1 2017-06-09 01:07:11	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15achow101 opened pull request #10563: Remove safe mode (06master...06rm-safemode) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10563
 2 2017-06-09 02:09:10	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15gmaxwell opened pull request #10564: Return early in IsBanned. (06master...06banned-early-term) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10564
 3 2017-06-09 02:14:09	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15achow101 opened pull request #10565: [coverage] Remove leveldb, univalue, and benchmarks from coverage report (06master...06lcov-remove-extra) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10565
 4 2017-06-09 08:49:14	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #10566: Use the "domain name setup" image (previously unused) in the gitian docs (06master...06unreferenced-file) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10566
 5 2017-06-09 10:41:25	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: the recent mail sent to security@ seems phishy... haven't checked although.
 6 2017-06-09 10:41:41	0|wumpus|yes, I'd be careful
 7 2017-06-09 10:41:50	0|jonasschnelli|Indeed
 8 2017-06-09 10:43:05	0|jonasschnelli|Such attacks (against developers) will rise IMO... good protection is really required now
 9 2017-06-09 10:45:34	0|wumpus|yes, agreed, we all need to start using qubes asap :)
10 2017-06-09 10:45:55	0|timothy|the only problem of qubes is xen
11 2017-06-09 10:46:42	0|wumpus|right, that's kind of its central point of failure
12 2017-06-09 10:48:21	0|wumpus|its achilles heel. Then again, it does raise the difficulty and cost of compromise, which is the point of security
13 2017-06-09 10:49:17	0|timothy|people are moving to kvm, xen in less maintained (as "big players" only amazon uses it, but they don't push patches upstream)
14 2017-06-09 10:50:48	0|wumpus|that's good to hear - I use kvm a lot for manual VM wrangling
15 2017-06-09 10:51:29	0|wumpus|kvm+libvirt is a breeze to use
16 2017-06-09 10:54:40	0|wumpus|I also moved all gpg signing to tokens a while ago, as well as some critical ssh authenticions
17 2017-06-09 10:58:05	0|timothy|openstack is kvm-based :)
18 2017-06-09 10:58:40	0|timothy|ovirt / rhv (red hat virtualization) too
19 2017-06-09 10:58:58	0|wumpus|trying to reduce attack surface as well as the impact when compromise would happen
20 2017-06-09 10:59:11	0|wumpus|okay :)
21 2017-06-09 10:59:25	0|timothy|I mean, big players are working on it
22 2017-06-09 11:03:00	0|timothy|infact I think I'll convert my gitian setup to use kvm instead of virtualbox
23 2017-06-09 11:03:25	0|wumpus|I've also started to use freebsd and openbsd for some things, to diversify from just linux
24 2017-06-09 11:04:35	0|wumpus|gitian with virtualbox? didn't know anyone was actually using that, most use either lxc or kvm
25 2017-06-09 11:07:49	0|timothy|the "official" procedure wants to install the VM on virtualbox and then gitian inside the vm
26 2017-06-09 11:08:25	0|timothy|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/gitian-building.md
27 2017-06-09 11:09:13	0|wumpus|right, okay, yes the outer VM doesn't really matter, using virtualbox there because it's easy to set up both on linux and windows
28 2017-06-09 11:09:41	0|timothy|my main OS is fedora, so it's not to easy to use gitian directly here :P
29 2017-06-09 11:10:00	0|wumpus|I'm imagine - never tried
30 2017-06-09 11:10:04	0|wumpus|I'd*
31 2017-06-09 11:16:25	0|MarcoFalke|hmm, I haven't had any major issues running gitian in fedora
32 2017-06-09 11:26:36	0|wumpus|also moving critical infrastructure to RiscV/open hardware as possible, as devices become available
33 2017-06-09 11:27:07	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: might be useful to add that to one of the documents, apparently people think it only works on debian derivatives
34 2017-06-09 13:13:48	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #10568: Remove unnecessary forward class declarations in header files (06master...06fwd-decl) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10568
35 2017-06-09 18:54:15	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15achow101 opened pull request #10569: Fix stopatheight (06master...06fix-stopatheight) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10569
36 2017-06-09 20:09:54	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1490593ed 15practicalswift: Limit variable scope
37 2017-06-09 20:09:54	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/29f80cd230c3...76f268b9bd1b
38 2017-06-09 20:09:55	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1476f268b 15Pieter Wuille: Merge #10521: Limit variable scope...
39 2017-06-09 20:10:29	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa closed pull request #10521: Limit variable scope (06master...06tighten-scope) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10521
40 2017-06-09 20:25:04	0|gmaxwell|jonasschnelli: http://imgur.com/a/PxsfD post on reddit linking that, looks like a bug that it's showing unknown for a synced up node?
41 2017-06-09 21:14:49	0|gmaxwell|luke-jr: you should ping everyone listed on this https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Segwit_support  1:1 to make sure its accurate.
42 2017-06-09 21:30:29	0|luke-jr|gmaxwell: hmm, so I think the only ones who haven't edited or been pinged 1:1 so far would be: sdaftuar MarcoFalke maaku rusty petertodd
43 2017-06-09 21:43:07	0|luke-jr|does p2p-fullblocktest's runbarelyexpensive timeout for anyone else? it seems to have a limit of 60s for a 1000+ block reorg, which isn't practical? O.o