Is there a Hidden Secret Code in bitcoin protocol???

[turvarya]

Im confused with what your saying, so it's possible for someone to hack bitcoin?

What is "hack bitcoin" even supposed to mean?

[1715077621]

1715077621

[1715077621]

1715077621

[Q7]

Anyway most of you might say the codes are at github. But question is have we really audited and understand every single line?

Plenty of people have modified the code and compiled their own custom versions of the client. I am sure that most of the bigger pools use their own custom nodes, as would payment processors, exchanges and sites like blockchain.info. I doubt something like this can be hidden for this long.

If I recall correctly empty gox used their own custom wallet.

I saw the secret code in the Open source, it pop's up with the message ---> I am Satoshi, your BTCfather 

You cannot hide secret codes in the protocol, it's Open source, for EVERYONE to see and OnkelPaul already explained it best.

The democracy wins, when the mayority decide to use whatever version of the protocol.

Heartbleed demonstrates that this line of thinking i.e. it's open source somebody would notice is not always in line with what actually happens.

However, with so many building their own custom wallets somebody would have noticed any shenanigans by now.

Well you guys do have a point, but there is also chance that thousands of these shenedigans probably might not notice anything as demonstrated by this coincreator dot net. Thing is one does not need to be a master coder but probably just the basic of programming will be enough to get through. Why not we ask ourselves....Statistic wise how many of these thousands of altcoin have the blend of the word "innovation" in it?

[teukon]

There is however a not-so-secret message in the first Bitcoin block relating to the banking bail-out of 2008. Mind you I haven't confirmed the presence of this message myself personally but I believe it's there.

Quick bit of fun for anyone running Bitcoin Core on Linux (with the default blockchain location):

Code:

> head -c 300 .bitcoin/blocks/blk00000.dat

This prints the first 300 bytes of the blockchain to the console.  Along with some clearly non-ascii data, you'll see the headline in plain text.

[Soros Shorts]

Well you guys do have a point, but there is also chance that thousands of these shenedigans probably might not notice anything as demonstrated by this coincreator dot net. Thing is one does not need to be a master coder but probably just the basic of programming will be enough to get through. Why not we ask ourselves....Statistic wise how many of these thousands of altcoin have the blend of the word "innovation" in it?

Well, you also need to consider that there are non-C++ implementations of Bitcoin clients, for example, those Java-based SPV clients. Although the languages bear some similarities, you can't just copy-paste C++ code into a Java file when you port over logic. You first need to understand what the original code does and then translate that to the new language.

[Q7]

Well you guys do have a point, but there is also chance that thousands of these shenedigans probably might not notice anything as demonstrated by this coincreator dot net. Thing is one does not need to be a master coder but probably just the basic of programming will be enough to get through. Why not we ask ourselves....Statistic wise how many of these thousands of altcoin have the blend of the word "innovation" in it?

Well, you also need to consider that there are non-C++ implementations of Bitcoin clients, for example, those Java-based SPV clients. Although the languages bear some similarities, you can't just copy-paste C++ code into a Java file when you port over logic. You first need to understand what the original code does and then translate that to the new language.

Yeah you do have a valid point there. That clears off a lot of doubts that I had initially. And appreciate your effort to point that out in a more constructive manner.

[slaveforanunnak1]

I have just read this post of Satoshi's yesterday and until then I was under the impression that the longest chain always wins.
However, Satoshi clearly states here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2228.msg29479#msg29479
That: Safe mode can still be triggered by seeing a longer (greater total PoW) invalid block chain.

That is an old version of Bitcoin. Is the Safe Mode trigger still there?
And how does it work exactly?

Safe Mode is still there, functioning as a warning system.  It was activated, for example, during the March 2013 (BerkeleyDB) hard fork.  It appears that the main function of the mode (aside from alerting users) is to disable sending transactions whenever there appear to be multiple alternative chains with significant PoW (unexpected consensus breakdown or 51% attack) but this only speculation on my part (I'm certainly no core dev).

Here's a little research concerning your link:

Satoshi indeed said that he'd added some DoS controls and removed "safe-mode" alerts at 6.22pm on December's 12th, 2010.

The Github commit: "added some DoS limits, removed safe mode" shows the DoS protections being added as lines 632...649 in main.cpp and the removal of safe mode code in rpc.cpp.  The commit was made at 6.20pm on the same day (hover over the commit date).

At 6.38pm, a second commit: "correction" re-inserts the safe mode.

These elements of the code are still there: "Observe safe mode" and "okSafeMode".

gawd i love open-source.

[slaveforanunnak1]

Im confused with what your saying, so it's possible for someone to hack bitcoin?

What is "hack bitcoin" even supposed to mean?

They can use TRACER-T to hack the bitcoin blockchain son!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXmv8quf_xM

[scarsbergholden]

Anyway most of you might say the codes are at github. But question is have we really audited and understand every single line?

As a community, yes. Every line of code has been thoroughly scrutinized by many people, as if a vulnerability is found then it would likely be very profitable.

Several years ago a vulnerability was found that essentially enabled someone to generate unlimited amounts of bitcoin while they were doing something funny with how their transaction was structured. The protocol was quickly forked at the block before this exploit was first used (luckily TX volume was extremely low back then)