Bitcoin Forum
May 12, 2024, 02:59:26 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: (Successful) Dictionary Attack Against Private Keys  (Read 9397 times)
dserrano5
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974
Merit: 1029



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 04:20:18 PM
 #41

To get rid of these junk "password testing outputs" don't create yet more outputs, here is how you make a transaction to defragment the utxo set:

[Detailed technical explanation]

I think I'm missing something here. Isn't it easier to use a coin control patch/utility to pick e.g. 10 of these tiny outputs, combine with a large output of mine (so the resulting priority is high enough) and create a single output to myself? By repeating this procedure we could also reduce the UTXO set without having to fiddle with raw transactions and/or edit any hexdump.
1715482766
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715482766

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715482766
Reply with quote  #2

1715482766
Report to moderator
1715482766
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715482766

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715482766
Reply with quote  #2

1715482766
Report to moderator
The Bitcoin network protocol was designed to be extremely flexible. It can be used to create timed transactions, escrow transactions, multi-signature transactions, etc. The current features of the client only hint at what will be possible in the future.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
gmaxwell
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4172
Merit: 8419



View Profile WWW
September 06, 2013, 06:20:49 PM
 #42

I think I'm missing something here. Isn't it easier to use a coin control patch/utility to pick e.g. 10 of these tiny outputs, combine with a large output of mine (so the resulting priority is high enough) and create a single output to myself? By repeating this procedure we could also reduce the UTXO set without having to fiddle with raw transactions and/or edit any hexdump.
Thats fine too, though it does result in moving more data than strictly required (the extra signature for the coins you're moving just as a source of priority) and priority also limits how much you can do thus for free.

What you don't want to do is just move one single worthless output by itself... that just further decreases the odds that it'll ever get cleaned up.

Eligius now has a pushtx interface which will directly accept OP_RETURN and other weird txn that eligius accepts: http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/pushtxn.php
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  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!