★[ANN] [NAV] NAV COIN - Community Fund Live!!!

[Seanzqt]

Nav would reach to 7k shortly imho.

Doubt it, there is not enough buy support for it, we'd most likely see it fall before it reaches 7k.

[rakesh1_90]

Nav would reach to 7k shortly imho.

Doubt it, there is not enough buy support for it, we'd most likely see it fall before it reaches 7k.

Well, u never know!

[Seanzqt]

Nav would reach to 7k shortly imho.

Doubt it, there is not enough buy support for it, we'd most likely see it fall before it reaches 7k.

Well, u never know!

Good to have a dream price, it isn't impossible, though if you're watching the buy support for example on Poloniex the buying power is not there. Since there is more news expected as far as I can see on Coindesk then this could see some positive investments in to the NAV, once news runs dry watch the curse begin. You'll have trolls say how bad it is, what a stupid coin, has no value or growth, and the positive side give there input. I am expecting some positive outcomes with NAV, better than that Carpe Diem prospect. 

[rakesh1_90]

About time we crossed 2k. Bring in the BTCs

Put your buys low and buy off the sell wall.

[gregofdoom]

An hour already looking for coins that sent the wallet in my computer to Poloniex.
Is it normal ?

[xtrembash]

An hour already looking for coins that sent the wallet in my computer to Poloniex.
Is it normal ?

yea i just have some crappy deposit
nothing is happening
So i resynchro because i m paranoid ...  

p.s:
This blockchain is really a mess
30 mins to synchro 1 day ?!  
Maybe bad usage of orphans on my ssd C300 with blk0001.dat & debug.log heapsize increasing 1Ko by 1Ko .. ?!

[soopy452000]

An hour already looking for coins that sent the wallet in my computer to Poloniex.
Is it normal ?

An hour already looking for coins that sent the wallet in my computer to Poloniex.
Is it normal ?

yea i just have some crappy deposit
nothing is happening
So i resynchro because i m paranoid ...  

p.s:
This blockchain is really a mess
30 mins to synchro 1 day ?!  
Maybe bad usage of orphans on my ssd C300 with blk0001.dat & debug.log heapsize increasing 1Ko by 1Ko .. ?!

How many confirmations do you see on your wallet? Sometimes Poloniex can take a bit of time with the deposits.

Warm Regards,

PS: If you are syncing your blockchain , use the one click installer if in a hurry.

http://www.navcoin.org/downloads

IMPORTANT : ALWAYS BACKUP YOUR WALLETl.DAT before anything.


~SoopY~

[Sjacmur]

An hour already looking for coins that sent the wallet in my computer to Poloniex.
Is it normal ?

My some NAV was send in few minutes. Maybe you send it from not synchronize wallet ?
you have transaction in wallet show ? And you make wallet addres on Poloniex first if you dont have one ? If you send when staking stop staking close wallet and send again coins with closed wallet to poloniex. Always first few coins to avoid any human mistakes !
I make it all in few minutes.

[hashforce101]

Our press release has been published on cointelegraph.com!



Read it here: https://cointelegraph.com/news/nav-coin-releases-worlds-first-x13-mobile-wallet
And please remember to spread the word!
https://twitter.com/CoinTelegraph/status/759016334659231745
https://twitter.com/NAVCoin/status/759196248243003392

Great Achievement NAV Team!

[hashforce101]

You can still trade at Bittrex - just cant withdraw or deposit your NAV just yet - shouldn't be long

[isen]

Any info when the bittrex wallet will be fixed?I made a deposit two days ago and i am still waiting for the coins to shown on my balance.
Wish i had chosen poloniex instead of bittrex but now it's too late i guess.

[soopy452000]

Any info when the bittrex wallet will be fixed?I made a deposit two days ago and i am still waiting for the coins to shown on my balance.
Wish i had chosen poloniex instead of bittrex but now it's too late i guess.

They are syncing their wallet , I believe they should be ready by now.

Warm Regards,
~SoopY~

[sempron]

I lost around 300 navs while syncing. Tried repairwallet command and this is what it says

{
"mismatched spent coins" : 2,
"amount affected by repair" : 501.16863010
}

i lost track of my total nav coins I just left it on to stake. So as it turns out the wallet is out of sync and I'm indeed 300 navs short? I had a back-up of my wallet a few days ago should I load it?

[rakesh1_90]

Nice to c weak hands leaving....Makes thing easier  

Keep your buy support low and buy off the sell wall...Let dumpers dump.

[Sjacmur]

maybe it was orphant from staking sometimes its not exactly the same amount in wallet and in blockchain but it normal on PoS coins.
Depend from your wallet if is bigger it can have little not the same number coins like 200-300 coins. In my wallet I full synchro I have different something like 200 coins but I dont care.
But if you have very small amount coins and not staking you maybe will try repair wallet.

[WolfLee84]

The new GUI updates look great, but why does the updated application still run OpenSSL 1.0.1g 7 Apr 2014 (HeartBleed) & not a more updated secure one? I'm not an SSL specialist or anything, but it was one of the first things I notice in testing the apps. Which some of the older Scrypt ones still have as well, making anyone who starts the apps risk more than they would possible understand to networks around them?

//
CVE-2014-0160 (OpenSSL advisory) 7th April 2014:
    A missing bounds check in the handling of the TLS heartbeat extension can be used to reveal up to 64kB of memory to a connected client or server (a.k.a. Heartbleed). This issue did not affect versions of OpenSSL prior to 1.0.1. Reported by Neel Mehta.

        Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.1g (Affected 1.0.1f, 1.0.1e, 1.0.1d, 1.0.1c, 1.0.1b, 1.0.1a, 1.0.1)

https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities.html#2014-0076

[soopy452000]

The new GUI updates look great, but why does the updated application still run OpenSSL 1.0.1g 7 Apr 2014 (HeartBleed) & not a more updated secure one? I'm not an SSL specialist or anything, but it was one of the first things I notice in testing the apps. Which some of the older Scrypt ones still have as well, making anyone who starts the apps risk more than they would possible understand to networks around them?

//
CVE-2014-0160 (OpenSSL advisory) 7th April 2014:
    A missing bounds check in the handling of the TLS heartbeat extension can be used to reveal up to 64kB of memory to a connected client or server (a.k.a. Heartbleed). This issue did not affect versions of OpenSSL prior to 1.0.1. Reported by Neel Mehta.

        Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.1g (Affected 1.0.1f, 1.0.1e, 1.0.1d, 1.0.1c, 1.0.1b, 1.0.1a, 1.0.1)

https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities.html#2014-0076

Please take a read on this.

https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20140407.txt

Code:

OpenSSL Security Advisory [07 Apr 2014]
========================================

TLS heartbeat read overrun (CVE-2014-0160)
==========================================

A missing bounds check in the handling of the TLS heartbeat extension can be
used to reveal up to 64k of memory to a connected client or server.

Only 1.0.1 and 1.0.2-beta releases of OpenSSL are affected including
1.0.1f and 1.0.2-beta1.

Thanks for Neel Mehta of Google Security for discovering this bug and to
Adam Langley <agl@chromium.org> and Bodo Moeller <bmoeller@acm.org> for
preparing the fix.

Affected users should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.0.1g. Users unable to immediately
upgrade can alternatively recompile OpenSSL with -DOPENSSL_NO_HEARTBEATS.

1.0.2 will be fixed in 1.0.2-beta2.

Heartbleed was fixed on version 1.0.1g which being the same that the wallet uses, it is also important to note that there hasn't been a vulnerability that has been discovered in the current version as well as other versions thereafter that would affect the cryptographic processes of the blockchain , where the blockchain technology itself being far more secure than OpenSSL itself.

Warm Regards,
~SoopY~

[WolfLee84]

Thanks for the quick reply Soopy452000, as I've read the entire OpenSSL site for years now & keep up on each update. Only reason why I ask, because of testing more than 5000+ of these applications (same as Operating Systems with all their Package^s & just wondering why OpenSSL "git" passed on so many of them. It's very simple to update 1 line of code to the newest with all the bugs in the worldwide net "fixed or improved", but as said before I'm no network specialist or anything

https://www.openssl.org/news/newslog.html

07-Apr-2014
   Security Advisory: Heartbeat overflow issue.
07-Apr-2014
   OpenSSL 1.0.1g is now available, including bug and security fixes

//There have been many flaws in OpenSSL since 2014, just not Giant Bugs & or anything like the HeartBleed

[soopy452000]

Thanks for the quick reply Soopy452000, as I've read the entire OpenSSL site for years now & keep up on each update. Only reason why I ask, because of testing more than 5000+ of these applications (same as Operating Systems with all their Package^s & just wondering why OpenSSL "git" passed on so many of them. It's very simple to update 1 line of code to the newest with all the bugs in the worldwide net "fixed or improved", but as said before I'm no network specialist or anything

https://www.openssl.org/news/newslog.html

07-Apr-2014
   Security Advisory: Heartbeat overflow issue.
07-Apr-2014
   OpenSSL 1.0.1g is now available, including bug and security fixes

//There have been many flaws in OpenSSL since 2014, just not Giant Bugs & or anything like the HeartBleed

I agree with you when it comes to not having giant bugs on OpenSSL since 2014 or anything like HeartBleed at all. And I m going leave it at that I have more faith in the blockchain technology than OpenSSL. Haha.
Regards to your suggestion surely I'll make a version update , just so to make everyone happy about a version upgrade.

Thank you very much for your kind suggestions and thoughts.

Warm Regards,
~SoopY~

[Affilate User]

Status: 0/unconfirmed
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000