Bitcoin Forum
December 13, 2024, 09:04:17 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Blockchain split of 4 July 2015  (Read 45648 times)
unamis76
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 11:34:29 AM
 #141

So, I was AFK and only noticed this now... Sent 2 transactions from an SPV wallet 2 hours ago, I hope they confirm normally. At least the forking issue seems to be no more...

And there we have it, folks SPV mining. Amazing Roll Eyes I hope everyone starts taking this seriously and start validating blocks. It's of everyone's best interest to keep the blockchain healthy. I thought miners were aware of that, but apparently not. Quickly relaying blocks isn't going to give them profit, validating blocks and keeping the blockchain running smoothly is, I hope they learned it this time.
RealBitcoin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854
Merit: 1009


JAYCE DESIGNS - http://bit.ly/1tmgIwK


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 11:41:38 AM
 #142

OMG WTF guys? I`m getting scared.

So if i just send now a transaction, then i lose my bitcoins and it doesnt get to the other end?

Also what if i buy now bitcoin with € do i get fake bitcoin if the merchant is on wrong chain?

This could be a serious problem. No FUD intended but seriously, i`m starting to panic/   Huh

OMG WTF please read carefully before getting panic. Everything is settled, those who using Bitcoin core older than 0.10 and was receiving payment during fork period should wait at least 30 confirmations.
OMG WTF guys? I`m getting scared.

So if i just send now a transaction, then i lose my bitcoins and it doesnt get to the other end?

Also what if i buy now bitcoin with € do i get fake bitcoin if the merchant is on wrong chain?

This could be a serious problem. No FUD intended but seriously, i`m starting to panic/   Huh
Just relax. Why would you panic at all? Obviously you're that kind of person, so how about you just pause everything related to Bitcoin for a day or two?
You don't buy Bitcoin from merchants, but rather on exchanges. Even if something does go wrong I'm pretty sure that Bitstamp would reimburse you.

We just need someone to confirm this. I think that everything is fine now, however I can't be sure.

Ok so for example i got an older bitcoin core version, way before the header stuff was included. So if i download the latest version, do i have to redownload the blockchain too? Because the blocks got corrupted?

Also i use blockchain.info as a secondary online wallet, do i have to worry when i send or when i receive bitcoins?

n2004al
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134
Merit: 1000


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 11:44:22 AM
 #143


Also i use blockchain.info as a secondary online wallet, do i have to worry when i send or when i receive bitcoins?

Read the previous posts in this thread. You will find an answer.
Triple
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 847
Merit: 500


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 11:47:35 AM
 #144

This seems to be only a minor problem for now. The problem will get updated and it should be fixed fairly quickly.

Available for Rent - 25 Posts $100/Week. PM me
chupatolas
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 79
Merit: 10


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 11:55:28 AM
 #145

did the problem keeps ? i saw several reply but no one said yet that is all ok,soo fake transactions sounds a bad way hope blockhains just fix those mistake
favdesu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
July 04, 2015, 11:56:10 AM
 #146


Ok so for example i got an older bitcoin core version, way before the header stuff was included. So if i download the latest version, do i have to redownload the blockchain too? Because the blocks got corrupted?

Also i use blockchain.info as a secondary online wallet, do i have to worry when i send or when i receive bitcoins?

If you run the latest core version you're fine.

as for blockchain.info - they did not even identify this issue (read up in this thread) - so it's not save to use them at the moment.

n2004al
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134
Merit: 1000


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 11:57:56 AM
 #147

did the problem keeps ? i saw several reply but no one said yet that is all ok,soo fake transactions sounds a bad way hope blockhains just fix those mistake

I think the answer is that that is written in the news of this forum:

"If you are using any wallet other than Bitcoin Core 0.10.x or 0.9.5, then you should not trust incoming transactions until they have ~30 confirmations."
Mr.Money
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 9
Merit: 0


View Profile WWW
July 04, 2015, 12:11:06 PM
 #148

Hi your mine about bicoin core is about program ? or website ? i always use of website and have good job
shorena
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1540


No I dont escrow anymore.


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 12:25:56 PM
 #149

Hi your mine about bicoin core is about program ? or website ? i always use of website and have good job

It depends which version of bitcoin core the website uses. Contact their support and ask.

Im not really here, its just your imagination.
BitUsher
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 994
Merit: 1035


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 12:41:06 PM
 #150

Note from Gregory Maxwell on reasons why the alert was delayed--

Quote from: nullc
I made a conscious decision to delay sending out a warning since there were no transaction conflicts and most of the hashpower on the invalid chain was not mining transactions. This was discussed, in public, with the rest of the technical crew that was minding the issue.

Without any conflicts at play yet the fork was harmless, and I thought it was better to gather more information before acting and the rest of the active tech folks seemed to agree. Had conflicts shown up the alert would have gone out immediately.

It was also the case that all versions of Bitcoin Core who would have been on the invalid fork would have been displaying an automatically generated alert due to the presence of 'future' version blocks.



Official Status and recommendations--

https://bitcoin.org/en/alert/2015-07-04-spv-mining


ome Miners Generating Invalid Blocks
4 July 2015

This document is being updated as new information arrives. Last update: 2015-07-04 09:30 UTC
Summary

Your bitcoins are safe if you received them in transactions confirmed before 2015-07-04 08:00 UTC.

However, there has been a problem with a planned upgrade. For bitcoins received later than the time above, confirmation scores are significantly less reliable then they usually are for users of certain software:

    Lightweight (SPV) wallet users should wait an additional 30 confirmations more than you would normally wait.
    Bitcoin Core 0.9.4 or earlier users should wait an additional 30 confirmations more than you would normally wait or upgrade to Bitcoin Core 0.10.2.
    Web wallet users should wait an additional 30 confirmations more than you would normally wait, unless you know for sure that your wallet is secured by Bitcoin Core 0.9.5 or later.
    Bitcoin Core 0.9.5 or later users are unaffected.

Miners

If you pool mine, please switch to a pool that properly validates blocks. (If you solo mine, please switch to Bitcoin Core 0.10.2.)

Bad pools: these pools are not correctly validating, and are losing money.

    BTC Nuggets

Good pools: these pools properly validate blocks. Please switch to them, at least until the bad pools have fixed their systems.

    Eligius
    kano/ckpool
    P2Pool
    F2Pool

When Will Things Go Back To Normal?

The problem is miners creating invalid blocks. Some software can detect that those blocks are invalid and reject them; other software can't detect that blocks are invalid, so they show confirmations that aren't real.

    Bitcoin Core 0.9.5 and later never had any problems because it could detect which blocks were invalid.
    Bitcoin Core 0.9.4 and earlier will never provide as much security as later versions of Bitcoin Core because it doesn't know about the additional BIP66 consensus rules. Upgrade is recommended to return to full node security.
    Lightweight (SPV) wallets are not safe for less than 30 confirmations until all the major pools switch to full validation.
    Web wallets are very diverse in what infrastructure they run and how they handle double spends, so unless you know for sure that they use Bitcoin Core 0.9.5 or later for full validation, you should assume they have the same security as the lightweight wallets described above.

What's Happening

Summary: Some miners are currently generating invalid blocks. Almost all software (besides Bitcoin Core 0.9.5 and later) will accept these invalid blocks under certain conditions. The paragraphs that follow explain the cause more throughly.

For several months, an increasing amount of mining hash rate has been signaling its intent to begin enforcing BIP66 strict DER signatures. As part of the BIP66 rules, once 950 of the last 1,000 blocks were version 3 (v3) blocks, all upgraded miners would reject version 2 (v2) blocks.

Early morning UTC on 4 July 2015, the 950/1000 (95%) threshold was reached. Shortly thereafter, a small miner (part of the non-upgraded 5%) mined an invalid block--as was an expected occurrence. Unfortunately, it turned out that roughly half the network hash rate was mining without fully validating blocks (called SPV mining), and built new blocks on top of that invalid block.

Note that the roughly 50% of the network that was SPV mining had explicitly indicated that they would enforce the BIP66 rules. By not doing so, several large miners have lost over $50,000 dollars worth of mining income so far.

All software that assumes blocks are valid (because invalid blocks cost miners money) is at risk of showing transactions as confirmed when they really aren't. This particularly affects lightweight (SPV) wallets and software such as old versions of Bitcoin Core which have been downgraded to SPV-level security by the new BIP66 consensus rules.

The immediate fix, which is well underway as of this writing, is to get all miners off of SPV mining and back to full validation (at least temporarily). As this progresses, we will reduce our current recommendation of waiting 30 extra confirmations to a lower number.
thebenjamincode
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 500


37iGtdUJc2xXTDkw5TQZJQX1Wb98gSLYVP


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 12:53:45 PM
 #151

what is the meaning of this?
does it mean that bitcoin may have a bug or something?

how did this happen? is it a flaw on bitcoin system? well i hope its not because
i think it will be a serious problem if many things like this occurs in the future
jl2012 (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1111


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 01:00:58 PM
 #152

what is the meaning of this?
does it mean that bitcoin may have a bug or something?

how did this happen? is it a flaw on bitcoin system? well i hope its not because
i think it will be a serious problem if many things like this occurs in the future

In short: some miners are not doing their job properly. As far as I know, this is the first incident of this kind. However, if many miners keep their sub-optimal practice, we may have similar problem again.

Donation address: 374iXxS4BuqFHsEwwxUuH3nvJ69Y7Hqur3 (Bitcoin ONLY)
LRDGENPLYrcTRssGoZrsCT1hngaH3BVkM4 (LTC)
PGP: D3CC 1772 8600 5BB8 FF67 3294 C524 2A1A B393 6517
LFC_Bitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3752
Merit: 10670


#1 VIP Crypto Casino


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 01:01:51 PM
 #153

So this will only potentially effect people who are making transaction, sending & receiving coins atm?
If I'm a simple HODLER & haven't & won't be buying any coins this weekend I'm safe & ok yes? My BTC's in several wallets & paper wallets are ok & I can totally ignore this?
Thanks in advance to anybody who responds.

█████████████████████████
███████████▄█████████████
██████▀░▀█▀░▀█▀░▀████████
███████▄███▄███▄█████████
████▀██▀██▀░▀████▀░▀█████
███████████░███▀██▄██████
████▀██▀██░░░█░░░████████
███████████░███▄█▀░▀█████
████▀██▀██▄░▄███▄░░░▄████
███████▀███▀███▀██▄██████
██████▄░▄█▄░▄█▄░▄████████
███████████▀█████████████
█████████████████████████
 
.Bitcasino.io.
 
.BTC  ✦  Where winners play  BTC.
.
..
.
    ..





████
████
░░▄████▄████████████▄███▄▄
░███████▄██▄▄▄▄▄▄█████████▄
███████████████████████████
▀████████████████████████▀
░░▀▀████████████████████
██████████████████▄█████████
██
▐███████▀███████▀██▄██████
███████▄██▄█▀████▀████████
░░██████▀▀▀▄▄▄████▀▀████
██▐██████████▀███▀█████████████    ████
███
████████████
███████████████    ████
█████▀████████████████▀
███████▀▀▀█████████▀▀
..
....
 
 ..✦ Play now... 
.
..
QuestionAuthority
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1393


You lead and I'll watch you walk away.


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 01:04:28 PM
 #154

             


EvilDave
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854
Merit: 1001



View Profile
July 04, 2015, 01:08:08 PM
 #155

Quote
Summary: Some miners are currently generating invalid blocks. Almost all software (besides Bitcoin Core 0.9.5 and later) will accept these invalid blocks under certain conditions. The paragraphs that follow explain the cause more throughly.

For several months, an increasing amount of mining hash rate has been signaling its intent to begin enforcing BIP66 strict DER signatures. As part of the BIP66 rules, once 950 of the last 1,000 blocks were version 3 (v3) blocks, all upgraded miners would reject version 2 (v2) blocks.

Early morning UTC on 4 July 2015, the 950/1000 (95%) threshold was reached. Shortly thereafter, a small miner (part of the non-upgraded 5%) mined an invalid block--as was an expected occurrence. Unfortunately, it turned out that roughly half the network hash rate was mining without fully validating blocks (called SPV mining), and built new blocks on top of that invalid block.

Note that the roughly 50% of the network that was SPV mining had explicitly indicated that they would enforce the BIP66 rules. By not doing so, several large miners have lost over $50,000 dollars worth of mining income so far.

All software that assumes blocks are valid (because invalid blocks cost miners money) is at risk of showing transactions as confirmed when they really aren't. This particularly affects lightweight (SPV) wallets and software such as old versions of Bitcoin Core which have been downgraded to SPV-level security by the new BIP66 consensus rules.

The immediate fix, which is well underway as of this writing, is to get all miners off of SPV mining and back to full validation (at least temporarily). As this progresses, we will reduce our current recommendation of waiting 30 extra confirmations to a lower number.

Just for some extra clarity..........
For consumer level users: make sure that you (or your wallet provider) are on Bitcoin 0.9.5 or later, and wait for 30 confirmations on your transfers.
For miners:  stop SPV mining, validate everything or lose income.

(and, obviously, transfer all your BTC into nice stable NXT....... Grin )


Nulli Dei, nulli Reges, solum NXT
Love your money: www.nxt.org  www.ardorplatform.org
www.nxter.org  www.nxtfoundation.org
MarkCara
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 367
Merit: 250


MS & Adobe keys. BestPriceSoft@protonmail.com


View Profile WWW
July 04, 2015, 01:09:02 PM
 #156

Does it affect coinbase and btc-e ?

FEEDBACK / Email: BestPriceSoft@protonmail.com / Skype: TtingTang (Check the Skype ID carefully, beware of imposters! Better contact me via email first if you're not sure)
CHEAP MICROSOFT WINDOWS OFFICE ADOBE KEYS [6YEARS+][70+ FEEDBACK][AUTOBUY]
jl2012 (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1111


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 01:10:30 PM
 #157

So this will only potentially effect people who are making transaction, sending & receiving coins atm?
If I'm a simple HODLER & haven't & won't be buying any coins this weekend I'm safe & ok yes?
Thanks in advance to anybody who responds.

Hodlers are unaffected

Payers, technically speaking, are unaffected, despite that your payees may require more confirmations than usual

Payees, with Bitcoin core 0.9.5 or above, are unaffected.

Payees, with anything else, please follow the instructions in the header of the forum

Donation address: 374iXxS4BuqFHsEwwxUuH3nvJ69Y7Hqur3 (Bitcoin ONLY)
LRDGENPLYrcTRssGoZrsCT1hngaH3BVkM4 (LTC)
PGP: D3CC 1772 8600 5BB8 FF67 3294 C524 2A1A B393 6517
jl2012 (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1111


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 01:11:41 PM
 #158

Does it affect coinbase and btc-e ?

I guess not affected but only they could confirm. Anyone using Bitcoin Core 0.9.5 or above is safe

Donation address: 374iXxS4BuqFHsEwwxUuH3nvJ69Y7Hqur3 (Bitcoin ONLY)
LRDGENPLYrcTRssGoZrsCT1hngaH3BVkM4 (LTC)
PGP: D3CC 1772 8600 5BB8 FF67 3294 C524 2A1A B393 6517
Altcoin4life
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 04, 2015, 01:15:07 PM
 #159

Is there a way to force those spv mining to have their work count as less to discourage it?

Scamalert
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 500


Captain


View Profile
July 04, 2015, 01:18:11 PM
 #160

Wonderful to see how quick the community take action and got this problem under control.
Also great to see that the bitcoin exhange rate is pretty much unaffected.
Just show that everything is under control.
Pretty amature of those pools who did not support the BIP66, I well guess they paid the price with all the orphan blocks they mined, hope they learned a leasson.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!