Bitcoin Forum
December 14, 2017, 11:03:56 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
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 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] GameCoin (GME) - Current version = v0.8.4.2  (Read 66374 times)
elend
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 95


View Profile
September 06, 2013, 05:22:37 PM
 #241

The point everyone seems to miss is the problem started at block 63485 not block 64000, prior to block 63485 blocks were being found every couple of minutes, then they suddenly were coming in every few seconds, I was watching the count on one of the pools stats pages, not on the block explorer that came later. Someone started to inject fast blocks at block 63485. Then when we hit 64k some of the blocks were 400 coins long but most were still 1000 coins. I would say the 400 coin long blocks were the legit ones, and the 1,000 were an attack or bad cleint.


A fundamental flaw in all the crypto coins bases on Bitcoin code, is the ability to accept mined blocks at a faster rate than a per-determined lower limit. eg. if you want your block rate to be 60sec then peers should not accept blocks that are time stamped ad being mined less than 30sec apart. The client software should use the  many time servers on the Internet to set the time accurately, then reject impossible time stamps such as pre-mined chains from an attacker.

IRC peers should be disabled by default in the client software, and a few reliable seed nodes in the code.



Well you mention a couple of fundamental issues concerning the most cryptocoins.

Solving this issues can be adresses on a more long-term timeframe.

In my opinion they are not the reason for the actual problem of Gamecoin.

Actually - I think - there is just a bug in the Gamecoin-Code starting with version 0.8.2.1.
Especially concerning a correct difficulty-upswing.

As Petr1fied told us earlier, he/she is already looking into the code an searching for the bug.



 
1513249436
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513249436

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513249436
Reply with quote  #2

1513249436
Report to moderator
1513249436
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513249436

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513249436
Reply with quote  #2

1513249436
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Petr1fied
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


View Profile
September 06, 2013, 05:52:44 PM
 #242

I don't believe the issue existed in v0.8.2.1, I believe It was introduced in v0.8.3.1.

The fairest solution to all is to roll back to the last block that all clients will have accepted which was 63,999. At this point I intend to create a separate fork by mining exactly 1 block. This new block 64,000 will be added as a checkpoint and this is where we will be starting from in the next client version.

I have abandoned the plan to reduce the block time from 2.5 minutes but I'm not going to increase it either. I will however be bringing retargets to 12 blocks apart and I intend to make the maximum adjustment 110% although it will remain on 400% for the first few retargets to bring us up to around a ~0.25 difficulty by block 64056.

The next client version will also ban all versions lower than itself from the get go so the update will be as mandatory is it can possibly get.

I am currently running isolated tests from my new baseline block 64,000 to ensure that it is behaving as expected so don't expect a new release too fast. I'd much rather fix issues now than have to do all this again.
erk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


View Profile
September 06, 2013, 06:13:21 PM
 #243

I don't believe the issue existed in v0.8.2.1, I believe It was introduced in v0.8.3.1.

The fairest solution to all is to roll back to the last block that all clients will have accepted which was 63,999. At this point I intend to create a separate fork by mining exactly 1 block. This new block 64,000 will be added as a checkpoint and this is where we will be starting from in the next client version.

I have abandoned the plan to reduce the block time from 2.5 minutes but I'm not going to increase it either. I will however be bringing retargets to 12 blocks apart and I intend to make the maximum adjustment 110% although it will remain on 400% for the first few retargets to bring us up to around a ~0.25 difficulty by block 64056.

The next client version will also ban all versions lower than itself from the get go so the update will be as mandatory is it can possibly get.

I am currently running isolated tests from my new baseline block 64,000 to ensure that it is behaving as expected so don't expect a new release too fast. I'd much rather fix issues now than have to do all this again.


I am amazed, how many time in this thread do I have to say the attack started at block 63485 can't you people simply look at the block chain at that point and the timestamps to confirm what I am saying? You are proposing to validate the bad blocks between 63485 and 64000 by introducing a checkpoint I don't believe this nonsense!

Petr1fied
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


View Profile
September 06, 2013, 07:04:22 PM
 #244

I've not examined every single block but I've only noticed 1 block which appears to go back in time by a matter of a few seconds, we're not talking hours here as would be expected if someone just dumped blocks on the network. All of the rest appear to go in sequence albeit getting generated ever faster due to the rapidly dropping difficulty.

There is an error in the code which allowed it to go to the absolute bare minimum difficulty and stay there. I have confirmed as much myself in testing. That is what has caused the massive number of blocks so yes I am going to validate the blocks up to 63,999 as this is the point that all clients agree on before going their separate ways.
erk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


View Profile
September 06, 2013, 07:42:30 PM
 #245

I've not examined every single block but I've only noticed 1 block which appears to go back in time by a matter of a few seconds, we're not talking hours here as would be expected if someone just dumped blocks on the network. All of the rest appear to go in sequence albeit getting generated ever faster due to the rapidly dropping difficulty.

There is an error in the code which allowed it to go to the absolute bare minimum difficulty and stay there. I have confirmed as much myself in testing. That is what has caused the massive number of blocks so yes I am going to validate the blocks up to 63,999 as this is the point that all clients agree on before going their separate ways.

What is the payout address that mined almost all the 500+ blocks between 63486 and 63999 in less than 20min?

 
erk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


View Profile
September 06, 2013, 07:47:03 PM
 #246

You are all wrong.

The problem started before block 63485, it started during the time warp. The coin is still under attack!!

Please take off your blinders and quit holding on to old resentments and realize that these minor fixes are creating more problems. Rollback to 63380, and remove the block time from 1 minute and change it to 4 minutes, change the confirmations to 5 instead of 6.
Read the code noob, the block time 1min doesn't kick in until block 64k it had nothing to do with the problem I pointed out.

 
Code:
else if(pindexLast->nHeight >= 63999)
    {
        nTargetTimespan = 120; // 2 minutes
        nTargetSpacing = 60; // 1 minute
        nInterval = nTargetTimespan / nTargetSpacing;
Petr1fied
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


View Profile
September 06, 2013, 08:08:45 PM
 #247

I've not examined every single block but I've only noticed 1 block which appears to go back in time by a matter of a few seconds, we're not talking hours here as would be expected if someone just dumped blocks on the network. All of the rest appear to go in sequence albeit getting generated ever faster due to the rapidly dropping difficulty.

There is an error in the code which allowed it to go to the absolute bare minimum difficulty and stay there. I have confirmed as much myself in testing. That is what has caused the massive number of blocks so yes I am going to validate the blocks up to 63,999 as this is the point that all clients agree on before going their separate ways.

What is the payout address that mined almost all the 500+ blocks between 63486 and 63999 in less than 20min?

 

It was most likely a GME address associated with ortchi's pool as I think there was a rally to mine there last night.

For what it's worth I have zero problem with invalidating everything all the way back to the last checkpoint I added to checkpoints.cpp which was 63380. It makes no difference to me as I didn't mine any of those blocks. Everyone should state which block they believe it should be rolled back to and I'll go with the majority.

The core problem is there is an error in the code and that needs to be resolved before a new client can be released and I'm still testing different settings.
Petr1fied
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


View Profile
September 06, 2013, 08:27:24 PM
 #248

PoolMiner: I'm not changing the block time at all any longer, it is staying at 2.5 minutes. Any change to the block time also needs a change to the coin supply to maintain balance. At 4 minute blocks I'd have to change the subsidy to 1600 GME and the coin will be constantly at a much higher difficulty in general.
bluestang
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 128


View Profile
September 06, 2013, 10:27:57 PM
 #249

I've not examined every single block but I've only noticed 1 block which appears to go back in time by a matter of a few seconds, we're not talking hours here as would be expected if someone just dumped blocks on the network. All of the rest appear to go in sequence albeit getting generated ever faster due to the rapidly dropping difficulty.

There is an error in the code which allowed it to go to the absolute bare minimum difficulty and stay there. I have confirmed as much myself in testing. That is what has caused the massive number of blocks so yes I am going to validate the blocks up to 63,999 as this is the point that all clients agree on before going their separate ways.

What is the payout address that mined almost all the 500+ blocks between 63486 and 63999 in less than 20min?

 

It was most likely a GME address associated with ortchi's pool as I think there was a rally to mine there last night.

For what it's worth I have zero problem with invalidating everything all the way back to the last checkpoint I added to checkpoints.cpp which was 63380. It makes no difference to me as I didn't mine any of those blocks. Everyone should state which block they believe it should be rolled back to and I'll go with the majority.

The core problem is there is an error in the code and that needs to be resolved before a new client can be released and I'm still testing different settings.

I switched from ahmed's to ortichi's yesterday since I knew (at least thought) he was on the correct chain and had 1600 kh/s on it so that may have well been me finding all the blocks.

Either way, make it 64000 like you have planned and make that the starting point.

Cheers,
bluestang

Cryptsy Trade Key: 3d74ea28a32572a77c108116c46ba67a65834bfc
Miner-TE
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 514



View Profile
September 07, 2013, 12:35:23 AM
 #250

64,000 is OK with me....  Just want to get back to mining this coin.

Looks like I'll loose a small payout from coin-base.net pool but no worries.  Smiley

Thanks for the hard work getting us through this.

Any ETA on a re-launch?

BTC - 1PeMMYGn7xbZjUYeaWe9ct1VV6szLS1vkD - LTC - LbtcJRJJQQBjZuHr6Wm7vtB9RnnWtRNYpq
8kmode
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 107


View Profile
September 07, 2013, 03:31:19 AM
 #251

So this block chain explorer (http://gme.p2pool.nl/chain/Gamecoins) is pointing to the wrong block chain?
erk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


View Profile
September 07, 2013, 03:58:16 AM
 #252

So this block chain explorer (http://gme.p2pool.nl/chain/Gamecoins) is pointing to the wrong block chain?

Who knows, despite many requests, nobody will publish the IP of a node that's on the right chain to sync to.

Miner-TE
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 514



View Profile
September 07, 2013, 04:08:32 AM
 #253

So this block chain explorer (http://gme.p2pool.nl/chain/Gamecoins) is pointing to the wrong block chain?

Who knows, despite many requests, nobody will publish the IP of a node that's on the right chain to sync to.



All my peers (only 5) appear to be on the 102K blockchain.  I'd guess to be on the other chain would require disabling DNS/IRC and only connecting to a "Good" known node that is unknown to us.

We will need to wait for the new client and probably download the blockchain again ....

Any chain/mining we doing now is going to be wiped with the new client and checkpoint.  We might as well be on the testnet ... were not doing any good on this chain.

BTC - 1PeMMYGn7xbZjUYeaWe9ct1VV6szLS1vkD - LTC - LbtcJRJJQQBjZuHr6Wm7vtB9RnnWtRNYpq
8kmode
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 107


View Profile
September 07, 2013, 09:40:25 AM
 #254

So this block chain explorer (http://gme.p2pool.nl/chain/Gamecoins) is pointing to the wrong block chain?

Who knows, despite many requests, nobody will publish the IP of a node that's on the right chain to sync to.



All my peers (only 5) appear to be on the 102K blockchain.  I'd guess to be on the other chain would require disabling DNS/IRC and only connecting to a "Good" known node that is unknown to us.

We will need to wait for the new client and probably download the blockchain again ....

Any chain/mining we doing now is going to be wiped with the new client and checkpoint.  We might as well be on the testnet ... were not doing any good on this chain.

damn... Ive found like 5002 blocks
Oldminer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022



View Profile
September 07, 2013, 09:42:10 AM
 #255

So this block chain explorer (http://gme.p2pool.nl/chain/Gamecoins) is pointing to the wrong block chain?

Who knows, despite many requests, nobody will publish the IP of a node that's on the right chain to sync to.



All my peers (only 5) appear to be on the 102K blockchain.  I'd guess to be on the other chain would require disabling DNS/IRC and only connecting to a "Good" known node that is unknown to us.

We will need to wait for the new client and probably download the blockchain again ....

Any chain/mining we doing now is going to be wiped with the new client and checkpoint.  We might as well be on the testnet ... were not doing any good on this chain.

damn... Ive found like 5002 blocks

Its pointless mining this atm

If you like my post please feel free to give me some positive rep https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=18639
Tip me BTC: 1FBmoYijXVizfYk25CpiN8Eds9J6YiRDaX
Tommo_Aus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
September 07, 2013, 11:19:28 AM
 #256

My pool made it to block 102177, I'm guessing they'll be orphaned. It would be great to see a fix so the pool can mine GME and I don't get the flack for mining going to waste Smiley

Tompool - http://tompool.org - a 2% fee SHA256/Scrypt/BURST/Groestl multipool supporting ANC, ASC, DGC, EZC, FLO, GLD, GME, MNC, RYC, TGC, TRC, XNC, ZET & more
Petr1fied
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


View Profile
September 07, 2013, 12:16:47 PM
 #257

It's already been stated that there will be a new completely independent fork. As I've seen very little objection to a new block 64,000 being the starting point that is where we will be starting from.

Currently I am the only person with this newly mined block 64,000 and it won't be made available until the new client is ready and the pools signal that they have updated to the latest code. (When ready and tested)

If you're mining right now you're wasting your time. Any coins generated past block 63,999 will not exist.
nhminer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 443



View Profile
September 07, 2013, 01:36:12 PM
 #258

It's already been stated that there will be a new completely independent fork. As I've seen very little objection to a new block 64,000 being the starting point that is where we will be starting from.

Currently I am the only person with this newly mined block 64,000 and it won't be made available until the new client is ready and the pools signal that they have updated to the latest code. (When ready and tested)

If you're mining right now you're wasting your time. Any coins generated past block 63,999 will not exist.

Please publish an authoritative node we can use for syncing

BTC - 1nhminerKr6whRyUkVc2Gbe3aCwhrvdjW
8kmode
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 107


View Profile
September 07, 2013, 01:41:51 PM
 #259

That sucks.
Literally lost all my coins whilst sending to cryptsy when the block chain messed up.
nhminer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 443



View Profile
September 07, 2013, 01:51:51 PM
 #260

That sucks.
Literally lost all my coins whilst sending to cryptsy when the block chain messed up.

No ... if the transaction was after block 64000, when the blockchain rolls back they will reappear in your wallet.

BTC - 1nhminerKr6whRyUkVc2Gbe3aCwhrvdjW
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 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!