It has happened to the JAP project (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_Anon_Proxy)


AFAIK they handled the situation by putting in the code, openly labeling it as what it is, and when asked about it they just said "we can't talk about that..." and everybody knew what was going on.
It pretty much killed the project, though, which was about to be overtaken by tor at the time anyway (at least from my point of view).

Regarding bitcoin, I don't think it would take more than an hour to be the topic of discussion on IRC if Gavin did actually commit something like that. Let alone release it.
And, as he already said, our developer community is spread over several countries/continents so it's extremely hard to put them all under legal pressure simultaneously.

Maybe it would be nice to better track / display who reviewed what code. I know you can count the ACKs in the github discussions, but maybe it would put some minds at rest if there was a website listing commits/tags/builds along with green badges representing valid signatures from the core devs.

oh hey you meant my site! yeah, i've basically given up on it for now, i don't really have the time, and there didn't seem to be lots of interest.
however the code is still there, and even though i wouldn't advise using it in its current state, the tx broadcast feature might be fine..
https://github.com/mhanne/webtc/tree/broadcast_transactions

wahrscheinlich hast du zwar mittlerweile entweder einen weg gefunden es zu testen, oder es aufgegeben, aber trotzdem

schuldig bist du mir dafuer nichts - jeder user der verschluesselung einsetzt ist ein gewinn fuer alle

FWIW, Satoshi did make a point of it that he didn't start mining before everyone else had the chance to - by including a newspaper headline in the genesis block.

We were just reading the wrong lists  

Just for the record, there is also a transaction export/import patch for bitcoin (GUI and CLI).
You have to compile bitcoind yourself, but after that, it is much easier to use IMHO.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=28278.0

Maybe one bitcoind handling multiple (separately encrypted) wallets would even better suit your needs? I'd chip in on that too.
Any word on how realistic that would be?

I get an error with removeprivkey on encrypted wallets. Works fine on non-encrypted.

Seriously, when asked
and
you can't do better than
and

Could UPNP be interfering with your router setup? IIRC that's new in 0.3.24. Just a wild guess, I have no idea about UPNP in detail.
Have you tried running something else (a webserver etc) on that port and test with that?

Bravo! This looks really great now. Unfortunately I still can't figure out my problem with wx, so I couldn't test it yet

However, I have added support for importing and rebroadcasting into webtc:
https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=12403.msg384505#msg384505

I'm assuming the file that is written contains just exactly the rawdata, no more no less.

Took a minor detour from what I had planned and implemented support for importing/rebroadcasting offline transactions as implemented by piotr:
https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=28278.0

Everyone (not just registered users) can upload an offline transaction and it gets broadcast to the network every half hour until it makes it into a block.
(With a limit of 100 tries in case the transaction is just bogus / will never be accepted)

http://webtc.interesthings.de/transactions/import

Those are testnet addresses. They start with m or n instead of 1. The testnet has been reset a while ago (and probably will be again) so difficulty was 1 and it was *really* easy to generate

Yay! There is also a patch for a 'getrawtransaction' command which can be used to check for confirmations, instead of blockexplorer.
https://github.com/forrestv/bitcoin/tree/getrawtransaction

Ah, now it seems to work. Great!

Even getbalance for the account shows 0 after the keys are removed, even though getaccountaddress still knows it.
Are you planning on adding that? (Not that I find it important, just curious what to expect )

Another question: is there a way to check the 'balance' of a single address/key?

Yeah it doesn't look good, but you obviously put quite some effort in the content.

Under 'services', I'd suggest a section for anonymity services / VPNs - I'm using mullvad and am very happy with it.

Just FYI - the Kalyhost review on the wiki you link to has been deleted by MagicalTux himself
Maybe you should re-publish that somewhere else...

Ah, of course! It returns the txid on import... Then it's easy of course. Missed that

Bitcoin is on its way.

You have a point with making the changes easy to review, but I think before this gets merged, the interface should be more obvious.
(Maybe I'm wrong here - could a core-dev comment his opinion on this?)

I was planning to integrate that into my online wallet, however I'm not very fond of decoding the rawdata myself...
If the user pastes the whole output of gettransaction it would be much easier, and maybe also a plus in usability; this way if you have multiple exported transactions, you can easily see which is which.
Could you maybe add that to the data the gui exports, and change the import so it accepts a json hash and just uses the 'rawdata' field of that?
Or do you think this is not a good idea and the webservice should just make the effort and decode it?

Edit: OTOH, if you make a standalone webservice for that, I would consider installing it on my server - if I can figure out how; what language/framework would you use?

Ich verstehe das so dass er einen root-server und einen "webspace mit datenbank", separat voneinander hat. Solange der rootserver auf die DB zugreifen kann sollte das kein Problem sein.
Du musst allerdings auch jedem User eine Bitcoin-Adresse generieren und irgendwo anzeigen.

Ich habe seit Jahren kein PHP mehr gemacht, aber wenn Ruby fuer dich in Frage kaeme, waere ich interessiert

Glad you like it! Feedback is much appreciated

Unfortunately I haven't had much time lately, but I'll definitely try to clear a few hours this week.

Has anybody looked at the code yet? Do you think it's a good idea to basically use the data from bitcoind and 'augment' it with stuff from the database?
The next thing i was planning to do is to better integrate transactions from bitcoind and the database.

Another important thing is how verification rules can be removed. Currently you can just go 'delete', which kinda defeats the whole purpose.
I was thinking to just verify the deletion of the rule with the specified method (to delete an email verification rule, you need to do an email verification, etc).
But I'm not sure what to do about the limits.. Do you think its okay to just wait a week until the weekly limit is removed, for example?

Yes, in the 'real' net. I was trying on testnet.