people. These people then become easily trackable.

Warning, brainstorm below:

Would it not be better to randomize t instead of incrementing it? Instead you send the coins to h = hash160(concat(c, t)) where t is a large (256-bit?) random number. That way, it seems to me that even someone with public key couldn't determine if a given h was generated from a given c without knowing the t used. Although then again, I don't see how such a transaction could be redeemed by the receiver without some out-of-band communication of t. Maybe you could encrypt t to that public key and insert that into the transaction as well? This would let the receiver be able to see when he received the coins, but in order to prove ownership when spending the transaction, it seems like he'd have to reveal t, giving up the privacy. Maybe some form of non-interactive zero-knowledge proof could be used?
12  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin Conference 2011 NYC on: August 24, 2011, 02:25:52 AM
I uploaded a PDF file of my slides here:

Gavin, Is there no youtube clip of your conference contribution? Did anyone post that?
13  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: BTC client crashes every 5 minutes. "Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime Library." on: August 21, 2011, 10:38:00 PM
The official Bitcoin Windows binary isn't built with VC, but it does use the Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime (msvcrt.dll).

What do you know. You're right! I just tested it with InspectExe and indeed msvcrt.dll is in the list of dependencies.

That is the C RTL not the C++ RTL, and indeed mingwin uses the msvcrt dll to avoid the need for gpled code at runtime.

Yes, it is C standard library specifically, but it is considered a Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime Library (there is no Microsoft Visual C) and I'm guessing that is what the error message is referring to.
14  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: No blocks on testnet for 24 hours on: August 21, 2011, 06:17:39 PM
Thanks for the help. We made it to the next retarget. Although now we need to cut back on mining. Testnet is generating blocks too fast and will soon jump right back up in difficulty.
15  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: BTC client crashes every 5 minutes. "Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime Library." on: August 21, 2011, 06:12:36 PM
A forum member told me that it could be a trojan suggest me to post in this section becuase BTC client does not use VC in any way.

The official Bitcoin Windows binary isn't built with VC, but it does use the Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime (msvcrt.dll).

This file might be corrupt. You can try running "sfc /scannow" from an administrator command prompt. This will attempt to find and repair bad system files.
16  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Is Bitcoin Plus a good deal? on: August 21, 2011, 01:18:39 AM
You get better speeds with Bitcoin Plus than with a normal miner program? What CPU to you have, and what miner did you try? For me, CPU mining with Ufasoft's miner gives me over ten times the hash rate of Bitcoin Plus, and even mining with Bitcoin's built-in generation capability gives me about four times that of Bitcoin Plus.
17  Other / Off-topic / Re: How IPv6 will destroy bitcoins on: August 19, 2011, 07:36:07 AM
Some of you are missing my point, or I didn't explain it well.  IPv6 will make it MUCH easier to firewall based on location.  Yes, I know you can get geographical info of current IPv4 addresses now, but I'm saying with v6, it will be easier.

It might be easier with IPv6, but it is easy enough now with IPv4. If a government wants to restrict Internet by country of IP address, they will do it. In fact, the decision to do so would probably be made by people who neither know nor care exactly how the filtering works on a technical level.
18  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Did TradeHill change their SSL certificate? on: August 19, 2011, 07:16:17 AM
I get no error. The SHA1 fingerprint of the certificate I get is bf5d728ac70686806c6fe7da2a7f1fe98daf98f1.
19  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Bitcoin client mirrors and checksums on: August 19, 2011, 03:37:29 AM
This is for folks that can't access sorceforge, IE embargoed countries.....

I think he was suggesting you copy that file and put it somewhere other than Sourceforge, such as in this topic. It does have the advantage that it is PGP-signed by a developer.

Hash: SHA1

4909c17a1cc025c6f6c88d036f0b487c51c510f6  bitcoin-0.3.24-linux.tar.gz
58531249230f769fdc755822b41e0f18ba59512c  bitcoin-0.3.24-src.tar.gz
d4b5425eff673551a326d5326b92a06359dc1a3d  bitcoin-0.3.24-win32-setup.exe
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

20  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Please remove Bitcoin from on: August 18, 2011, 05:58:31 PM
I don't really get it, how can I possibly protect others when the binaries I serve can potentially be malicious and I can potentially have malicious intentions ?

Should I post checksums ? Doesn't work :
 - if I have malicious intentions the checksums will match the malicious binaries.
 - if the binaries get changed without me knowing it means that the server got compromised, the checksums shouldn't then be trusted either
 - if I post a link to SF, that won't help since some users won't be able to access it and it also could be compromised

Let's face it, if you're truly paranoid, you read the source and then you compile it. Oh wait, you'd need to compile gcc too Wink

If you have better ideas than the couple I exposed I'm open. But I'd rather give no checksums than a false sense of security.

Actually I do compile gcc, but not for security reasons, lol.

And you are right about it being better to provide no checkfiles then provide a false sense of security.

What you could do is also mirror and provide a link  to which an earlier post said is the right signature to verify.  Now you have not only provided a way to check your mirrored files, but that no one has changed the sf ones since you mirrored them.

The idea is that you would have Jeff's PGP already, and not simply download it whenever you are checking a new binary. When you get the key for the first time, as with all PGP public keys, you should not trust its validity until you are convinced it is correct. You make this decision based on several factors such as where you obtained the key, what other sources agree that this key is legitimate, the PGP web-of-trust, etc.

Jeff's key could use more signatures. Somebody make him attend a keysigning party.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!