kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4620
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
January 17, 2016, 03:37:04 AM |
|
As the flaw states, it's only a problem if you are connecting to something you don't control. The authentication of the server host key prevents exploitation by a man-in-the-middle, so this information leak is restricted to connections to malicious or compromised servers.
Usually a good idea to point out something like that rather than cause panic.
|
|
|
|
Tibi
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
January 18, 2016, 12:46:35 AM |
|
almost 1 week since we found a block ((
|
|
|
|
notbatman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2212
Merit: 1038
|
|
January 18, 2016, 12:50:01 AM |
|
almost 1 week since we found a block (( Bitcoin Difficulty: 113,354,299,801
|
|
|
|
jedimstr
|
|
January 18, 2016, 03:50:20 AM |
|
almost 1 week since we found a block (( Bitcoin Difficulty: 113,354,299,801 And Hashrate hovering around 1.14PH.
|
|
|
|
notbatman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2212
Merit: 1038
|
|
January 18, 2016, 04:01:02 AM |
|
almost 1 week since we found a block (( Bitcoin Difficulty: 113,354,299,801 And Hashrate hovering around 1.14PH. ...and what happened to Bitfuy's promise to spread the love?
|
|
|
|
nicklello
Member
Offline
Activity: 193
Merit: 10
|
|
January 18, 2016, 12:11:56 PM |
|
So....
How do we attract more hashrate to P2Pool ?
|
|
|
|
Cassey
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 470
Merit: 250
Better to have 100 friends than 100 rubles
|
|
January 18, 2016, 12:43:15 PM |
|
You need a LOT more hashrate. I'm using a 40PH (more or less) pool and on back-luck weeks its variance is barely tolerable. I fear the only way this will happen is if several major pools die.
I know that mathematically, variance does not matter - in theory, but that theory does not take into account the changing difficulty, does it?
|
Cassey
|
|
|
notbatman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2212
Merit: 1038
|
|
January 18, 2016, 01:20:05 PM |
|
So....
How do we attract more hashrate to P2Pool ?
|
|
|
|
Tibi
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
January 18, 2016, 06:54:28 PM |
|
think we have to kill the dog boss.....
|
|
|
|
-ck
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4284
Merit: 1645
Ruu \o/
|
|
January 18, 2016, 09:00:26 PM |
|
I know that mathematically, variance does not matter - in theory, but that theory does not take into account the changing difficulty, does it?
You are correct mathematically on the latter part and it's not just a hunch. If you have bad luck for a whole diff and the diff is rising, then you will not on average ever make up the difference after the diff rise. However the opposite is also true - if you have good luck during a period and diff is rising, then on average after the diff change you will remain ahead long term. The practical side of this for those trying to understand it - if diff continues to rise, then short term luck has more long term effects on your overall returns the smaller the pool is.
|
Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel 2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org -ck
|
|
|
Cassey
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 470
Merit: 250
Better to have 100 friends than 100 rubles
|
|
January 18, 2016, 09:08:22 PM |
|
Thanks, that makes sense. However... over the long term, luck should equalize out, since by definition its just statiscal noise.
|
Cassey
|
|
|
|
|
Cassey
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 470
Merit: 250
Better to have 100 friends than 100 rubles
|
|
January 19, 2016, 01:23:21 AM |
|
And, of course, make sure your equipment can mine with Litecoins Scrypt algo instead of Bitcoins SHA256. Few ASICs can do both.
|
Cassey
|
|
|
wariner
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1255
Merit: 1004
pool.sexy
|
|
January 19, 2016, 06:24:58 AM |
|
And, of course, make sure your equipment can mine with Litecoins Scrypt algo instead of Bitcoins SHA256. Few ASICs can do both. and be sure to add " --net litecoin "
|
Pool.sexy - Pool ETH-ETC-EXP-UBQ-ZEC-DBIX..and more low fee Discussionmy BTC: 1KiMpRAWscBvhRgLs8jDnqrZEKJzt3Ypfi
|
|
|
notbatman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2212
Merit: 1038
|
|
January 19, 2016, 11:31:45 PM |
|
So I got p2pool sandboxed and a new web browser that doesn't 'sploit while running boxed. Smooth sailing for a bit but just now the assholes have returned to spamming the mempool full of shit; lopped a 0 off my txfees in response.
|
|
|
|
Richy_T
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2604
Merit: 2321
1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k
|
|
January 20, 2016, 05:51:44 AM |
|
Has anyone else had any trouble with p2pool interfering with their bitcoind?
I run some software which queries the RPC interface periodically and it's been giving 500 read timeout errors. I bumped my rpc threads up to 100 and it helped but it was still doing it. I just killed p2pool and a lot of the read errors stopped but also the requests I was making were coming back a lot faster. Does p2pool hit RPC pretty hard?
|
1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k
|
|
|
notbatman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2212
Merit: 1038
|
|
January 20, 2016, 07:49:39 AM |
|
Has anyone else had any trouble with p2pool interfering with their bitcoind?
I run some software which queries the RPC interface periodically and it's been giving 500 read timeout errors. I bumped my rpc threads up to 100 and it helped but it was still doing it. I just killed p2pool and a lot of the read errors stopped but also the requests I was making were coming back a lot faster. Does p2pool hit RPC pretty hard?
Try sandboxing both p2pool and your web browser. Whatever other app that's online or interacting with bitcoind would also be a good idea. This is just a guess but I think "they" are exploiting a vulnerability in python to cause a memory leak in bitcoind via a ddos mirror attack via multiple entry vectors. Today "they" started screwing with spam tx's to trigger the memory leak now that I've closed off their entry points with sandboxing. Up your mintxfee to filter the spam, that's working for me so far.
|
|
|
|
localhost
|
|
January 20, 2016, 08:52:08 AM |
|
I think the reason so few people use it is because, years after the first release, it's still so complicated to set up. I did configure Bitcoin Core to run that RPC server, here's bitcoin.conf: server=1 rpcuser='me' rpcpassword='youwish' Then tried to run run_p2pool.exe, but could find no option to configure the rpcuser there. And of course it failed. In the log I noticed: Testing bitcoind RPC connection to 'http://127.0.0.1:8332/' with username '' So I went back and set rpcuser='' in bitcoin.conf And I ran p2pool again this way: run_p2pool.exe -a myrichwalletiwish youwish And still it didn't work. So I went back to a normal pool, because I have other things to do today.........
|
-
|
|
|
trendax
|
|
January 20, 2016, 08:58:29 AM |
|
I think the reason so few people use it is because, years after the first release, it's still so complicated to set up. I did configure Bitcoin Core to run that RPC server, here's bitcoin.conf: server=1 rpcuser='me' rpcpassword='youwish' Then tried to run run_p2pool.exe, but could find no option to configure the rpcuser there. And of course it failed. In the log I noticed: Testing bitcoind RPC connection to 'http://127.0.0.1:8332/' with username '' So I went back and set rpcuser='' in bitcoin.conf And I ran p2pool again this way: run_p2pool.exe -a myrichwalletiwish youwish And still it didn't work. So I went back to a normal pool, because I have other things to do today......... run_p2pool.exe me youwish -a yourbitcoinaddress EDIT: lack of concentration
|
|
|
|
|