Bitcoin Forum
December 18, 2017, 09:05:38 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 [1215] 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 ... 1597 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [25+PH] KanoPool kano.is NO FEE TIL 2018 PPLNS US,DE,SG,JP,NL,NYA 🐈  (Read 5063605 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 06, 2017, 09:41:53 PM
 #24281

A have a question to kano or some other blockchain or db specialist.

I was under impression that once tx is on the blockchain, even an unconfirmed one, then it is unchangeable.
is this really so, or does current soft allow for some sort of "replacement in kind" with the same numerical outputs for currently unconfirmed transactions?
An unconfirmed transaction isn't in the blockchain.
It's simply in the mempool of anyone who has accepted it.
From the point of view of it ever getting in the blockchain, it must be in the mempool of (some) miners and they must include it in a block they find (and it must not be orphaned) e.g. a pool - kano.is Smiley

There's also:

1) RBF (replace by fee) was implemented by core - yep many may not realise that you can replace a transaction with a higher fee.
Bad idea in my opinion, but no one got to decide that, core just added it in.

2) Maleability. There is a minor fix for this here already in core for 1x transactions.
However P2SH (3x transactions) is plagued with this due to the design flaws in it.
That's basically what segwit is a poor solution for - poor since it is also full of 'core profit' motivated code, not just a maleability fix.

Maleability means anyone can change a transaction identifier to produce the same transaction result (same inputs and outputs) by modifying something in the transaction that does not depends on proof of ownership of the inputs.

....interesting
I had a tx that was not confirmed for 40-48 hr or so, but i could see it's tx id on both blockchain.info and blocktrail.
Suddenly, it disappears altogether and shortly, but not immediately, there is another tx id and tx is immediately confirmed, but timestamped at the second occurrence. All inputs/outputs are the same.
What could have happened?
Someone just picked up this tx, but timestamped it as a current one?
Blockchain fixed itself? LOL
A transaction doesn't actually have a timestamp.
A "blockchain site" is probably showing the first time they saw or added the transaction.
So if the txid didn't actually change, it doesn't make any difference what "timestamp" they show.

The 'replacement' transaction, if it did have a different txid, would depend on which of the above I mentioned it was, if the 'replacement' transaction creator wasn't the one who owns the inputs.

However, there's another option I didn't mention, since that is under the control of whoever created the transaction Smiley
After a certain amount of time, a non-confirmed transaction can become abandoned - thrown out of the mempool.
In this case, you can effectively replace the transaction with a completely new one, similar or completely different, reusing some or all of the old inputs.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
1513587938
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513587938

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513587938
Reply with quote  #2

1513587938
Report to moderator
1513587938
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513587938

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513587938
Reply with quote  #2

1513587938
Report to moderator
1513587938
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513587938

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513587938
Reply with quote  #2

1513587938
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513587938
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513587938

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513587938
Reply with quote  #2

1513587938
Report to moderator
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 06, 2017, 09:49:42 PM
 #24282

...
Now here's the real fun part ...
It checks for a reply from bitmain and if bitmain replies with anything containing the word "false"
 https://github.com/bitmaintech/bmminer/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.c#L7755
Then it will abort the checking function
 https://github.com/bitmaintech/bmminer/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.c#L7777
with the message "Stop mining!!!"
But if it fails to connect to bitmain or it doesn't get a "false" reply, it will continue checking randomly every 1 to 11 minutes connecting to bitmain.

Now I wonder why they would have a function like that, there in the code ... ... ... ... ...

Would it make sense to try to fork the code and update the miner with a new version that eliminates the send_mac and setup_send_mac_socket functions entirely?
I got booted out of the cgminer team - so don't ask me Smiley
Ask the cgminer guy who bitmain pays for pretty much all the code he writes Tongue

I thought that I read somewhere that it is possible to run a different miner (was it cgminer) on the S9's? The startup scripts also seem quirky and not very robust.
A scammer who mined here, and had a short run of luck, but his total luck mining on the pool was actually below 100%, "produced" a closed source S9 implementation that also talked to his own web site.
Yeah, really not worth the risk of going down that path at all.
His scamming was the ridiculous claims he made about making the miner something like 16% luckier ... to get people to use "his version"
Thus, no I wont provide a link (and would delete any such links)

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
NotFuzzyWarm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288


Evil beware: We have waffles!


View Profile
March 06, 2017, 11:19:38 PM
 #24283

re: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789369.msg18083086#msg18083086 (s9's phoning home?)
Since you just brought up He Who Is Not To Be Named, I do have to mention that he found that bit of code last year. As far as he could tell it did not actually do anything but one of his mods was to remove the code.. However, still worrying though...

My take on the code: If folks here remember, think it started with the s4 and was definitely in at least the early s5's. Bitmain for a time looked at a central Cloud control/monitoring solution for us using their miners. The site name? Minerlink.com In the Bitminer GUI they had a tick-box to use that service.

Don't think they ever took it active outside China. Just looked and the site is still there but have not seen that tickbox on any s9 or s7 as far as I can recall. Hmm.

Question still remains, is that code benign and just unused legacy? Considering how much Bitmain says they re-wrote all the code in the s9's ya gotta wonder how that got left in...

-Joshua Zipkin aka Joshua Alexander leaked AMT A1 miner skype chats http://bit.ly/1Qjt6lj
-For bitcoin to succeed the community must police itself.
-Support Sidehacks miner development. Donations to:   1BURGERAXHH6Yi6LRybRJK7ybEm5m5HwTr
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 06, 2017, 11:41:00 PM
 #24284

re: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789369.msg18083086#msg18083086 (s9's phoning home?)
Since you just brought up He Who Is Not To Be Named, I do have to mention that he found that bit of code last year. As far as he could tell it did not actually do anything but one of his mods was to remove the code.. However, still worrying though...

My take on the code: If folks here remember, think it started with the s4 and was definitely in at least the early s5's. Bitmain for a time looked at a central Cloud control/monitoring solution for us using their miners. The site name? Minerlink.com In the Bitminer GUI they had a tick-box to use that service.

Don't think they ever took it active outside China. Just looked and the site is still there but have not seen that tickbox on any s9 or s7 as far as I can recall. Hmm.

Question still remains, is that code benign and just unused legacy? Considering how much Bitmain says they re-wrote all the code in the s9's ya gotta wonder how that got left in...
The code does exactly as I stated, my running commentary and links are not guesses Smiley
Although -ck threw me off the ckpool and cgminer team for stating that I have a lot of experience
(I also have more than him - but his medical god status got upset at that comment and he threw a public tantrum about it)
I do know more about coding/programming than most.

The code in git is benign if bitmain keeps the DNS A record missing as it currently is.
It's only a one line change to their DNS to enable and disable it.
When you enable a missing DNS A record it is usually an almost immediate activation.

However, the git vs the code running in your Bitmain miners ... there's certainly no guarantee that's exactly the same either.
The git shows one inital commit and one change since then.
Seriously would anyone think there was only the one original commit and only one change ever since that? Smiley

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
NotFuzzyWarm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288


Evil beware: We have waffles!


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 12:05:36 AM
 #24285

Ja. Especially considering how much Bitmain has dicked around with a plethora of Firmware updates...

I know I certainly wonder Bitmain did with their software in latest R4 and s9's. Looking at hash rate reported by Awesome miner shows a very uncharacteristic smoothness vs what I normally see from s7's and earlier s9's. Think it's a s9 b22 I have at work that displays like the R4's do.

This shows my 2 R4's and Batch-1/b3 s9's at home. No way in hell are the R4's performing THAT evenly. BMminer 2.0 must be doing major stats smoothing of some sort and given that, who knows what else.

-Joshua Zipkin aka Joshua Alexander leaked AMT A1 miner skype chats http://bit.ly/1Qjt6lj
-For bitcoin to succeed the community must police itself.
-Support Sidehacks miner development. Donations to:   1BURGERAXHH6Yi6LRybRJK7ybEm5m5HwTr
firetreeactual
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756



View Profile
March 07, 2017, 12:07:59 AM
 #24286

Seriously would anyone think there was only the one original commit and only one change ever since that? Smiley
Of course no one (with a pulse) believes that. I'm not exactly happy with how all that came down with Con, but it's not my "stuff" (thankfully) and given my former profession, that's a blessing (for me, at least). Anyway...that sequence of events (which happened to include you as collateral damage, it seems to me) is what led me to mine only here, and to not buy Bitmain gear again. I don't sleep a heckuva lot anyway, but choices like these at least make those power naps a lot more peaceful.

Mine on.  Kiss

To infinity and beyond...on two 741s and one of only 3...nope, make that 4...full nodes in Hawaii...on <30A. (I have other gear on the Hoth ice planet)
ComputerGenie
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490


Retired IRCX God


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 12:28:22 AM
 #24287

Ja. Especially considering how much Bitmain has dicked around with a plethora of Firmware updates...
Most of that was in a vain attempt to strike a balance between how a high-performance miner should operate and how hobbits, running it 4' from their bed, want it to run.

If you have to ask why, you wouldn`t understand my answer.
tbonetony
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 457


No zuo no die why you try, u zuo u die dont be shy


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 12:42:47 AM
 #24288


Now here's the real fun part ...
It checks for a reply from bitmain and if bitmain replies with anything containing the word "false"
 https://github.com/bitmaintech/bmminer/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.c#L7755
Then it will abort the checking function
 https://github.com/bitmaintech/bmminer/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.c#L7777
with the message "Stop mining!!!"
But if it fails to connect to bitmain or it doesn't get a "false" reply, it will continue checking randomly every 1 to 11 minutes connecting to bitmain.

Now I wonder why they would have a function like that, there in the code ... ... ... ... ...

kano, would this give them the capability to remotely shutdown one's miner? For now it's just logging but if this condition works, who knows what else they will extend it to.

and if that day comes, maybe I have to block such connection on the router?

K&T Crypto Hosting, hosting as low as $45/kW per month ($0.06/kWh): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1794057.0








I offer private S9 rental for various length: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1708351.0
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 12:58:55 AM
 #24289


Now here's the real fun part ...
It checks for a reply from bitmain and if bitmain replies with anything containing the word "false"
 https://github.com/bitmaintech/bmminer/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.c#L7755
Then it will abort the checking function
 https://github.com/bitmaintech/bmminer/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.c#L7777
with the message "Stop mining!!!"
But if it fails to connect to bitmain or it doesn't get a "false" reply, it will continue checking randomly every 1 to 11 minutes connecting to bitmain.

Now I wonder why they would have a function like that, there in the code ... ... ... ... ...

kano, would this give them the capability to remotely shutdown one's miner? For now it's just logging but if this condition works, who knows what else they will extend it to.

and if that day comes, maybe I have to block such connection on the router?
Well the real issue related to that is: what code do they actually have in the miner?
As it is in git, it's effectively benign, just possible (with a minor DNS change) to have every recent Bitmain miner log information to Bitmain.

They delayed creating the git beyond the license requirements (even though creating the git is a few minutes effort)
Who knows what they're up to Tongue

Blocking it isn't trivial.
Updating the hosts file as suggested above by bitsink will block it until a power cycle.
But you don't know what the actual address will be, so you can't block that IP in advance at your router as such without whitelisting instead.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
NotFuzzyWarm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288


Evil beware: We have waffles!


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 01:07:28 AM
 #24290

Hmm, just had a thought: When I got my 1st Avalon 721's I had Antpool as my #3 failover. The Avalons could not connect to it. Think Bitmain might use that code to identify if their product is connected to the pool? Last time I ran my rare A1 Dragon clone from AMT it connected but that was around 2 yrs ago... (and truthfully Antpoo not liking Avalons does not break my heart)

-Joshua Zipkin aka Joshua Alexander leaked AMT A1 miner skype chats http://bit.ly/1Qjt6lj
-For bitcoin to succeed the community must police itself.
-Support Sidehacks miner development. Donations to:   1BURGERAXHH6Yi6LRybRJK7ybEm5m5HwTr
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 01:29:38 AM
 #24291

Hmm, just had a thought: When I got my 1st Avalon 721's I had Antpool as my #3 failover. The Avalons could not connect to it. Think Bitmain might use that code to identify if their product is connected to the pool? Last time I ran my rare A1 Dragon clone from AMT it connected but that was around 2 yrs ago... (and truthfully Antpoo not liking Avalons does not break my heart)
Well, firstly they'd have to have a DNS A record - which I don't check that address, but I gather it may usually not exist.

They can just look at the agent information you supply when you connect to the pool and be pretty sure it's a Bitmain miner, if it's directly connected to the pool, so I doubt they'd bother doing that.

If it was a proxy of miners, then there's all sorts of issues about if any of the miners can get out to the net, how many there are vs the hash rate, etc.

All in all, pretty pointless.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
bitsink
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 82


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 06:03:29 AM
 #24292


Now here's the real fun part ...
It checks for a reply from bitmain and if bitmain replies with anything containing the word "false"
 https://github.com/bitmaintech/bmminer/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.c#L7755
Then it will abort the checking function
 https://github.com/bitmaintech/bmminer/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.c#L7777
with the message "Stop mining!!!"
But if it fails to connect to bitmain or it doesn't get a "false" reply, it will continue checking randomly every 1 to 11 minutes connecting to bitmain.

Now I wonder why they would have a function like that, there in the code ... ... ... ... ...

kano, would this give them the capability to remotely shutdown one's miner? For now it's just logging but if this condition works, who knows what else they will extend it to.

and if that day comes, maybe I have to block such connection on the router?
Well the real issue related to that is: what code do they actually have in the miner?
As it is in git, it's effectively benign, just possible (with a minor DNS change) to have every recent Bitmain miner log information to Bitmain.

They delayed creating the git beyond the license requirements (even though creating the git is a few minutes effort)
Who knows what they're up to Tongue

Blocking it isn't trivial.
Updating the hosts file as suggested above by bitsink will block it until a power cycle.

I beg to differ: The hosts file DOES survive a power cycle (at least on a S9 13.5TH model wih the XILINX controller), but would not survive a hard reset without a hack... but obviously this is only a hack. What is the longterm solution? It must be possible to use a different miner all together with the right driver / interface if this is documented?
bitsink
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 82


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 06:30:38 AM
 #24293

Thanks kano for your pool! Seems like a good place. I am struggling though, unable to get some basic stats apart from the current (very rounded) hashrate. A simple graph like eligius had would be nice to have and give some piece of mind about past performance. I also have not yet quite worked out the payout scheme and any minimas. Where may I read up on that?

You could abuse cacti to draw monthly and/or weekly graphs based on data from your address.php - if this data were more accurate and parseable, it is also something that user may do herself. I can offer to do this locally if you make the data accessible and you could then implement it in the pool?
agentcash
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 49


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 07:02:12 AM
 #24294

Workers > Shift Graph   put "all" without quotes in input box, make sure it's checked and hit update

Edit: if you mean for the whole pool Pool > Graph
miner0007
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 45


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 07:09:59 AM
 #24295


@Kano any though of supporting Bitcoin Unlimited?

Lisk - Javascript Blockchain Development Platform
Get more info below if you want to earn MONEY with Lisk
                    https://liskelite.com
bitsink
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 82


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 07:16:01 AM
 #24296

Workers > Shift Graph   put "all" without quotes in input box, make sure it's checked and hit update

Edit: if you mean for the whole pool Pool > Graph

I should have clarified: I mean without an account, just anonymous mining with an address (like was possible with eligius).
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 09:01:14 AM
 #24297

Workers > Shift Graph   put "all" without quotes in input box, make sure it's checked and hit update

Edit: if you mean for the whole pool Pool > Graph

I should have clarified: I mean without an account, just anonymous mining with an address (like was possible with eligius).
If you want details then use an account.
... as it says on the http://kano.is/ web page Smiley
If you address mine, you just get the stats available at the time you check them.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 09:09:00 AM
 #24298


@Kano any though of supporting Bitcoin Unlimited?
Well they seem to be the closest to what the pools and miners in general want, but as I mentioned in the Antpoo thread, core seems to be the centralised control of bitcoin at the moment so it would need a core option to vote for it.

We had over 70% support for BIP100 that would almost certainly have got more support, but since core didn't want it, the minority centralised control (core) got their wish, no BIP100.

The biggest problem with the whole blocksize issue is that everyone has an agenda to add to it, core being the worst in this situation.

A simple vote for a simple blocksize increase (not the ridiculous BIP101 version) would get in very quickly and then the rest of the rubbish being peddled by everyone could be ignored Tongue
It seems no one will do that, as I said, everyone has some other agenda they want.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
CryptoBuddha
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


reality is what you think it is


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 01:08:34 PM
 #24299

Orphan or what's that? Huh

aka Shammann elsewhere, spreche etwas Deutsch, русский тоже знаю
ॐ मणि पद्मे हूँ
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 07, 2017, 01:09:13 PM
 #24300

Stale block Sad
Came in just after the block change.
CKDB automatically switches it to 'orphan' if the current block we are working on isn't the block we got.
i.e. the main pool bitcoind had switched to a different block before that block was processed, thus it was stale.

Edit: to be specific:
The other pool's block arrived at 2017-03-07 13:06:08.989605 UTC and bitcoind had processed it by 2017-03-07 13:06:09.156078 UTC
(166ms to fully process the block)
However, the share arrived at 2017-03-07 13:06:09.256 so it was 100ms after the block had changed - so when ckpool submitted it, bitcoind said 'no thanks' - thus CKDB marked it as an orphan since we weren't working on the share's block, and I then flagged it as 'Stale'
As usual, CKDB shows all block attempts by ckpool, if they succeed or fail.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
Pages: « 1 ... 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 [1215] 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 ... 1597 »
  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!