Bitcoin Developers Changed blocks data! Now plenty people have stalled transacts

[Dealazer]

Edit 3: News were ticking in! But 14.0 was still insecure!
And it allowed from 14.3 to allow the hack they did:

Original post: My 2019 14.3 QT Block 130mb. Of Block0000.dat

Got 16mb with QT 16.3

And rev0000.dat got 19,456kb!

That means they infected the rules of the first blocks data!

That is not Fork,,, that is pre-fork work!

As 14.3 QT shows unknown rules in effect on new blocks mined.

It's insane news??? For your use of Bitcoin even 14.3.

Your funds might be at risk.

Especially some Satoshi mined blocks as there are new rules!

Edit:
They hide it by doing all Bitcoin code backward.

If you got the old 14.3? Then what would happen?



And they implement much more on the ABC test network: Which is BitcoinCash!



Edit 3!
They filed 14.0-insecure


Some bunch of Timetravelers!

[NeuroticFish]

I am not sure what you mean but the way the data is stored doesn't matter as long as the protocol and the content of the data is the same.
So your gibbering means nothing.

So .. what are FUD-ing about?

[Darker45]

This is too technical for a lay person like me to possibly digest. But I surely would want to understand more of what you are saying.

What are these alleged rules that are newly and shadily injected in new blocks? And why does it pose a risk to our Bitcoin? And why do we have to sell?

[Dealazer]

I think this proves much.
On 28th December the change became valid?

I don't know.
Because my QT wants to reload blocks and reindex for hours after I copied old Blockchain copy of the Core files.




It's flause for Bitcoin Really

The enormous power you have with block 00000 to 5035? OR more?

Block 5035 was legendary...

But this takes up 130mb of blocks and 5035 was around 1mb or less?

[gentlemand]

Not totally sure what you're trying to convey but if there were any type of nefarious attempts to trick people with data chaning it would've been all over this forum in seconds and the place would be shouted down.

Whatever's happening to you, it ain't happening to anyone else.

[Dealazer]

Not totally sure what you're trying to convey but if there were any type of nefarious attempts to trick people with data chaning it would've been all over this forum in seconds and the place would be shouted down.

Whatever's happening to you, it ain't happening to anyone else.

Actually it's happening to all!

Download blocks with 14.3 QT

Then Switch over to 16.3 QT

And see both rev0000.dat and block0000.dat was being replaced.

They had a plan to get away with it! Now they had the chance.

Some things are shouted soon!

14.3 QT!!!

[gentlemand]

Jesus.

Sounds terrifying.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5135747.0

[Dealazer]

Jesus.

Sounds terrifying.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5135747.0

See here above on file sizes!

The Greediness of the #Bitcoin  #Developers
It's insane, soon all funds have been moved.
The joke is over.
They single out all the Bitcoins with editing the first blocks!
It's for real!
Insane
And the proof tells it here on #Bitcointalk

Let me tell that it's outrageous. How many funds will be stopped in the moves? But then again who wants to accept?

I'm testing my blocks on BitcoinABC as well and BitcoinCash as it is...

The day you use 14.3 you will not see your funds.

If they have been sent to you by long address and all other if the funds they move then from the block registry.

That moment you don't see your funds in 14.3 QT Bitcoin Software

Maybe they got the right core!

[free-bit.co.in]

It's too late for FUD..accept your fate and wait for a dump or buy now!

[Dealazer]

It's too late for FUD..accept your fate and wait for a dump or buy now!

You can't accept it!

The game is over!!!

Since Bitcoin has actually an original key? or from +2017 Clients?

BCH and BTC forked

Look at the difference between BCH and Bitcoin.
July 2017,

They can fucking hilariously do anything!

Developers of fucking insanity!

The different wallet keys for the block!

"Edit: They might have changed account addresses to anyhow BCH for all addresses. To compress them as BCH?"
This means there is no difference, making this just indifferent.

But not in fact the whole changing first blocks.

[gentlemand]

You can't accept it!

The game is over!!!

Thanks for that.

Just bought more.

[bitbunnny]

This is too technical for a lay person like me to possibly digest. But I surely would want to understand more of what you are saying.

What are these alleged rules that are newly and shadily injected in new blocks? And why does it pose a risk to our Bitcoin? And why do we have to sell?

It's techical but what is important to understand is that it's interpreted in a wrong way, obviously with the cause to spread panic among Bitcoin users, especially those who are not so well informed. Another FUD post.

[Dealazer]

Writing today, again, got an email from Euro Chems

More and more are having trouble of transactions going on in the Blockchain.
Euro Chems as lately and more might be concerned with this matter.
Transactions which never confirm.

Some systems are confirming the transactions, some are not.

How many invalid transactions have been placed? How many not?

A new file that I've observed in between as I had older blockchains copies.


" " " I cannot confirm this " " "
I myself had 0.6BTC in my account which was not possible to move. If I only could enter that wallet.dat file today...
Since I tricked with 14.0-14.3 and that type of system then loaded it into 16.30 and then again used several private keys.
Since blockchain was strictly downloaded from older version blockchains.
This transaction of 0.6BTC was most likely of stolen BTC private keys.

The transactions become in a way impossible to move, for some it may be "yes".

But the system writes this transaction has already occurred on the block...

" " " I cannot confirm the above " " " sorry my computer was reinstalled. Forgot to really think about it why I should had kept the vital information"

The only thing happened above that the transaction isn't sent to mempool. If it can then what?

These files are 131.000kb but I have around 6 different of that style.

What other .dat blocks have been replaced? Minted or tricked with?

Was stolen property of mt.gox already a fact at that time? One bad trick to perform? Developers trying to cover up and other tricks? The transactions always follow to the root of it. To the fiat withdraw. Think about that.

Edit: Was Avast paid to find 14.0.exe version as virus?

[gmaxwell]

I can't figure out if this is just someone that is super sadly confused or an inept attempt at malicious market manipulation.

Needless to say there is no fire here.

Files like "blk00000.dat" are not the blocks by themselves.  They are files that get filled with many blocks written as you download them.   In early software (pre 0.8 IIRC) they would grow to 2GB (maximum vfat file size) before moving to the next one.  The constant appending for a single large file created disk fragmentation and isn't very compatible with pruning, so later versions make smaller files and pre-allocate their space.

The format of bitcoin's database files has changed over time for performance and stability reasons, and so some newer versions convert older files to new versions when you upgrade. The release notes for versions note when a database rewrite is required, and upgrading to those versions usually takes a long time as it converts all the files.

The blocks themselves can never be changed once they are created, unless the software wasn't really bitcoin but was really some other network (like the BCash chains that some scammers try to pass off as "Bitcoin").  But if you had malicious software it would do whatever malicious thing it was going to do without anything being visible about block files.

0.14.0 is marked insecure because of CVE-2018-17144-- just a software bug. Nothing to be excited about there.

The reason the dates on old file on that page is because old versions didn't used to get left up at all (due to space usage reasons). Later the old versions were put online. The old files are all unchanged e.g.


[gmaxwell@bean tmp]$ wget https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.10.0/bitcoin-0.10.0.tar.gz
--2020-05-09 00:52:55--  https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.10.0/bitcoin-0.10.0.tar.gz
Resolving bitcoincore.org (bitcoincore.org)... 107.191.99.5, 198.251.83.116
Connecting to bitcoincore.org (bitcoincore.org)|107.191.99.5|:443... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 4152163 (4.0M) [application/octet-stream]
Saving to: ‘bitcoin-0.10.0.tar.gz’

bitcoin-0.10.0.tar.gz                      100%[=====================================================================================>]   3.96M  3.50MB/s    in 1.1s    

2020-05-09 00:52:57 (3.50 MB/s) - ‘bitcoin-0.10.0.tar.gz’ saved [4152163/4152163]

[gmaxwell@bean tmp]$ sha256sum bitcoin-0.10.0.tar.gz
a516cf6d9f58a117607148405334b35d3178df1ba1c59229609d2bcd08d30624  bitcoin-0.10.0.tar.gz


Which matches the hashes you can find from peoples posts at the time.

When you run old versions (but new enough to know about BIP9) they will warn if blocks have different version numbers than they expect.  If you're just making transactions these warnings are completely harmless, there there so that you know not to mine with that version (you might waste your time producing an invalid block), or if you are accepting transactions you should wait for more confirmations to be confident that they're final.   The reason for this is that over time Bitcoin gains new functionality in a way that is completely backwards compatible, can't risk your existing funds, and won't stop existing wallets from working.

In short, there is nothing at all of interest here.

And if "Euro Chems" is saying otherwise, then perhaps they've been using some of their own "chems".