Jeez - Everybody calm down. Fixed it for ya:  HAHAHA!!! Careful.... 'she' will come and get you! |
|
|
|
did you ever take a look at what is happening with Bitcoin in the tor darknet?
a little girl is really NOT what we want on a Bitcoin banknote.
What do you mean? |
|
|
|
|
I had all sort of troubles caused by MacGPG, even after I uninstalled it. I think I ven had to force brew to link the files to move on.
|
|
|
|
|
I am very grateful for Red Emeralds work.
|
|
|
|
|
You could also display a code/sentence on the screen rather than having the user select one. This more or less forces them to record it somewhere (and as you said, most people would record it on the paper). If you did this then you would probably want to have the user re-enter for accuracy.
Fr those that truly want an armory brainwallet the methods are out there if they look hard enough, so they are not locked out either.
|
|
|
|
Instawallet https://instawallet.org/A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt learn more. If traffic's at all a concern maybe should fix that. It is probably that way because every time you goto the home page you get a new wallet. If they didn't tell the site to not be crawled then everytime bing/google/whoever visited the site then you would get a ton of needless new wallets. |
|
|
|
I just came across this thread, after having come up with a "bitcoin certificate" design a couple of days ago. I've been silkscreening this 4-color design on thick 100% cotton art paper, with the intent of selling them; they look and feel REALLY nice, and being printed by hand makes them extra special. If there's interest, I'd be happy to donate the original vector files to the community, for those who don't wish to splurge on the real deal. The two QR code areas are both designed to fit a 1x1" code, but this can be adjusted if necessary. Pictures are here: http://imgur.com/a/YeUQ4Cheers! Those are fantastic looking! |
|
|
|
You've got that the wrong way around. Waiting longer helps keep transaction fees down. The last thing you'd want to do is consolidate them before you actually need to consolidate them.
But I thought TX size played a role as well adn that was the major contributing factor in these situations? If you combined many small outputs into a single one (perhaps many times) then the resulting TX based off the consolidated inputs would be smaller. If it is not a size issue then i am mistaken. |
|
|
|
May I ask how can I "consolidate some outputs"?
By sending yourself some transactions. For example if a bitcoin address has 100 0.001 BTC outputs you could send yourself one 0.1 BTC transaction to combine the 100 outputs into one. The problem is it may end up costing more in transaction fees than the inputs are worth. Would it be possible to implement some sort of warning similar to how git warns you that you need to do a 'git gc'? "WARNING: Your wallet is amassing a large number of small values outputs. You should consolidate them ASAP or it may end up costing more in transaction fees than the inputs are worth." Obviously you would need to indicate that in itself would cost fees, but maybe it would help people from getting too far into the mess? |
|
|
|
|
I am not sure I see the point in this vs truly random keys?
My thought behind brainwallets were so that they could not be lost or destroyed? The idea behind just using a simple SHA256 was that it was not complicated or hard, you can even find (non bitcoin) related sites to do it for you.
If you require a special program to generate your address then does that leave the realm of brainwallet and enter the realm of super-duper wallet generator?
Don't get me wrong, I really like the idea, but it would be very hard for me to loose anything digital. But for your average user I am not so sure?
|
|
|
|
|
The 'liteness' of Electrum is what first attracted me to it; however lack of servers is what dove me away. If armory could speak electrum I think that would be great for both projects.
However how does the upcoming additions of bloom filters to bitcoind affect this?
|
|
|
|
I think you can also do listen=1 with a connect and it will work, that is how I got t working with TOR IIRC.
I hope you mean a Tor Hidden Service. If you are using Tor as a client, you don't want to listen. I was connecting to nodes over tor; however armory did not work (obviously). Adding the listen was a relatively small issue in my setup as the machine could only talk out via tor. It was more messing around than anything. But the setup did allow to connect to the bitcoin net via tor and still use armory. |
|
|
|
|
I think you can also do listen=1 with a connect and it will work, that is how I got t working with TOR IIRC.
|
|
|
|
For those of you, who have spare unneeded coins  I have new toy in Google Go : https://bitbucket.org/mmanchaild/brainqeyz.gitThis SAVING brainwallet generator has some quite secure properties. On average PC EVERY brute-force attempt of a passphrase will take ~ 90 minutes to perform. It comes with a cost: application will run about 2..3 hours for one launch. You will need to launch it at least 2 times (or MORE) for safety reasons. And then you must compare results. They must be the same. I am interested in how you calculated that every brute force attempt would take 2.5 hours. |
|
|
|
Searching for transactions has stopped working.
It seems that the whole website is offline. I think something is majorly wrong as I get a decryption error when attempting to login. |
|
|
|
I will activate my seats when ASICs arrive,
Any news on this now that the Avalon has apparently come out of vaporware? |
|
|
|
Part of what I wrote above is nonsense I think, regarding the supposed "disadvantage", because I don't really see a practical use case where some 3rd-party should generate new pubkeys for someone elses wallet. So please disregard that. Also, I didn't understand why you consider what you said to be type-1, but nevermind.
Actually there are very good reasons for that to happen. Two examples: 1) Payment processing. A processor company could maintain the webpage and infrastructure but generate addresses ad-hoc from your chain-code. The benefit is that you (as a merchant) don't have to wait. the funds hit your wallet and don't go through the payment processors. I think there is already ones that do this actually. 2) Website. Your '3rd party' in this case would be your webserver; however it wouldn't hold any public keys so it is really the same thing as #1, you just happen to own both. Because the webserver can generate keys ad infinitum you don't have to worry about running out or having it get compromised and your private keys out. 3-Bonus) Games & Public Affairs - Lets say bitlotto wanted to make all the payment addresses for the future available, he could publish the public details of the chain for anyone who cared and then you would know what payment address would be XYZ. This is a fluff example really, but the point is once the tool is there then people will find creative uses for it. |
|
|
|
It's me again..... Is it possible to use Armory with testnet-in-a-box? I tried but got the following output: $ PYTHONPATH=`brew --prefix`/lib/python2.7/site-packages /usr/bin/python /usr/local/Cellar/armory-qt/0.86.3-beta/share/armory/ArmoryQt.py --testnet --satoshi-port=19000 --satoshi-datadir /Users/aburns/src/bitcoin/bitcoin-testnet-box/1/testnet3
********************************************************************************Loading Armory Engine: Armory Version: 0.86.3
PyBtcWallet Version: 1.35
Detected Operating system: Mac/OSX
User home-directory : /Users/aburns/Library/Application Support
Satoshi BTC directory : /Users/aburns/src/bitcoin/bitcoin-testnet-box/1/testnet3
First blkX.dat file : /Users/aburns/src/bitcoin/bitcoin-testnet-box/1/testnet3/blk0001.dat
Armory home dir : /Users/aburns/Library/Application Support/Armory/testnet3
Setting netmode: 1
Number of registered addr: 10
Opening file 1: /Users/aburns/src/bitcoin/bitcoin-testnet-box/1/testnet3/blk0001.dat
Highest blkXXXX.dat file: 1
Attempting to read blockchain from file: /Users/aburns/src/bitcoin/bitcoin-testnet-box/1/testnet3/blk0001.dat
/Users/aburns/src/bitcoin/bitcoin-testnet-box/1/testnet3/blk0001.dat is 0.550011 MB
***ERROR: Block file is for the wrong network!
MagicBytes of this file: fabfb5da
Obviously I can patch this check, but I just wanted to know if there was an easier way than hard patching the client? |
|
|
|
It doesn't work because I only recently added the "encodePrivKeyBase58" function and you are using an older version (up until now, I was basically rewriting the encode code everywhere I needed it). It is available in the latest download, 0.87.
Quite right. I am on OSX so I leave the voodoo of making Armory work up to Red Emerald and the brew formula isn't updated for 0.87 yet. I had thought that I checked my actual installed Armory code; however I must have been looking at my HEAD checkout, sorry about that. I have pushed my script changes to github. For anyone who is interested the (very rough) script can: - Dump all 'created' public address
- Generate new public addresses
- Dump imported pub/priv keys
- Dump generated pub/priv keys
Right now is outputs in pseudo-csv format. I say pseduo because Armory logs to stdout so you have to do some 'magic' to get a plain CSV file: # I am on OSX so I have to invoke python-for-armory in a voodoo way
PYTHONPATH=`brew --prefix`/lib/python2.7/site-packages /usr/bin/python export_keys.py | tail -n +10 > keys.txt
# Normal people would probably be able to just do:
/usr/bin/python export_keys.py | tail -n +10 > keys.txt
You can access the script here: https://github.com/ErebusBat/BitcoinArmory/blob/master/extras/export_keys.py with the same license as Armory. Question: I didn't use a test wallet for this and now my chain is extended by several hundred addresses. Is there a (quick) way I can reset the highest address count back to something sane? EDIT: nm, found wallet.rewindHighestIndex Second question: I appear to be getting differing results for the .chainIndex value, is that to be expected? See below for an example of tailing output of a dump of the public keys, then a call to new which produces an index almost -100 behind. EDIT 2: nm again... looks like i was using lastComputedChainIndex rather than highestUsedChainIndex. Out of curiosity, what is the difference? |
|
|
|
A basic question here, is the electrum wallet.dat the exact same as the satoshi wallet.dat?
No. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
