Bounty for Cracking Bitmain S9 BMminer

[kano]

So ... the above, ignoring the first comment about bmminer, ... is 2 statements:

1) An excuse why there is no complete source for the previous version
2) A stupid false statement about how his previous version was faster

Umm ... I only came back and posted again coz certain people were making false statements about me ... I'm out of here (again) coz it's a waste of time reading and posting here.

[fubly]

P.s.
https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492
Try the software, and share your results here.

This here has nothing more to do with the bounty!!!! This is all after the BREAK!

Next Steps on cgminer new options.
Read this only if you also believe that a chip timeout effects better work.

I will implement now an external field for the timeout.

--timeoutC5

For that we can set this option (default: if unset = bitmain antminer S9 default).

You all know this:

oooooooo oooooooo xooooooo xooooooo oooooxoo oooxoooo oooooooo ooooooo

I will explain it:

o = good chip
x = bad chip

But what declares a GOOD and a BAD?

This:

Code:

if(dev->chain_asic_nonce[i][j]>avg_num)
                        {
                            dev->chain_asic_status_string[i][j+offset] = 'o';
                        }
                        else
                        {
                            dev->chain_asic_status_string[i][j+offset] = 'x';
                            error_asic++;
                        }

Question here: avg_num

The function: check_system_work, sets the avg_num value to zero at start, and then an

if (diff.tv_sec > 60) also to zero and then

inside a for

avg_num += dev->chain_asic_nonce[j];


I'm not finished with this post. I working on atm

[fubly]

Are you wondering if I told you that bitmain can control every miner?

If you want also to block them, just use the new version which is published right now.

https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492/blob/master/build.md

I unset the function now.

If you wand deeper details take a look to the driver now!

https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.c
and
https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.h

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Are you wondering if I told you that bitmain can control every miner?

If you want also to block them, just use the new version which is published right now.

https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492/blob/master/build.md

I unset the function now.

If you wand deeper details take a look to the driver now!

https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.c
and
https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.h

I wonder if that has to do with Bitmain's "Control your miner via the Cloud" service that they used to link to on their site. Just looked and do not see it anymore offhand. The s9 does not have a GUI setting for it, I'll check some s7's at work manyana.

Think the S5 and s7 even have something in the GUI about setting access to that service.
AFAIK Bitmain never activated it. While definitely think it would be BAD idea to give Bitmain or subsidiary that access, I still tried a few times in the past to see what it was about.

[fubly]

I think it has to do with this program also:

https://github.com/bitmaintech/minerlink_agent

• Receive commands from server and response miner state.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

I think it has to do with this program also:

https://github.com/bitmaintech/minerlink_agent

• Receive commands from server and response miner state.

MinerLink - That's it! http://www.minerlink.com/
Looks like all s7's from batch 1 on up to my last (batch-18) has setup for it as part of the Bitmain GUI under Miner Configuration as a 3rd choice next to Advanced

[d57heinz]

Well im thinking that Kano working on this would be a conflict of interest being as he is in tight with avalon.  Im sure they dont want him to jump on this nor does he want to bite himself in foot by helping us being as its for a bitmain miner.  I think getting kano approval even if its up to gpl standards is going to be a stretch on this one.  I think we are on our own folks.  My coin is still available if/when fubly pulls thru.
best regards
d57heinz

If that is how Kano views it (conflict of interest) he should be up front and say that.

We know how he feels about Bitmain in general. For that I can't blame him as they have been less than honorable towards GPL. Not mention that I doubt they ever donated to him for the software they use in their commercial product. But tie that to him working with Avalon and you get: no way in hell will it ever be approved by him.

So much for the idea of him accepting Community extensions to his software

You clearly have no idea about GPLv3 or how to check if it has been adhered to.
... even though you seem to be making posts about that ...

I've posted in here a number of times and still some seem to not give a shit that fubly has broken the cgminer license with his previous version, and they want to support him in this version ...

Yes I am not surprised at that at all.
When people see something they want, they rarely care about copyright or licenses.
You all bought S9s from a company that ignored the GPLv3 license in cgminer in the past.
When they finally did post S9 source after when they said they would and after when the license required them to, I wonder if there is only 1 version for all the S9s out there?
Hopefully there is only one version, since Bitmain have only one version on the public git.
However I also know they changed it coz there was an early version that failed on ckpool ... but there's no sign of that change anywhere ... GPLv3 requires all versions that were released, not just one specific version.

Bitmain have done this before, but that never seems to stop people buying from Bitmain.
Copyrights and licenses are really of little interest to some ...

When fubly broke multiple licenses with his previous version, at least cgminer and CryptoGlance, I posted asking him where the source was.
His answer on the forum says it's here:
https://github.com/Zwilla/cgminer
So what is that?
A copy of my git, unedited.

It contains one pull request, that has never been applied.
The pull request contain lots of code removed from cgminer for drivers not used in the version, changes, some changes with comments suggesting it doesn't work, and a couple of empty files ... ... ... ...

Now there's nothing surprising about this with fubly coz ... as I've already posted here in this thread and explained it ... he's a scammer.

Ok, I got that we are not all the way to the goal yet, but from saying you wouldn't give it a green light when finished to saying that some work still have to be done, is a huge difference.
What is needed to make you even consider this project to get to the finish line ? You know that this project is to get rid of Bitmains way of treating us all ?

As I have already posted a number of times ...
fubly is a scammer.
His magic way he posted how his miner version was 16% faster:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1452009.msg14698985#msg14698985
The missing image from that post:
https://www.schulminator.com/sites/default/files/wiki/wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung-bernoulli-wahrscheinlichkeit.PNG

His git fails the cgminer GPLv3 due to hiding code.
I've no idea why anyone would think I would put any support behind someone scamming and breaking the cgminer license ...

and
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1569129.msg16117745#msg16117745

Both of you are ignoring what I've posted and decided to come up with some tinfoil crap about my interest in Avalon.
My interest in Avalon is coz they DON'T break the GPLv3 license requirements on cgminer ... unlike Bitmain.
Both have offered to send me hardware.
One keeps with the opensource GPLv3 license ... Avalon.

Aside: and for any of you here who haven't been around since 2012 ...
The first miner by Bitmain - the S1 - the whole software front end was copied from Xiangfu who did the Avalon version
To this day you still see Avalon code in the Bitmain firmware

actions speak louder than words. ehh.  To me you seem like your just above us all and you speak to that tone.   Fubly has it covered and it looks like your just upset that he may come with an improvement you cant take credit for?  At least he is giving it his best effort to help the community.  your just filling it with hot air and bs about how Bitmain broke a license your not prepared to defend.. So again not worth the time for us to read about and you to write.

Best Regards
d57heinz

[philipma1957]

Well im thinking that Kano working on this would be a conflict of interest being as he is in tight with avalon.  Im sure they dont want him to jump on this nor does he want to bite himself in foot by helping us being as its for a bitmain miner.  I think getting kano approval even if its up to gpl standards is going to be a stretch on this one.  I think we are on our own folks.  My coin is still available if/when fubly pulls thru.
best regards
d57heinz

If that is how Kano views it (conflict of interest) he should be up front and say that.

We know how he feels about Bitmain in general. For that I can't blame him as they have been less than honorable towards GPL. Not mention that I doubt they ever donated to him for the software they use in their commercial product. But tie that to him working with Avalon and you get: no way in hell will it ever be approved by him.

So much for the idea of him accepting Community extensions to his software

You clearly have no idea about GPLv3 or how to check if it has been adhered to.
... even though you seem to be making posts about that ...

I've posted in here a number of times and still some seem to not give a shit that fubly has broken the cgminer license with his previous version, and they want to support him in this version ...

Yes I am not surprised at that at all.
When people see something they want, they rarely care about copyright or licenses.
You all bought S9s from a company that ignored the GPLv3 license in cgminer in the past.
When they finally did post S9 source after when they said they would and after when the license required them to, I wonder if there is only 1 version for all the S9s out there?
Hopefully there is only one version, since Bitmain have only one version on the public git.
However I also know they changed it coz there was an early version that failed on ckpool ... but there's no sign of that change anywhere ... GPLv3 requires all versions that were released, not just one specific version.

Bitmain have done this before, but that never seems to stop people buying from Bitmain.
Copyrights and licenses are really of little interest to some ...

When fubly broke multiple licenses with his previous version, at least cgminer and CryptoGlance, I posted asking him where the source was.
His answer on the forum says it's here:
https://github.com/Zwilla/cgminer
So what is that?
A copy of my git, unedited.

It contains one pull request, that has never been applied.
The pull request contain lots of code removed from cgminer for drivers not used in the version, changes, some changes with comments suggesting it doesn't work, and a couple of empty files ... ... ... ...

Now there's nothing surprising about this with fubly coz ... as I've already posted here in this thread and explained it ... he's a scammer.

Ok, I got that we are not all the way to the goal yet, but from saying you wouldn't give it a green light when finished to saying that some work still have to be done, is a huge difference.
What is needed to make you even consider this project to get to the finish line ? You know that this project is to get rid of Bitmains way of treating us all ?

As I have already posted a number of times ...
fubly is a scammer.
His magic way he posted how his miner version was 16% faster:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1452009.msg14698985#msg14698985
The missing image from that post:
https://www.schulminator.com/sites/default/files/wiki/wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung-bernoulli-wahrscheinlichkeit.PNG

His git fails the cgminer GPLv3 due to hiding code.
I've no idea why anyone would think I would put any support behind someone scamming and breaking the cgminer license ...

and
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1569129.msg16117745#msg16117745

Both of you are ignoring what I've posted and decided to come up with some tinfoil crap about my interest in Avalon.
My interest in Avalon is coz they DON'T break the GPLv3 license requirements on cgminer ... unlike Bitmain.
Both have offered to send me hardware.
One keeps with the opensource GPLv3 license ... Avalon.

Aside: and for any of you here who haven't been around since 2012 ...
The first miner by Bitmain - the S1 - the whole software front end was copied from Xiangfu who did the Avalon version
To this day you still see Avalon code in the Bitmain firmware

actions speak louder than words. ehh.  To me you seem like your just above us all and you speak to that tone.   Fubly has it covered and it looks like your just upset that he may come with an improvement you cant take credit for?  At least he is giving it his best effort to help the community.  your just filling it with hot air and bs about how Bitmain broke a license your not prepared to defend.. So again not worth the time for us to read about and you to write.

Best Regards
d57heinz

This was supposed to be something nice  and it got twisted sideways.

I would think some simple set of pm's could have stopped this but the time for pm's has been missed.
I won't change my software and use this for now.  

But I will send 0.10 btc to Fubly  since I do not want him to work for nothing.

@ ck and kano  

  I got involved in this to be supportive not destructive.

 I suppose I am at least 1/3 to blame since I did not pm either one of you to ask about the issues you had with Fubly and the older GIT



as for buying an s-9  there were no other options to mine btc.  I am a miner more or less.

well now I earn more btc with ETH and XMR  gpu mining.   

not a knock on either one of you since btc mining is out of our hands anyway. in the hands of bitmaintech and the like.

[citronick]

Can we collectively decide or poll on a consensus?

Put all the personal issues aside - and let's get a good win-win outcome.

Also, we need kano's feedback - I have not his latest post - I hope his feedback will be favourable.

If we cannot get our act together - it will only benefit Bitmain and the other pools.

We need to decide - YES or NO to the fork, and get back to business.

I was very excited about the intention of this bounty and fully supported it - the upside was massive for all of us if not the entire ASICS mining world, because it will teach Bitmain a lesson that the mining community can make a difference.

I guess I am wrong... IMHO, Bitmain wins again...

After reading the few pages of feedback...

I am disappointed that parties involved have not reached a conclusion, in-fact I see many new information now and have made my own analysis and made my recommendations to my investors.

I am not happy about the outcomes and rationales on why this project is not approved, but that's sorely my own opinion and selfish analysis.

Therefore, I have made a decision to stay out of this matter, as I am firstly responsible for maximizing my investors returns in BTC and non-BTC mining and trading.

There is only so much I can do and control, the things that is beyond my control ... I do not want to spend any more time and effort on it.

Like other members, I will send my original BTC donation to Fubly as he has done the work for the intended bounty. The usability of the fubly's final published codes in my preferred pool is a different matter altogether.

To all parties involved, kano, -ck, fubly.... I don't have any grudges against anyone of you - all of you have your own opinions, principles and reputation to protect --- just be nice to each other.

Live long and prosper!

[NotFuzzyWarm]

From a Dr. of CompSci in my Skype room (yes the once infamous AMT room is still alive!) regarding GPL violations and sale of programs:
  1) Yes Fubly should have released his driver code work for the s7.

  2) Since most of the s9 code he is doing is based on s7 work (even Kano said that) AND SINCE THIS s9 CODE IS PUBLISHED, then point-1 is now moot.

  3) As to sale of what should be considered code for an add-on: Even with CGminer being open-source one CAN sell modified packages containing it and closed source code. Just fulfill the requirements of pointing to/providing the source(s) for the Open Source parts.

  4) Point-3 applies ONLY if code such as ASICboost is not put into CGminer as part of it but rather is a helper add-on. Something  that intercepts header information/manipulates it and then passes the block information to CGminer. In other words, only if the boost is pretty much stand-alone code and that is what is being bought.

  5) The only formatting fault that stands out in Fubly's git is that the 1st commit should have been a clean copy of 4.9.2 with all the other code commits after that to provide a clear deviation reference point for Fubly's code changes.

[philipma1957]

Here is the answer from Timo Hanke:

Ich verstehe fast nur Bahnhof. Für welchen miner Typ soll das der code sein? Ist das code von Con Kolivas wie in der Readme steht? Wenn der code öffentlich ist, wo ist dann die GPL violation? Wo gibt es einen Hinweis auf asicboost?

He say: I understand nothing, if you published (to the public) the code I can´t understand where there is a violation against GPL?


Dear Cgminer Dev Team,

this will be now my next steps:

• make a fork of bitmaintech/bmminer
• publishing my code
• create a update script for S9 (bmminer to cgminer 4.9.2)
• create a downgrade script  (cgminer 4.9.2 to bmminer)
• collecting money for the bounty to this address: 16L45ub3SpHZ6dYbqseip7Fv4BEJSj9xEo

There is no need of any escrow, because I will publish the code direct for public, after testing and review you can donate what ever you want to me.

If you just want to make a donation to the developer team take a look to this page https://github.com/kanoi/cgminer or this https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer you will find there a donation address.


On this page https://www.zwilla.de/en/auctions/english-software/donation-product-for-changing-bmminer-into-cgminer-4-9-2/ I will published a donation product if you want to donate with paypal or btc. For this you will get a invoice on the fly.

Also you can make an offer - there is a button "make an offer" all value will be accepted which are at minimum 1% of 20 bucks.

And if you donate and not satisfied with the new code, let me know I will send you your donation back.
IF you send btc you will get btc back, you send fiat you get fiat back. The same amount.

I will publish the code this evening.

I sent you $50 usd in btc

I am checking on how to send $50 usd to the developer team as I promised 100 altogether

so $50 + $ 50 = $100

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Query: Looking at https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492/blob/master/build.md I take it we have to SSH into a miner and do the instructions on the command line.

Once 1 of the .tar files is made for a miner, can that be copied/backed up to a PC and then used with Bitmains GUI page to directly flash our other miners as an update??

[philipma1957]

Here is my $ 50 donation to the other party.

i.e. kano & ck

so $100 was donated ½ to team kano/CK  ½ to FUBLY

I will not use the software on my s-9's

but I would like to ask kano and or ck  to pm me in the future  if there is a problem with something I am doing on the site.  I in turn will do the same with them.

[-ck]

but I would like to ask kano and or ck  to pm me in the future  if there is a problem with something I am doing on the site.  I in turn will do the same with them.

You weren't doing anything wrong. I had zero intention of getting involved and making a judgement call on fubly's work. However, you asked me to sign off on it which is when I spoke up about my concerns. I still think if you're happy with the product he generates then it makes no difference what I think, but if you want me to bless it, I cannot do that for the reasons I've outlined. Getting Kano to sign off on his work is likely 100x harder. The language barrier is not helping the discussion either, where fubly is asking  fellow German to explain why he might be accused of dishonouring the license requirements of the GPL when Kano's concern there is fubly's previous project, and Kano would refuse to "forgive and forget" unless fubly goes back and releases all the hidden code and retracts claims of improved performance.

[moe7865]

but I would like to ask kano and or ck  to pm me in the future  if there is a problem with something I am doing on the site.  I in turn will do the same with them.

You weren't doing anything wrong. I had zero intention of getting involved and making a judgement call on fubly's work. However, you asked me to sign off on it which is when I spoke up about my concerns. I still think if you're happy with the product he generates then it makes no difference what I think, but if you want me to bless it, I cannot do that for the reasons I've outlined. Getting Kano to sign off on his work is likely 100x harder. The language barrier is not helping the discussion either, where fubly is asking  fellow German to explain why he might be accused of dishonouring the license requirements of the GPL when Kano's concern there is fubly's previous project, and Kano would refuse to "forgive and forget" unless fubly goes back and releases all the hidden code and retracts claims of improved performance.

Wel said 

[philipma1957]

but I would like to ask kano and or ck  to pm me in the future  if there is a problem with something I am doing on the site.  I in turn will do the same with them.

You weren't doing anything wrong. I had zero intention of getting involved and making a judgement call on fubly's work. However, you asked me to sign off on it which is when I spoke up about my concerns. I still think if you're happy with the product he generates then it makes no difference what I think, but if you want me to bless it, I cannot do that for the reasons I've outlined. Getting Kano to sign off on his work is likely 100x harder. The language barrier is not helping the discussion either, where fubly is asking  fellow German to explain why he might be accused of dishonouring the license requirements of the GPL when Kano's concern there is fubly's previous project, and Kano would refuse to "forgive and forget" unless fubly goes back and releases all the hidden code and retracts claims of improved performance.

   Yes which is why I decided to not do  escrow services.  The older  project is still in  active violation status. That would not be the same as: forgive and forget since it is active.
 It is what I failed to understand about the issue.  I did not realize it was active.  Like I mention understanding code and code GPL rules is not my area of expertise. Once informed the prior problem was current and active I stopped my escrow service and refunded all involved.

[fubly]

Dear Community,

I need more time to read all the posts.

But I want to inform you, that I published an update. Also the binaries are updated.

p.s. uthash.h - UTHASH_VERSION 2.0.1 - Give me a feedback please if it was not a good idead, but the Cgminer is working also perfect with it.



at the git folder I was using this after every new build:

Code:

mv /usr/bin/bmminer /usr/bin/bmminer-old

cp cgminer /usr/bin/bmminer

chmod 755 /usr/bin/bmminer

/etc/init.d/bmminer.sh restart

sleep 3

screen -r

https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492


_{now reading the post above}

[-ck]

p.s. uthash.h - UTHASH_VERSION 2.0.1 - Give me a feedback please if it was not a good idead, but the Cgminer is working also perfect with it.

You want feedback? Sure. Updating uthash does precisely nothing.

[fubly]

p.s. uthash.h - UTHASH_VERSION 2.0.1 - Give me a feedback please if it was not a good idead, but the Cgminer is working also perfect with it.

You want feedback? Sure. Updating uthash does precisely nothing.

Check! It really does nothing other, just the Version number is changed and the copyright notice.

https://github.com/troydhanson/uthash/blame/master/src/uthash.h


p.s. thx to all donators (btc/paypal) 

[fubly]

ATM I was running a 24hour race between two S9.

One with modified driver settings and one with default.

modified driver (pari with git atm)
S9-1: (15.14 Th/s Scoring Hash Rate)    (21.47 Th/s 5 minutes)  (16.11 Th/sHour)  (9.205 Th/sDay  = started this morning)

unmodified driver
S9-2: (6.320 Th/s Scoring Hash Rate)    (7.158 Th/s 5 minutes (8.948 Th/sHour)  (12.62 Th/s Day  = diff changed 3pm)