1 2011-08-06 00:03:12 BlueMatt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2 2011-08-06 00:03:16 dbitcoin has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3 2011-08-06 00:03:38 HEx1 has joined
4 2011-08-06 00:05:16 dbitcoin has joined
5 2011-08-06 00:09:15 theorb has joined
6 2011-08-06 00:09:22 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
7 2011-08-06 00:09:40 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
8 2011-08-06 00:12:40 Cusipzzz has joined
9 2011-08-06 00:15:08 AAA_awright_ has joined
10 2011-08-06 00:16:28 AAA_awright has quit (Disconnected by services)
11 2011-08-06 00:16:32 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
12 2011-08-06 00:16:35 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
13 2011-08-06 00:20:16 mosi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
14 2011-08-06 00:20:36 Cusipzzz has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.2 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
15 2011-08-06 00:23:58 <Eliel> this one opened my eyes a bit. I'd been missing the importance of the email address password in this equation: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=34430.msg432618#msg432618
16 2011-08-06 00:27:57 eastender has joined
17 2011-08-06 00:28:12 <Evious> gmail is the keychain to the world
18 2011-08-06 00:28:19 phungus has joined
19 2011-08-06 00:28:20 <neofutur> Eliel: so the yubikey would have saved him
20 2011-08-06 00:28:39 <Eliel> yep, seems like it would've
21 2011-08-06 00:28:40 ybit has quit (Changing host)
22 2011-08-06 00:28:40 ybit has joined
23 2011-08-06 00:30:55 <luke-jr> [19:31:19] <shadders> not true⦠With a single bitcoin daemon poolserverj still out performed pushpool by 360% for share submits and by 299% for getworks
24 2011-08-06 00:31:05 <luke-jr> shadders: I was quoting their own website's performance comparison
25 2011-08-06 00:31:18 Quetzalcoatl_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
26 2011-08-06 00:36:34 BlueMatt has joined
27 2011-08-06 00:40:58 <shadders> luke-jr: I'm the psj author and I did the tests... The test you are referring to only tested getworks (i.e. no share submits) and used a constant flat out traffic pattern. Have a look at the 2nd and 3rd sets of tests, these are more close to real world scenarios
28 2011-08-06 00:43:23 <shadders> Trying to work out a strategy for managing work-map size in poolserverj. It stores a unique portion of all work issued in current block. Question is do any miners keep using work for longer than a specified period?
29 2011-08-06 00:43:32 agath has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
30 2011-08-06 00:43:57 <shadders> i.e. should I make the assumption that a work issued at the beginning of a block could be submitted at anytime up to when the block is solved?
31 2011-08-06 00:44:01 <luke-jr> shadders: can I build it with GCJ?
32 2011-08-06 00:44:32 devon_hillard has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
33 2011-08-06 00:44:48 <luke-jr> shadders: did you read the rollntime expiration spec?
34 2011-08-06 00:44:53 <BlueMatt> you mean gjc?
35 2011-08-06 00:44:55 <Caesium> 'Poolserverj on the other hand spends idle periods filling up itâs cache so when the burst of activity happens itâs able to serve work straight from memory rather than waiting on the bitcoin daemon. '
36 2011-08-06 00:45:01 <Caesium> fwiw this was a 10 minute patch to pushpoold
37 2011-08-06 00:45:57 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I mean GCJ
38 2011-08-06 00:46:04 <shadders> luke-jr: Just reading what GJC is... I can't see why not... It already has some native binaries in it for the sqlite3 support. Don't know if those would pose a problem but I could probably strip those out for you if they are
39 2011-08-06 00:46:19 SecretSJ has quit (Quit: IceChat - Its what Cool People use)
40 2011-08-06 00:46:33 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: odd, for some reason I thought it was gnu java compiler instead of gnu compiler for java
41 2011-08-06 00:46:36 agricocb has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
42 2011-08-06 00:46:48 <BlueMatt> isnt it gnu c compiler and not gnu compiler for c?
43 2011-08-06 00:47:04 <luke-jr> shadders: does PoolServerJ support rollntime, noncerange, longpoll, etc? :p
44 2011-08-06 00:47:13 <luke-jr> shadders: maybe even cheating detectoin?
45 2011-08-06 00:47:15 wolfspraul has quit (Quit: leaving)
46 2011-08-06 00:47:20 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: shrug
47 2011-08-06 00:48:23 dr_win has joined
48 2011-08-06 00:48:26 <shadders> GCJ: looks like it only support java 1.5... psj can compile under 1.5 but current binary is 1.6...
49 2011-08-06 00:49:05 <shadders> Can compile you a 1.5 version or you can do yourself when it's open sourced (a few weeks)
50 2011-08-06 00:49:22 <Caesium> luke-jr: their page says yes to longpoll, no to roll-ntime
51 2011-08-06 00:49:47 <Caesium> I like their reason for not doing roll-ntime.
52 2011-08-06 00:50:48 <shadders> luke-jr: LP yes, noncerange - no although it guarantees unique work to all miners. rollntime - no because I haven't been able to find any doco on it. If you can point me to some that'd be great
53 2011-08-06 00:51:32 maqr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
54 2011-08-06 00:51:56 <shadders> re: nonce range, every work is checked for uniqueness and I've found the duplicate rate coming in from bitcoind to be incredibly low (sub 1%)
55 2011-08-06 00:52:13 <Caesium> as high as that?
56 2011-08-06 00:52:20 BurningToad has joined
57 2011-08-06 00:52:40 <Caesium> I'd have expected more like thousandths of a percent
58 2011-08-06 00:52:50 <shadders> normally 0-0.05... occasional spike to 1%
59 2011-08-06 00:52:52 maqr has joined
60 2011-08-06 00:53:24 <shadders> So I don't really get the point of noncerange
61 2011-08-06 00:53:52 <shadders> or extranonce
62 2011-08-06 00:56:59 BGL has joined
63 2011-08-06 00:58:33 b4epoche_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
64 2011-08-06 00:58:46 <shadders> "did you read the rollntime expiration spec?" Where can I find it?
65 2011-08-06 01:01:20 karnac has joined
66 2011-08-06 01:01:30 karnac has quit (Client Quit)
67 2011-08-06 01:01:46 b4epoche_ has joined
68 2011-08-06 01:01:51 agricocb has joined
69 2011-08-06 01:03:10 <luke-jr> shadders: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Getwork
70 2011-08-06 01:03:22 Workbench has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
71 2011-08-06 01:03:42 <luke-jr> shadders: noncerange has nothing to do with duplicates
72 2011-08-06 01:03:53 <luke-jr> Caesium: I assume shadders refers to bitcoind w/o my fix
73 2011-08-06 01:04:18 <luke-jr> shadders: without extranonce (which is implemented in bitcoind), 99% of bitcoind work would be dupes
74 2011-08-06 01:04:31 <shadders> isn't it meant to share work between multiple miners so they only check a portion of the range and don't overlap?
75 2011-08-06 01:04:41 Workbench has joined
76 2011-08-06 01:04:45 <luke-jr> shadders: yes, more efficient use of work
77 2011-08-06 01:04:53 <luke-jr> shadders: you can put up to 4 GH/s on a single work
78 2011-08-06 01:05:08 Evious has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
79 2011-08-06 01:05:23 <shadders> Isn't it redundant if extra nonce is already implemented?
80 2011-08-06 01:05:58 <luke-jr> shadders: no, extranonce is slow
81 2011-08-06 01:06:03 <luke-jr> has to rebuild the merkle tree
82 2011-08-06 01:06:11 <shadders> ahh haven't looked at wiki page since updated...
83 2011-08-06 01:06:32 dbitcoin has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
84 2011-08-06 01:07:06 <shadders> yeah I looked into doing that with bitcoinj and keeping it all internal but I gave up when I realised I had to build a new coinbase for every work.
85 2011-08-06 01:07:14 dbitcoin has joined
86 2011-08-06 01:07:41 <luke-jr> shadders: that's the only thing making the work unique ;)
87 2011-08-06 01:08:37 vigilyn has quit (Quit: Leaving)
88 2011-08-06 01:09:47 <shadders> I did wonder... I thought I'd only be getting unique on second rollover or new tx added. Couldn't work out why I was getting uniques all the time. But it was huge headache that just magically went away so I just grinned and moved on
89 2011-08-06 01:10:05 <luke-jr> lol
90 2011-08-06 01:10:44 <shadders> Thought extranonce was just proposed and not implemented...
91 2011-08-06 01:11:51 sgornick has joined
92 2011-08-06 01:15:26 sgornick has quit (Changing host)
93 2011-08-06 01:15:26 sgornick has joined
94 2011-08-06 01:15:50 <shadders> so an X-Roll-NTime header should look something like
95 2011-08-06 01:16:01 <shadders> X-Roll-NTime: expire=n ???
96 2011-08-06 01:17:24 bitcoinbulletin has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
97 2011-08-06 01:19:14 sgornick has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
98 2011-08-06 01:19:46 sgornick has joined
99 2011-08-06 01:20:28 <lfm> Luke I see you have added another extranonce to your coinbases
100 2011-08-06 01:20:32 <Diablo-D3> shadders: or just y
101 2011-08-06 01:20:41 <Diablo-D3> shadders: it can be y or expire=x
102 2011-08-06 01:21:06 erus` has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.87 [Firefox 5.0.1/20110707182747])
103 2011-08-06 01:21:53 <shadders> what does y mean? miner can roll for as long as they like?
104 2011-08-06 01:24:26 wolfspraul has joined
105 2011-08-06 01:25:31 bitcoinbulletin has joined
106 2011-08-06 01:25:34 <luke-jr> shadders: yes
107 2011-08-06 01:25:41 <luke-jr> lfm: already?
108 2011-08-06 01:26:10 <luke-jr> shadders: 'Y' means you have to guess on how long it's valid ;)
109 2011-08-06 01:26:21 <luke-jr> shadders: the pre-expire "spec" did not specify any value
110 2011-08-06 01:26:31 <luke-jr> so I implemented it as Y in pushpool
111 2011-08-06 01:29:47 <shadders> right... I wish there was a guaranteed max work age... Trying to sort out memory usage issues atm
112 2011-08-06 01:31:09 <shadders> pp and psj both keep a lookup table of work issued. psj mem usage grows pretty big with this table because I can't find a guaranteed strategy for pruning it. Don't see memcached or pushpool memory usage getting out of control though
113 2011-08-06 01:31:17 <luke-jr> shadders: Eligius sends expire=120 for now
114 2011-08-06 01:31:49 <luke-jr> pushpool currently has 120 seconds hardcoded
115 2011-08-06 01:32:15 <shadders> do all miners support the hard coded limit?
116 2011-08-06 01:32:24 agath has joined
117 2011-08-06 01:32:35 pumpkin is now known as copumpkin
118 2011-08-06 01:32:59 <luke-jr> shadders: I haven't noticed any trying beyond 120 seconds with 'Y' or 'expire=120'
119 2011-08-06 01:33:10 <luke-jr> mainline poclbm is hard-coded for 60
120 2011-08-06 01:33:52 <shadders> cool, that solves the problem then..
121 2011-08-06 01:34:04 vigilyn has joined
122 2011-08-06 01:34:11 <shadders> Wasn't sure I could make that assumption
123 2011-08-06 01:34:27 DontMindMe has quit (Quit: Nettalk6 - www.ntalk.de)
124 2011-08-06 01:35:13 <shadders> actually now I remember why... been doing all my testing with phoenix and it seems to hang on to work for ages.
125 2011-08-06 01:35:30 <luke-jr> phoenix doesn't support any extensions :/
126 2011-08-06 01:39:30 skeledrew has quit (Quit: Instantbird 1.1a1pre)
127 2011-08-06 01:41:20 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
128 2011-08-06 01:43:03 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
129 2011-08-06 01:44:33 agricocb has joined
130 2011-08-06 01:44:51 <shadders> BTW isn't the request map a serious vulnerability (for both psj and pp) someone could flood a pool with requests filling up memory with request mappings
131 2011-08-06 01:45:34 <luke-jr> shadders: that's what DoS protection is for
132 2011-08-06 01:46:11 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
133 2011-08-06 01:46:38 agricocb has joined
134 2011-08-06 01:47:04 pogden has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
135 2011-08-06 01:47:06 <shadders> doesn't really fit the standard DoS profile though does it... valid requests, just instead of pauses between to do some work it just spams them...
136 2011-08-06 01:47:50 skeledrew has joined
137 2011-08-06 01:47:56 gfinn has joined
138 2011-08-06 01:48:58 <luke-jr> shadders: I mean pool-specific DoS profiling
139 2011-08-06 01:56:32 DaQatz has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
140 2011-08-06 02:00:07 netxshare has joined
141 2011-08-06 02:02:13 ThomasV has joined
142 2011-08-06 02:04:41 nefario has joined
143 2011-08-06 02:13:43 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
144 2011-08-06 02:16:37 ewal-otg has quit (Quit: ewal-otg)
145 2011-08-06 02:17:21 DaQatz has joined
146 2011-08-06 02:18:32 <josephcp> mybitcoin seems to have updated their page https://www.mybitcoin.com/ they claim that they had a transaction reversed from an orphan block... seems pretty trivial to check whether any orphaned transactions had double-spent transactions, no?
147 2011-08-06 02:19:21 samr7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
148 2011-08-06 02:22:29 <ThomasV> the saga goes on
149 2011-08-06 02:22:52 <ThomasV> they do not tell the percentage of loss :-D
150 2011-08-06 02:23:47 DaQatz has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
151 2011-08-06 02:24:54 <josephcp> i bet what really happened if they were attacked was they deposited funds even before a confirmation of a block
152 2011-08-06 02:25:42 <josephcp> i remember their SCI didn't make me wait minutes for a block confirmation when I used it
153 2011-08-06 02:26:46 <phantomcircuit> josephcp, where they accepting 1 block confirms?
154 2011-08-06 02:27:37 <josephcp> phantomcircuit: i remeber they accepted a transaction the moment the transaction was on the network (0 confirms), but I could be wrong, i haven't used their SCI (as a user) in months
155 2011-08-06 02:29:39 <phantomcircuit> if that's true
156 2011-08-06 02:29:40 <phantomcircuit> lol
157 2011-08-06 02:29:42 <josephcp> if we were to check for double-spent transactions it seems like it'd be trivial, no? check for duplicate txids with different outputs?
158 2011-08-06 02:30:00 <josephcp> i mean if their story from their website holds up
159 2011-08-06 02:30:04 <phantomcircuit> it's fairly hard because the mainline client silently drops duplicate txids
160 2011-08-06 02:30:14 <phantomcircuit> although i believe that it does log them in debug.log
161 2011-08-06 02:31:28 <josephcp> seems like a trivial attack though if they accepted (and DEPOSITED) with 0 confirmations, just directly connect to their bitcoin node, send the transaction, and send a different transaction directly to the pools at the same time
162 2011-08-06 02:31:44 <ThomasV> but they say they waited for 1 confirm, not zero
163 2011-08-06 02:31:46 samr7 has joined
164 2011-08-06 02:32:07 <josephcp> ThomasV: do they? i vaguely remember the SCI allowed purchases instantly, i've never accepted anything over their SCI so they could've waited to actually deposit funds..
165 2011-08-06 02:32:55 <ThomasV> josephcp: rtf statement
166 2011-08-06 02:32:56 <josephcp> well in any case seems pretty trivial to see if their story holds up by checking whether duplicate TXIDs exist with different outputs
167 2011-08-06 02:33:11 <josephcp> ThomasV: i'm saying the statement might be wrong because a blockchain attack like that is HARD
168 2011-08-06 02:34:13 <ThomasV> you mean it is hard with 1 conf or woth 0 ?
169 2011-08-06 02:34:19 <josephcp> with 1 conf
170 2011-08-06 02:34:29 <josephcp> theoretically it sounds trivial with 0 conf
171 2011-08-06 02:34:33 <ThomasV> yes
172 2011-08-06 02:34:53 <lfm> you could do 0 conf without even modifying any software
173 2011-08-06 02:34:58 <ThomasV> "It appears to be human error combined with a misunderstanding of how Bitcoin secures transactions into the next block. Our programmer was under the assumption that one block was good enough to secure a transaction. Two years ago when the software was written, this single confirm myth was a popular belief."
174 2011-08-06 02:35:27 <josephcp> yeah i bet the programmer really just confirmed transactions the moment it hit the network instead of waiting for even 1 measly block based on what I remember from their SCI, ThomasV
175 2011-08-06 02:35:47 BlueMatt has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
176 2011-08-06 02:35:48 maqr has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
177 2011-08-06 02:36:29 <gmaxwell> orphan blocks are saved...
178 2011-08-06 02:36:38 <gmaxwell> so it wouldn't be hard to see if there had been a reversal
179 2011-08-06 02:36:42 <josephcp> gmaxwell: exactly, seems pretty easy to check whether that statement is even remotely true
180 2011-08-06 02:37:54 <josephcp> AFAIK i don't even know of one reported case lately of double spending a txid with even 1 block confirm on the real network...
181 2011-08-06 02:37:55 <lfm> do people think Satoshi was wrong to look for 6 confirming blocks?
182 2011-08-06 02:39:56 maqr has joined
183 2011-08-06 02:40:01 maqr has quit (Changing host)
184 2011-08-06 02:40:01 maqr has joined
185 2011-08-06 02:40:08 maqr_ has joined
186 2011-08-06 02:42:00 maqr_ has quit (Client Quit)
187 2011-08-06 02:42:00 maqr has quit (Client Quit)
188 2011-08-06 02:42:06 marf_away has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
189 2011-08-06 02:42:32 maqr has joined
190 2011-08-06 02:42:56 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
191 2011-08-06 02:43:00 <gmaxwell> lfm: 6 is pretty conservative these days, I think.. for most transactions.
192 2011-08-06 02:43:21 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
193 2011-08-06 02:43:33 TheSeven has joined
194 2011-08-06 02:43:57 <gmaxwell> >1 is needed those, splits happen naturally with some regularity. You could keep trying over and over again aganst a bank like site and eventually end up with transactions on both sides of a split.
195 2011-08-06 02:44:05 <gmaxwell> er those* though.
196 2011-08-06 02:44:25 <gmaxwell> In fact, people might actually be doing network partitioning attacks already because the miners don't peer with each other.
197 2011-08-06 02:45:28 <gmaxwell> E.g. I can run 1000 botnet powered 'nodes' (really proxies to a single host) and manage to substantially seperate two big miners. I spend on both... after the 'bank' credits me I drop the attack.
198 2011-08-06 02:46:30 <ThomasV> how can you know you separate them ?
199 2011-08-06 02:47:00 <gmaxwell> You just keep trying.
200 2011-08-06 02:47:14 <gmaxwell> Well, you know you've seperated them when you're not hearing the blocks on the other side.
201 2011-08-06 02:47:30 <ThomasV> will the client drop connections based on best pingtimes, or something like that ?
202 2011-08-06 02:47:46 <gmaxwell> No.
203 2011-08-06 02:47:49 agricocb has joined
204 2011-08-06 02:48:00 dvide has joined
205 2011-08-06 02:48:03 <gmaxwell> It doesn't drop intentionally (Except due to the anti-flood logic)
206 2011-08-06 02:48:31 <gmaxwell> Rotating connections is something that ought to be added. (e.g. hold N static change M periodically, in order to weaking partitioning)
207 2011-08-06 02:49:45 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
208 2011-08-06 02:56:27 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, i thought orphan blocks where dropped interesting
209 2011-08-06 02:56:45 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: nah, they're left in the blocks file forever. nothing is erased from it.
210 2011-08-06 02:56:51 <phantomcircuit> ah
211 2011-08-06 02:56:52 <phantomcircuit> neat
212 2011-08-06 02:57:01 <phantomcircuit> so their story can be confirmed
213 2011-08-06 02:57:12 <ThomasV> gmaxwell: could an attacker forge packets from miner A sent to miner B, in order to trigger anti-flood logic?
214 2011-08-06 02:57:17 <gmaxwell> (because that would require some cross file atomic operation since all the later index entries would need to be updated)
215 2011-08-06 02:57:20 <gmaxwell> ThomasV: no.
216 2011-08-06 02:57:39 <gmaxwell> Miners don't connect to each other except by chance anyways. It's a flaw in the current operational practices.
217 2011-08-06 02:57:46 <gmaxwell> If they did they couldn't be partitioned by an attacker.
218 2011-08-06 02:57:57 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, actually TCP sequence numbers aren't nearly enough on gbps lines
219 2011-08-06 02:58:09 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: bitcoin never opens the window much.
220 2011-08-06 02:58:21 <gmaxwell> And you need to guess _both_ port numbers.
221 2011-08-06 02:58:32 <phantomcircuit> no just 1
222 2011-08-06 02:58:40 <phantomcircuit> obviously one of them will be 8333
223 2011-08-06 02:58:44 <Namegduf> One of those numbers could be changed but cannot reliably be assumed to be
224 2011-08-06 02:58:46 <gmaxwell> I suppose you could flood one off eventually, but in that case... you might as well just fill their pipes
225 2011-08-06 02:58:57 <Namegduf> So "just one" you can sort of rely on.
226 2011-08-06 02:58:59 <phantomcircuit> 8 bits on the port + 32 bits on the sequence number
227 2011-08-06 02:59:14 <gmaxwell> more like 14 bits on the port.
228 2011-08-06 02:59:32 <phantomcircuit> connect side is limited to the upper half of the range
229 2011-08-06 02:59:32 <Namegduf> If you could make a statistical attack on the port, that would be enough.
230 2011-08-06 02:59:53 <gmaxwell> log2(32768) = 15
231 2011-08-06 03:00:00 <Namegduf> phantomcircuit: Halving the range drops one bit, not half the bits.
232 2011-08-06 03:00:11 <gmaxwell> Namegduf: its random. I was being giving saying 14.
233 2011-08-06 03:00:13 <phantomcircuit> oh right
234 2011-08-06 03:00:36 <gmaxwell> In any case, â indeed. So you could slay their connections (TCPMD5 FTW) but its irrelevant because there is currently no such connection.
235 2011-08-06 03:01:07 <Namegduf> In general, any router between the two capable of passive sniffing and delaying of packets can defeat those measures, though
236 2011-08-06 03:01:28 <gmaxwell> Well, if you can filter the traffic you can filter the traffic.
237 2011-08-06 03:01:34 <Namegduf> Right
238 2011-08-06 03:01:40 <Namegduf> Bitcoin assumes one can't.
239 2011-08-06 03:01:43 <gmaxwell> If the big miners fully mesh though you'd have to be ISP-in-the-middle in many places though.
240 2011-08-06 03:02:00 <gmaxwell> Eh, bitcoin makes fairly few assumptions about the network.
241 2011-08-06 03:02:09 <phantomcircuit> it would take ~6 days on average to break into a tcp connection
242 2011-08-06 03:02:16 <phantomcircuit> from a gbps line to another
243 2011-08-06 03:02:29 <phantomcircuit> (2^(32+15) bytes / 1 gigabit/s)/2 ~= 6 days
244 2011-08-06 03:02:46 <gmaxwell> I mean, this is really just the 50% attack problem except (1) the miners are unwitting participants, (2) it doesn't need 50%, the power is amplified by your ability to split the network.
245 2011-08-06 03:03:08 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: great, and it would be reestablished quickly once it realized it lost its mind.
246 2011-08-06 03:03:13 <Namegduf> gmaxwell: I mean in terms of avoiding partition
247 2011-08-06 03:03:21 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, not if they're using -addnode ;)
248 2011-08-06 03:03:25 <Namegduf> It assumes you can't filter traffic because if you can filter traffic there's easy ways to do it
249 2011-08-06 03:03:28 <gmaxwell> Yea, addnode is useless.
250 2011-08-06 03:03:31 <Namegduf> Not practical to defend against.
251 2011-08-06 03:03:52 <gmaxwell> fair enough.
252 2011-08-06 03:03:54 <lfm> there would be lots of evidence left around if it really happened
253 2011-08-06 03:04:00 <gmaxwell> lfm: right.
254 2011-08-06 03:04:17 Rabbit67890 has quit (Quit: Rabbit67890)
255 2011-08-06 03:04:27 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: yea, this is why we need a -keepnode (or -trustnode, really) which reserves a slot and makes an effort to keep it up.
256 2011-08-06 03:04:28 Rabbit67890 has joined
257 2011-08-06 03:04:55 zeropoin1o has joined
258 2011-08-06 03:05:02 <gmaxwell> we also need to seriously reconsider the logic used for the /16 filtering, because it allowes people who inbound to you to choose who you'll try outbounding to.
259 2011-08-06 03:05:19 <Namegduf> Oooh, tricky.
260 2011-08-06 03:05:28 <gmaxwell> e.g. if I get a node on the /16 of each big miner, I can agressively connect to other nodes and prevent them from connecting to the miners on the same /16s as my drones.
261 2011-08-06 03:05:33 <Namegduf> Flag connections as inbound/outbound?
262 2011-08-06 03:06:00 <gmaxwell> We flagâ but we use all in the filter. One line change to ignore inbound... which I've been running locally, but it deserves some careful consideration.
263 2011-08-06 03:06:12 <Namegduf> Yeah.
264 2011-08-06 03:06:27 <Namegduf> I don't think it tries to make guarantees about having "so many" outbound vs inbound
265 2011-08-06 03:06:40 <gmaxwell> well it always tries to make 8 outbound.
266 2011-08-06 03:06:43 <Namegduf> Ah.
267 2011-08-06 03:07:03 <gmaxwell> But it excludes nodes in /16s we already have connections to (in or out) from consideration.
268 2011-08-06 03:07:30 agricocb has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
269 2011-08-06 03:07:37 <gmaxwell> because of the unequal distribution of the internet, a few dozen of well placed drones can make a target have fairly few non-drone choices.
270 2011-08-06 03:07:43 Guest39969 has joined
271 2011-08-06 03:08:40 <gmaxwell> e.g. I map a map of all listening bitcoin nodes, then I find the /16s with the most honest nodes.. and I get drones on them. From those drones I connect super agressively to my target, thus denying them access to big hunks of honest nodes.
272 2011-08-06 03:09:06 Rabbit67890 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
273 2011-08-06 03:09:09 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, brb implementing
274 2011-08-06 03:09:11 <gmaxwell> eventually you end up only connected to an attacker, or to nodes which are only connected to the attacker...
275 2011-08-06 03:09:15 <gmaxwell> ah
276 2011-08-06 03:09:17 <gmaxwell> hah
277 2011-08-06 03:09:24 <phantomcircuit> a far more efficient version of simple connect slot exhaustion
278 2011-08-06 03:09:37 <gmaxwell> amusingly, having multiple attackers might make things more secureâ if the attackers still forward normally other than their attack.
279 2011-08-06 03:09:45 nefario has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
280 2011-08-06 03:09:48 <phantomcircuit> lol
281 2011-08-06 03:10:00 <Namegduf> Clearly, the libertarian solution is for everyone to attack at once, thus completely blocking each other.
282 2011-08-06 03:10:09 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, i thought of the same attack but highly unoptimized
283 2011-08-06 03:10:11 <gmaxwell> This would be a reason to disconnect nodes which aren't looking helpfulâ we want to encourage attackers to forward normally!
284 2011-08-06 03:10:19 <Namegduf> Haha
285 2011-08-06 03:10:28 jimon has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
286 2011-08-06 03:10:47 <gmaxwell> (or at least some portion of slots should be reserved for nodes which look like they are behaving normally)
287 2011-08-06 03:10:58 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, measuring helpfulness is a notoriously difficult thing to do
288 2011-08-06 03:11:50 <phantomcircuit> anybody here use bit-pay.com?
289 2011-08-06 03:12:33 <gmaxwell> well, there are some things: nodes that tell you about blocks are helpful.
290 2011-08-06 03:12:40 <gmaxwell> and you can't really fake that.
291 2011-08-06 03:12:47 <phantomcircuit> hmm true
292 2011-08-06 03:13:14 <gmaxwell> if attacker A is trying to split the mining power, and attacker B is trying to split the mining power... and they foward blocks that don't promote the split they are trying to create, they'll step on each other.
293 2011-08-06 03:13:34 <gmaxwell> er don't block the split is what I meant.
294 2011-08-06 03:13:49 karnac has joined
295 2011-08-06 03:14:07 <gmaxwell> Unless they happen to choose the same split... which they might, because some miners are easier to find and isolate than others.
296 2011-08-06 03:14:31 <gmaxwell> Ideally you want to create a split where one side is only big enough to mine N blocks fast enough for the site not to notice.
297 2011-08-06 03:15:17 <gmaxwell> If the site only checks one block eligius alone would be perfectly fine, and its easy to find .. dunno how easy it is to isolate, since luke has outbound ddos-the-network patches. ;)
298 2011-08-06 03:15:44 <gmaxwell> though perhaps all the orphans he had prior to his current agressive network posture were due to an attack.
299 2011-08-06 03:16:20 <gmaxwell> might explain some of the surprisingly long (>30s) block propagations which have been observed.
300 2011-08-06 03:17:19 <gmaxwell> in any case, first step is to validate that a respend has happened.
301 2011-08-06 03:22:02 kluge has joined
302 2011-08-06 03:24:14 agricocb has joined
303 2011-08-06 03:28:04 <lfm> gmaxwell: hmm, there is a couple pairs of duplicate coinbase txn in blocks 91842 and 91812 and in blocks 91880 and 91722
304 2011-08-06 03:28:21 <gmaxwell> Yea, the duplicate coinbases were known.
305 2011-08-06 03:28:41 <lfm> a pool goofed?
306 2011-08-06 03:28:47 <gmaxwell> They're harmless: same input ID, so only one can be spent.. some crazy custom miner lost 50btc forever.
307 2011-08-06 03:29:00 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
308 2011-08-06 03:29:07 <gmaxwell> Paying to a single address, not incrementing extranonce ... duplicate coinbase.
309 2011-08-06 03:29:16 <gmaxwell> I didn't know about the second one, only the first.
310 2011-08-06 03:29:18 <gmaxwell> Odd...
311 2011-08-06 03:29:19 <lfm> ya, ok. I am working on code to find attempted double spends
312 2011-08-06 03:29:30 <gmaxwell> well, success, kinda.
313 2011-08-06 03:29:32 <gmaxwell> :)
314 2011-08-06 03:29:48 <lfm> not really what I was trying to find! hehe
315 2011-08-06 03:31:04 <gmaxwell> hm. now I'm puzzled. I ran a node with IsMine removed .. and the balance was short 50.01[...]1 btc. I thought it was 50 from the duplicate coinbase, and 1.0...01 from midnightmagic's magic block. But apparently not if there was a second duplicate.
316 2011-08-06 03:31:25 <gmaxwell> I wonder where the 50 was lost from if it wasn't counting the duplicates as lost.
317 2011-08-06 03:31:48 <gmaxwell> Hmph. too bad it takes hours to rescan with IsMine removed. :)
318 2011-08-06 03:32:08 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
319 2011-08-06 03:33:25 <lfm> gmaxwell: I was able to balance the inputs and outputs with the "lost" 0.01000001
320 2011-08-06 03:33:58 <gmaxwell> hm!
321 2011-08-06 03:34:34 <gmaxwell> maybe I was failing to count the very most recent block.
322 2011-08-06 03:34:51 <lfm> or block 0
323 2011-08-06 03:34:57 <gmaxwell> I'd cut out the isconfirmed check, but perhaps depth 0 still got it.
324 2011-08-06 03:35:07 <gmaxwell> yea, hm, I could have been off by one that way too I guess.
325 2011-08-06 03:36:13 <lfm> so anyway now we have anothe 100btc confirmed as permenantly lost
326 2011-08-06 03:36:27 <gmaxwell> another?
327 2011-08-06 03:36:43 <lfm> besides the 0.01000001
328 2011-08-06 03:37:48 BlueMattBot has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
329 2011-08-06 03:37:58 <lfm> prolly insignificant compared to block of early testers who lost whole wallts and stuff
330 2011-08-06 03:38:04 <gmaxwell> Sure.
331 2011-08-06 03:38:20 <gmaxwell> I've lost ~500 btc most likely.
332 2011-08-06 03:38:42 Milbo has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.0 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
333 2011-08-06 03:38:46 <gmaxwell> But I'm not actually sure about it, because I'd left bitcoin running for a long time without looking at it.
334 2011-08-06 03:38:57 <copumpkin> how about the 17k? :P
335 2011-08-06 03:38:59 <copumpkin> from bitomat
336 2011-08-06 03:39:04 <gmaxwell> And it may someday turn up on some disk I missed checking, though thats pretty unlikely.
337 2011-08-06 03:39:28 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: if it was really lost. ;) Someone could just be playing a really long game.
338 2011-08-06 03:39:48 <gmaxwell> the 100 + 0.01000001 has zero ambiguity. It's lost for sure any anyone can validate that.
339 2011-08-06 03:41:47 <gmaxwell> e.g. Plan for immortality 3825: (1) run a big bitcoin wallet service. (2) 'lose' a huge number of bitcoins. (3) die and have yourself cryogenically preserved. (4) 300 years from now a trust with control of the 'lost' coins show up and puts 10% of mankinds wealth into reviving you. ;)
340 2011-08-06 03:42:48 <copumpkin> lol
341 2011-08-06 03:43:02 <copumpkin> I think the community could do with a notification service
342 2011-08-06 03:43:14 <copumpkin> that watches addresses for any movement
343 2011-08-06 03:44:27 eoss has joined
344 2011-08-06 03:45:32 <gmaxwell> of course, 300 years from now would anyone care about a little zombie coins being spent (assuming the trust started spending slowly)? :)
345 2011-08-06 03:48:24 eian has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
346 2011-08-06 03:52:23 Raccoon has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
347 2011-08-06 03:54:42 BlueMattBot has joined
348 2011-08-06 04:00:43 <luke-jr> so MyBitcoin claims the theft was double-spends
349 2011-08-06 04:00:51 <luke-jr> doesn't that implicate Deepbit?
350 2011-08-06 04:05:06 jimon has joined
351 2011-08-06 04:05:50 <BurningToad> not really double spends... but just sent funds that only survived one confirmation, and then withdrew different funds from mybitcoin
352 2011-08-06 04:05:51 <iddo> huh? how can anyone else double-spend the coins that were under mybitcoin control?
353 2011-08-06 04:06:17 <luke-jr> BurningToad: how can 1-confirmation transactions be reversed other than deepbit?
354 2011-08-06 04:06:36 <iddo> ahh
355 2011-08-06 04:07:19 Guest39969 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
356 2011-08-06 04:07:39 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: er, any orphan potentially reverses it!
357 2011-08-06 04:07:54 <gmaxwell> (if the opposite sides of the split have different transactions)
358 2011-08-06 04:07:58 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: potentially, but what's the probability of that?
359 2011-08-06 04:08:15 MrTiggr has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
360 2011-08-06 04:08:33 Graet has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
361 2011-08-06 04:09:11 <gmaxwell> 100% if someone was working to make it possible. For example, I get a link to you and a link to deepbit (somehow). I constantly present each of you conflicting transactions both paying different accounts at RandomEwallet with different inputs.
362 2011-08-06 04:09:16 <BurningToad> could be as simple as some script that kept depositing coins, and then trying to withdraw them as fast as possible? Maybe some network manipulation on mybitcoin's bitcoinds?
363 2011-08-06 04:09:35 <gmaxwell> As soon as one block makes it to randomewallet I withdraw it.
364 2011-08-06 04:09:51 <iddo> why would mybitcoin accept funds after 1-confirmation ?
365 2011-08-06 04:10:08 <gmaxwell> If randomEwallet eventually hears an eligius block first but then it gets orphaned, poof.
366 2011-08-06 04:10:22 <gmaxwell> I can make this much more likely if I conduct a network attack where I intentionally partition miners.
367 2011-08-06 04:10:32 <gmaxwell> (assuming the miners don't peer with each other)
368 2011-08-06 04:10:47 <gmaxwell> E.g. I get a botnet to pretend to be 1000 bitcoin nodes (by forwarding the tcp connections back to me)
369 2011-08-06 04:11:09 <gmaxwell> Then I've got a pretty good chance of being the only working path between a medium and a large miner.
370 2011-08-06 04:11:25 <gmaxwell> So I split the network (don't let the two miners hear about each others blocks)
371 2011-08-06 04:11:29 <luke-jr> hmm
372 2011-08-06 04:11:46 <gmaxwell> I put txn in both sides... withdraw. pop the split.
373 2011-08-06 04:12:07 <gmaxwell> I might have to try a bunch of times to be successful, but I could automate it.
374 2011-08-06 04:12:52 <BurningToad> or, mybitcoin.com WAS rooted, and this is an attempt to get some user/passwords along with bitcoins ;)
375 2011-08-06 04:12:58 <gmaxwell> To prevent this: wait for more txn (duh) which makes this much harder (someone will notice splits that deep), miners should peer with each other (most important), and high target services should peer with miners.
376 2011-08-06 04:13:11 <gmaxwell> People are now analyizing the block data to verify the claim.
377 2011-08-06 04:13:33 <gmaxwell> Orphan blocks are not erased, so if there was a reversal it can be detected using the block data from any node that heard the orphaned block.
378 2011-08-06 04:14:40 <gmaxwell> If people can find it, the next question will be "how did it happen"... e.g. is there an evil miner? (well, not that unlikely.. you don't need _that_ much hash power to make a 1 deep orphan assuming you also network attack the wallet service.
379 2011-08-06 04:14:57 <gmaxwell> or did it happen via a larger network splitting attack.
380 2011-08-06 04:16:01 <iddo> why 1 deep and not 6 deep ? mybitcoin accepted funds after just one block ?
381 2011-08-06 04:16:20 <luke-jr> well, if this doesn't implicate Deepbit, I personally think their story is probably true
382 2011-08-06 04:16:25 <luke-jr> iddo: apparently
383 2011-08-06 04:16:34 <gmaxwell> well, it will get validated.
384 2011-08-06 04:17:08 <gmaxwell> and .. in any case, if it _was_ a partitioning attack, that kind of attack is made _much_ easier by the concentration of mining power.
385 2011-08-06 04:17:32 <gmaxwell> It's really hard to partition dozens of potential block solvers.. much easier to parition just a few.
386 2011-08-06 04:17:36 <gmaxwell> Or one.
387 2011-08-06 04:20:27 <iddo> sounds fishy to me, mybitcoin advetised that the wallet with most of their bitcoins isn't even online
388 2011-08-06 04:20:42 <gmaxwell> how much do they say was stolen this way?
389 2011-08-06 04:20:53 <gmaxwell> the problem with a reversal attack is that you could potentially do it many times...
390 2011-08-06 04:21:02 <gmaxwell> even causing them to refill from their offline wallet
391 2011-08-06 04:21:09 <gmaxwell> "oh lots of withdraws"
392 2011-08-06 04:21:22 <gmaxwell> not noticing the that the site balance and the wallet balance were not in agreement.
393 2011-08-06 04:22:04 <gmaxwell> If they didn't have safty checks in to catch imbalances, they might only notice when they ran out of money and couldn't satisify a withdraw.
394 2011-08-06 04:25:16 <iddo> so the idea is to let e.g. deepbit work on the txn that will survive, and meanwhile let mybitcoin see another txn ?
395 2011-08-06 04:26:11 <iddo> unless you can really partition the network, i guess this cannot be done even if you wait just for 2 confirmations
396 2011-08-06 04:28:53 <iddo> if event of finding two hashes at same time is p for very small p, then it should be less than p^2 after 2 blocks etc.
397 2011-08-06 04:34:05 <gmaxwell> depends on who you can partition an how.
398 2011-08-06 04:35:40 <gmaxwell> For example if you can make a partition of deepbit+slush|mybitcoin+everyone-else thats >50% on one side, but enough on the other that you could leave it going for a little while before it was too obvious.
399 2011-08-06 04:35:54 asuk has joined
400 2011-08-06 04:35:57 <gmaxwell> It wouldn't work 100% of the time, of course, but you lose nothing when it fails
401 2011-08-06 04:36:14 <luke-jr> iddo: their thing today says the offline was unaffected
402 2011-08-06 04:36:54 <gmaxwell> e.g. if your attack 'fails' it just means that the first confirm mybitcoin saw is the one that ends up surviving.
403 2011-08-06 04:37:25 <gmaxwell> e.g. if someone connected to the network and broke your partitoning before your 'reversal' side (the one without mybitcoin) was longer.
404 2011-08-06 04:37:34 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: someone on the ML was recently suggesting broadcasting double-spend attempts
405 2011-08-06 04:37:38 <luke-jr> this makes it look like a good idea
406 2011-08-06 04:38:18 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
407 2011-08-06 04:38:22 <gmaxwell> The problem here is that if they parition effectively there they could also limit the txn flooding, so no node would see both. Make it much more likely to get noticed but still possible.
408 2011-08-06 04:38:44 mf has joined
409 2011-08-06 04:39:05 <gmaxwell> The better idea is to get a -keepnodes feature and get large miners to peer with each other (fewer orphans), it's in their best interest as well as everyone elses (paritioning miners becomes very hard).
410 2011-08-06 04:39:22 Frozenlock has joined
411 2011-08-06 04:40:00 <gmaxwell> you could still do crap like partition mybitcoin, then mine a block for it on the partition.. and if its operators aren't paying attention they may not notice that it's split from the network for hours at a time.
412 2011-08-06 04:40:08 <gmaxwell> But at least you need a good amount of hash power for that.
413 2011-08-06 04:40:34 <gmaxwell> (enough to perform the attack before someone notices that mybitcoin is two dozen blocks behind.
414 2011-08-06 04:40:37 <gmaxwell> )
415 2011-08-06 04:41:09 <gmaxwell> though I assume if you paritioned it, you'd still let txn acrossâ just not blocks. so txn would keep working during the attack the only way to notice would be that getting one confirm would take a long time.
416 2011-08-06 04:41:36 <shadders> luke-jr: what should I expect to find following X-Mining-Extensions: ? X-Roll-NTime or rollntime
417 2011-08-06 04:41:40 <shadders> case sensitive?
418 2011-08-06 04:41:46 <luke-jr> shadders: rollntime lowercase
419 2011-08-06 04:42:19 <shadders> reject-reason noncerange are the defined name for those extensions?
420 2011-08-06 04:43:00 <gmaxwell> this is why 6 confirms is still goodâ if a netwok attacker partitions you, they'd have to mine 6 blocks just for you to attack... thats too many (300 btc in lost income alone!), as it'll take them a very long time unless they are one of the bigger pools.
421 2011-08-06 04:51:42 HardDisk_WP has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
422 2011-08-06 04:51:44 koolfy has quit (Excess Flood)
423 2011-08-06 04:51:45 HD has joined
424 2011-08-06 04:52:42 HD is now known as Laptop!~marco@wikipedia/harddisk|HardDisk_WP
425 2011-08-06 04:52:49 koolfy has joined
426 2011-08-06 04:52:52 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
427 2011-08-06 04:53:09 zeropointo has quit (Quit: leaving)
428 2011-08-06 04:55:51 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
429 2011-08-06 05:00:25 <Frozenlock> My apologies for asking this simple question in this serious channel, but could someone please tell me what is the format of the wallet.dat file? (to read my privates and public keys, for example)
430 2011-08-06 05:02:02 <gmaxwell> it's bdb
431 2011-08-06 05:02:41 <Frozenlock> Thanks!
432 2011-08-06 05:03:44 <luke-jr> shadders: reject-reason doesn't require advertising tho
433 2011-08-06 05:05:08 eianpsego has joined
434 2011-08-06 05:05:16 <jrmithdobbs> hmm this seems like a bad idea
435 2011-08-06 05:05:32 <jrmithdobbs> but i've found a hacky way to give a raw block device for use with dm_crypt a uuid
436 2011-08-06 05:06:01 fakap has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net)
437 2011-08-06 05:06:22 <jrmithdobbs> example: mkswap /dev/sdc 40; creates a 40K swap space, then, just to be space, give cryptsetup the --offset 80 option
438 2011-08-06 05:06:35 fakap has joined
439 2011-08-06 05:06:48 <jrmithdobbs> someone tell me why this is awful besides blkid saying the partition is SWAP when it's ont ;p
440 2011-08-06 05:06:51 <jrmithdobbs> s/ont/not/
441 2011-08-06 05:07:05 sgstair has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
442 2011-08-06 05:07:30 <jrmithdobbs> s/just to be space/just to be safe/
443 2011-08-06 05:07:53 zeropointo has joined
444 2011-08-06 05:10:35 magn3ts has joined
445 2011-08-06 05:11:42 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: sounds like a good way to hide a partition
446 2011-08-06 05:11:50 sgstair has joined
447 2011-08-06 05:12:15 <jrmithdobbs> no i don't want to hide it, i want to make it usable by uuid
448 2011-08-06 05:12:20 <jrmithdobbs> it's p much the opposite of hiding it
449 2011-08-06 05:18:06 brooss__ has joined
450 2011-08-06 05:19:05 somuchwin2 has joined
451 2011-08-06 05:19:06 brooss_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
452 2011-08-06 05:20:20 RazielZ has joined
453 2011-08-06 05:20:23 somuchwin has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
454 2011-08-06 05:20:23 EPiSKiNG- has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
455 2011-08-06 05:21:00 sgstair has quit (Quit: .«UPP»Â.)
456 2011-08-06 05:21:34 AmazingPudding has joined
457 2011-08-06 05:21:37 rlifchitz has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
458 2011-08-06 05:21:37 repl has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
459 2011-08-06 05:21:37 rm99 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
460 2011-08-06 05:21:49 Blitzboom_ has joined
461 2011-08-06 05:22:03 Workbench_ has joined
462 2011-08-06 05:22:03 MobiusL has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
463 2011-08-06 05:22:03 Blitzboom has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
464 2011-08-06 05:22:04 bonsaikitten has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
465 2011-08-06 05:22:04 gim has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
466 2011-08-06 05:22:06 Kobier has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
467 2011-08-06 05:22:12 rlifchitz has joined
468 2011-08-06 05:22:13 rm99 has joined
469 2011-08-06 05:22:15 agricocb has joined
470 2011-08-06 05:22:19 gim has joined
471 2011-08-06 05:22:26 EPiSKiNG- has joined
472 2011-08-06 05:22:30 Workbench has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
473 2011-08-06 05:22:33 MobiusL has joined
474 2011-08-06 05:22:48 repl has joined
475 2011-08-06 05:22:56 Xunie has quit (Excess Flood)
476 2011-08-06 05:22:57 tcatm has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
477 2011-08-06 05:23:28 tcatm has joined
478 2011-08-06 05:23:29 tcatm has quit (Changing host)
479 2011-08-06 05:23:29 tcatm has joined
480 2011-08-06 05:23:43 Xunie has joined
481 2011-08-06 05:23:54 sgstair has joined
482 2011-08-06 05:25:45 karnac has joined
483 2011-08-06 05:26:30 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
484 2011-08-06 05:27:27 Bwild has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
485 2011-08-06 05:28:50 koleg has joined
486 2011-08-06 05:29:06 osmosis has joined
487 2011-08-06 05:29:20 koleg has quit (2!~koleg@89.151.191.93|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
488 2011-08-06 05:29:20 koleg has joined
489 2011-08-06 05:29:43 koleg has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
490 2011-08-06 05:31:34 moa7 has joined
491 2011-08-06 05:36:52 Bwild has joined
492 2011-08-06 05:38:48 AStove has joined
493 2011-08-06 05:43:31 MobiusL has quit (Quit: Leaving)
494 2011-08-06 05:43:46 eastender has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
495 2011-08-06 05:43:55 MobiusL has joined
496 2011-08-06 05:45:15 koleg has quit (3!kvirc@79.133.138.234|Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
497 2011-08-06 05:47:47 suriv has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
498 2011-08-06 05:47:47 amiller has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
499 2011-08-06 05:49:05 amiller has joined
500 2011-08-06 05:51:09 fakap has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net)
501 2011-08-06 05:51:32 fakap has joined
502 2011-08-06 05:55:14 suriv has joined
503 2011-08-06 05:57:59 sacarlson has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
504 2011-08-06 05:58:24 Frozenlock has left ("Killed buffer")
505 2011-08-06 05:58:40 kish` has joined
506 2011-08-06 05:59:09 kish`_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
507 2011-08-06 05:59:50 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
508 2011-08-06 05:59:59 moa7 has quit (Quit: Page closed)
509 2011-08-06 06:01:23 espinet has joined
510 2011-08-06 06:04:31 <m03sizlak> hey, ive launched a HTML5 bitcoin blackjack site, check it out http://bitjack21.com
511 2011-08-06 06:04:48 <upb> not clicking :)
512 2011-08-06 06:05:26 bitcoinbulletin has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
513 2011-08-06 06:07:53 <lfm> m03sizlak: is that announcement on a cron job now?
514 2011-08-06 06:09:25 <m03sizlak> hey im trying to promote a legitimate use for bitcoins
515 2011-08-06 06:09:49 <lfm> so it IS a cron job huh
516 2011-08-06 06:12:46 sacarlson has joined
517 2011-08-06 06:13:47 <[Tycho]> He is spamming.
518 2011-08-06 06:14:41 <jrmithdobbs> m03sizlak: you mean a service that is illegal for about 50% of this channel
519 2011-08-06 06:15:34 bitcoinbulletin has joined
520 2011-08-06 06:15:59 <m03sizlak> the server is in the UK, its very legal
521 2011-08-06 06:16:04 <m03sizlak> and bitcoins are not currency
522 2011-08-06 06:16:11 <m03sizlak> nothing illegal about it
523 2011-08-06 06:17:10 <lfm> so you're claiming poker is not gambling.
524 2011-08-06 06:17:22 <lfm> oh blackjack
525 2011-08-06 06:17:45 joepie91 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
526 2011-08-06 06:18:02 <m03sizlak> of course its gambling
527 2011-08-06 06:18:09 <m03sizlak> but its gambling BITCOINS
528 2011-08-06 06:18:20 <m03sizlak> and internet gambling (even for money) is legal in the UK
529 2011-08-06 06:18:28 <m03sizlak> but bitcoins are of course not money
530 2011-08-06 06:18:49 <arcatan> what makes you think they're not money?
531 2011-08-06 06:18:52 <lfm> oh, then your claiming online gambling isnt illegal for us citizens?
532 2011-08-06 06:19:28 <m03sizlak> if you use money it might be
533 2011-08-06 06:19:40 <m03sizlak> its debatable
534 2011-08-06 06:19:46 <neofutur> m03sizlak: move this to #bitcoin-games
535 2011-08-06 06:20:20 <lfm> neofutur: you just made that channel up just now didnt you!?
536 2011-08-06 06:20:55 <neofutur> #bitcoin-games is here for days
537 2011-08-06 06:21:07 fakap has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net)
538 2011-08-06 06:21:31 fakap has joined
539 2011-08-06 06:22:07 ridi has joined
540 2011-08-06 06:22:35 eianpsego has quit (Quit: Leaving)
541 2011-08-06 06:29:42 zeropointo has quit (Quit: leaving)
542 2011-08-06 06:31:16 <neofutur> /msg chansrv info #bitcoin-games
543 2011-08-06 06:31:19 <neofutur> and its not mine
544 2011-08-06 06:32:13 <neofutur> (08:26) -ChanServ(ChanServ@services.)- Information on #bitcoin-games:
545 2011-08-06 06:32:13 <neofutur> (08:26) -ChanServ(ChanServ@services.)- Founder : OneFixt, nanotube
546 2011-08-06 06:32:13 <neofutur> (08:26) -ChanServ(ChanServ@services.)- Registered : Mar 03 07:14:33 2011 (22 weeks, 1 day, 23:12:05 ago)
547 2011-08-06 06:32:43 <neofutur> ( here for months , not days )
548 2011-08-06 06:35:25 karnac has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
549 2011-08-06 06:37:32 m87 has joined
550 2011-08-06 06:41:06 m86 has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
551 2011-08-06 06:43:30 <gmaxwell> I wrote a rebuttal to dan's scalibility argument https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability#Note_to_readers
552 2011-08-06 06:43:55 Blitzboom_ is now known as Blitzboom
553 2011-08-06 06:48:29 MrTiggr has joined
554 2011-08-06 06:49:46 <iddo> cool
555 2011-08-06 06:49:57 <upb> btw its a terabyte :)
556 2011-08-06 06:50:33 <iddo> though i only now noticed that he took that 1gb per block number from this bitcoin wiki page
557 2011-08-06 06:52:18 <gmaxwell> {{sofixit}}
558 2011-08-06 06:52:20 <gmaxwell> it's a wiki.
559 2011-08-06 06:52:22 zeropoin1o has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
560 2011-08-06 06:52:29 <gmaxwell> please proofread my spew.
561 2011-08-06 06:53:24 ThomasV has joined
562 2011-08-06 06:56:34 <iddo> maybe i'm wrong, but this seems a little incoherent: "Bitcoin is a more complete replacement for checks, wire transfers, money orders, gold coins, CDs, savings accounts, etc. and if widely adopted probably replace the uses of credit cards which would be better served by these other things if they worked better online."
563 2011-08-06 06:57:35 E-sense has joined
564 2011-08-06 06:57:40 magn3ts has quit (Quit: Leaving)
565 2011-08-06 06:59:13 <gmaxwell> I mean, I commonly use a debit card where giving someone a check would suffice just fine, except for the whole three days it would take to mail a check.
566 2011-08-06 06:59:20 osmosis has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
567 2011-08-06 06:59:58 <gmaxwell> Thats an example where a direct bitcoin transaction would usually be a perfect fit: not instant, potentially high value...
568 2011-08-06 07:01:38 <upb> makes sense
569 2011-08-06 07:03:26 <iddo> but in wiki you start by saying bitcoin doesnt have properties of credit cards, then say it can replace credit cards without specifying the reasoning
570 2011-08-06 07:04:22 osmosis has joined
571 2011-08-06 07:04:23 <upb> eh i think the point is that it replaces some specific uses of credit cards
572 2011-08-06 07:04:23 <iddo> when i read it i wasnt sure if you meant "probably won't replace"
573 2011-08-06 07:09:17 <iddo> i actually doubt that anti-fraud is good argument for credit cards implemented on top of bitcoin, i think bitcoin contracts can be better, i.e. without involving trust
574 2011-08-06 07:09:33 <gmaxwell> "It depends"
575 2011-08-06 07:10:13 <iddo> the one obvious benefit of credit cards is instant transactions
576 2011-08-06 07:10:18 <gmaxwell> E.g. making the merchant eat some kinds of fraud sometimes make economic sense (basically where the merchant has good ability to mitigate the risk)
577 2011-08-06 07:10:42 <gmaxwell> Making the buyer eat other kinds of fraud also makes sense.
578 2011-08-06 07:11:17 <iddo> but i'm saying bitcoin can prevent the fraud
579 2011-08-06 07:11:29 Clipse has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
580 2011-08-06 07:12:19 <gmaxwell> nah, bitcoin can't check to make sure that what someone shipped you wasn't a box of rocks. If you do a two-party trustless escrow, then you're vulnerable to holdup extortion. If you have a third party you're back to trust and they can be tricked. "it was rocks he sent me" "it was gpus!"
581 2011-08-06 07:12:20 <iddo> in the sense that dishonest participant will only lose money
582 2011-08-06 07:13:47 <gmaxwell> (I'm not really arguing that bitcoin can't helpâ it's just not the only tool in our toolbox. We shouln't hesitate to use it, but we shouldn't be afraid that other things exist either)
583 2011-08-06 07:14:03 <iddo> let's say product p costs x bitcoins, so merchant and customer lock 2x bitcoins each, then merchant sends p, then they unlock it as 3x to merchant and x back to customer
584 2011-08-06 07:14:25 <iddo> if either one of them is dishonest then he just loses money
585 2011-08-06 07:15:03 <gmaxwell> Yep, you can do that. And if my balls are made of harder brass than yours, (or really, my tolerance of loss is lessâ perhaps I'm spending stolen money to begin with) I can still extort you in this game of chicken.
586 2011-08-06 07:15:55 osmosis has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
587 2011-08-06 07:16:04 <iddo> why would you participate in such protocol if you knew in advance that you would give in to extortion?
588 2011-08-06 07:16:15 <gmaxwell> bitcoin also adds a fun wrinkle. because coin supply is finite, if I'm very rich it's actually in my interest to destroy my own coins, so long as I can destroy some of yours too. :)
589 2011-08-06 07:16:17 <random_cat> nothing about bitcoin removes the need for trust
590 2011-08-06 07:16:48 <gmaxwell> iddo: because you won't give into infinite extortion, but you may give into a little exortion.
591 2011-08-06 07:17:02 <iddo> i'm missing technical detail, maybe bitcoin contracts can prevent extortion?
592 2011-08-06 07:17:12 dvide has quit ()
593 2011-08-06 07:17:30 <gmaxwell> People use that kind of small extortion all the time. They'll go to buy something... get it all unpackaged, paperwork ready... sales guy committed.. then the demand a slightly better price.
594 2011-08-06 07:17:40 <gmaxwell> iddo: you just described how they can do it, but the protection isn't perfect.
595 2011-08-06 07:18:23 <iddo> can you do this? lock 2x coins of A with 2x coins of B so that only by providing both private keys you can unlock, and the outputs can *only* be unlocked as 3x to A and x to B
596 2011-08-06 07:18:26 <iddo> can it be done?
597 2011-08-06 07:18:56 osmosis has joined
598 2011-08-06 07:18:56 <random_cat> what if i bring a gun?
599 2011-08-06 07:18:58 <gmaxwell> No. But even if it could it wouldn't matter.
600 2011-08-06 07:19:12 <gmaxwell> "I won't unlock that txn until you've also paid me 0.01 extra btc seperately"
601 2011-08-06 07:19:24 <iddo> :)
602 2011-08-06 07:19:54 <gmaxwell> and "Look, I'm willing to wait this out. Just pay up, I know you have the margins" .. people would.
603 2011-08-06 07:20:22 <gmaxwell> They'd hate you, and they'd smear your reputation justly... but if reputation matters, thats not zero trust.
604 2011-08-06 07:20:35 <iddo> but the basic property that i said holds: any participant who is dishonet will gain nothing and will lose money... i doubt that visa can offer you this property
605 2011-08-06 07:20:39 ridi has quit ()
606 2011-08-06 07:21:22 <random_cat> ugh
607 2011-08-06 07:21:33 <iddo> also, instead of 2x and 2x for product that costs x, you can do e.g. 9x and 9x, so now there is higher incentive to be honest because the locked coins worth much more than the product
608 2011-08-06 07:21:49 hcc_ has joined
609 2011-08-06 07:21:52 <gmaxwell> iddo: but it's not, I'm pretty sure that I could reliably extort a little bit in those kinds of transactions.. so long as the extortion was fairly small. Eventually people would lynch me, the state would lock me up, my bad reputation would get me shuned, etc. but all those things work without fancy transactions.
610 2011-08-06 07:22:07 <gmaxwell> iddo: but the stakes of the extortion are higher.
611 2011-08-06 07:22:13 <hcc_> il y a t'il des français ici
612 2011-08-06 07:22:18 <iddo> and a problem is, if the product gets lost in the mail...
613 2011-08-06 07:22:20 <gmaxwell> Are you going to turn down my 0.01 BTC demand when you have 100 BTC tied up?
614 2011-08-06 07:22:53 <iddo> personally, yes i will turn it down... why should i encourage extorters...
615 2011-08-06 07:22:59 <gmaxwell> yea... sometimes there are disputes. Disputes are best settled by people who can think. Bitcoin is a very rigid system. Thats normally good, but not when you need judgement.
616 2011-08-06 07:23:33 <gmaxwell> iddo: keep saying that when your rent is due, and your suppliers are cutting you off, etc. It might not always work, but it would work often.
617 2011-08-06 07:23:45 hachque has joined
618 2011-08-06 07:24:07 <hcc_> Hello, I need your help, someone could tell me how you win the bitcoins
619 2011-08-06 07:24:55 <iddo> also as described in bitcoin contracts wiki, after e.g. 6 months the coins go to bitcoin faucet or charities, so you can feel a little better about it....
620 2011-08-06 07:25:25 <gmaxwell> https://fr.bitcoin.it/wiki/Accueil < hmph, the french page is not very useful
621 2011-08-06 07:25:59 <hcc_> thank
622 2011-08-06 07:28:11 espinet has left ()
623 2011-08-06 07:28:15 mmoya has joined
624 2011-08-06 07:28:51 <gmaxwell> iddo: in any case, if you think my mention of anti-fraud there is questionable please remove it.
625 2011-08-06 07:28:59 <gmaxwell> The core point is really instant transactions.
626 2011-08-06 07:29:09 <iddo> in a technical sense, visa doesnt have any tools that bitcoin doesnt have to prevent this kind of extortion, any real-world tools that visa can use, you can also use directly with bitcoin
627 2011-08-06 07:29:27 <gmaxwell> beyond that I wanted to make the point that alternative systems give people choices, which will make them simply better for some things.
628 2011-08-06 07:29:39 <gmaxwell> Visa has an ongoing relationship with you.
629 2011-08-06 07:29:51 <gmaxwell> (well the bank that sits between you and visa, but whatever)
630 2011-08-06 07:30:46 <gmaxwell> You won't hold up visa because you value the relationship more (visa doesn't have any doubt when visa itself thinks you've screwed it, vs random joe saying you've extorted him not being trusted by other traders)
631 2011-08-06 07:31:13 <gmaxwell> and because visa is more likely to fight back, because they'll deal with more fraud they'll have dedicated procedures and staff that joe trader will not
632 2011-08-06 07:31:47 <gmaxwell> they can also do things like "know where you live" as part of their ongoing relationship with you, something you might not want to tell every vendor you deal with.
633 2011-08-06 07:32:31 <gmaxwell> I don't mean to argue that it's betterâ it's just different. Their tools are almost a superset of bitcoins. (well are a superset if you deal with them using bitcoin)
634 2011-08-06 07:32:44 <iddo> so i guess you can exchange bitcoins with party in ongoing fashion... i just mean in technical sense the visa protocol doesnt offer anything, you can do this "know where you live" with bitcoins too, there's no special property of visa that allows it
635 2011-08-06 07:32:51 <ThomasV> someone reduced the wiki trade page by 50%...
636 2011-08-06 07:33:28 <ThomasV> probably edited an old version
637 2011-08-06 07:33:41 <gmaxwell> iddo: correct, but e.g. every single person you trade with learning and validing your addressâ while possibleâ just isnt efficient.
638 2011-08-06 07:33:52 <gmaxwell> It has costs, both in the validation and in the privacy harm.
639 2011-08-06 07:34:03 <ThomasV> MagicalTux: can you revert him ?
640 2011-08-06 07:34:33 <gmaxwell> If knowing my address were required for enough trust... I'd rather tell it to a few trusted intermediaries than everyone I need trust with.
641 2011-08-06 07:34:57 <gmaxwell> I don't need "visa" for that, call it whatever you want. It's still an overlay on top of bitcoin.
642 2011-08-06 07:35:06 <gmaxwell> (even if the transactions themselves are all bitcoin transactions)
643 2011-08-06 07:35:14 <gmaxwell> ThomasV: it's a wiki, you can edit.
644 2011-08-06 07:35:17 <gmaxwell> make an account.
645 2011-08-06 07:35:20 <gmaxwell> validate your email.
646 2011-08-06 07:35:22 suriv has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
647 2011-08-06 07:35:23 <gmaxwell> then edit.
648 2011-08-06 07:35:37 <ThomasV> gmaxwell: it's easier when youre a sysop
649 2011-08-06 07:35:49 <gmaxwell> reverting is trivial.
650 2011-08-06 07:35:59 ee1 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
651 2011-08-06 07:36:02 <iddo> anyway for relatively small transactions, like something that costs now $100, i think it'd work well to use protocol where each sides only loses if he's dishonest
652 2011-08-06 07:36:03 <gmaxwell> [history] [click a good version] [edit this page] [save]
653 2011-08-06 07:36:18 <ThomasV> gmaxwell: I know, I am a mediawiki dev
654 2011-08-06 07:36:23 <iddo> if it's something that costs $1,000,000 now, you might want to meet the merchant in person anyway
655 2011-08-06 07:36:47 <gmaxwell> Oh, you're that thomasv. :)
656 2011-08-06 07:36:56 <gmaxwell> the extension from wikisource, no?
657 2011-08-06 07:37:04 <ThomasV> yes
658 2011-08-06 07:37:41 <gmaxwell> iddo: who knows, bitcoin's distributed contracts are basically something new. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't use them for soda-pop txn (you'll just take the risk)
659 2011-08-06 07:38:15 <gmaxwell> (new meaning I don't think there exists a good parallel anywhere else in the world)
660 2011-08-06 07:38:28 <iddo> yes, but for the ebay crowd they can be very useful i think
661 2011-08-06 07:39:04 <iddo> clearcoin had to be shut down because of too much demand? contracts achieve the same, without trusted 3rd party
662 2011-08-06 07:39:20 <gmaxwell> iddo: gavin wanted to focus.
663 2011-08-06 07:39:33 <gmaxwell> I'm glad thought, I felt it created a conflict of interest.
664 2011-08-06 07:39:57 <gmaxwell> (not attacking gavin's characterâ conflicts are still problems even if they are just imaginary)
665 2011-08-06 07:40:01 Raccoon has joined
666 2011-08-06 07:40:39 <iddo> but i think it's true that there heavy demand for clearcoin? i saw other escrow services in popping up in forums after it shut down
667 2011-08-06 07:41:37 <gmaxwell> ThomasV: is this the edit that you're talking about? https://en.bitcoin.it/w/index.php?title=Trade&diff=prev&oldid=14263
668 2011-08-06 07:41:49 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
669 2011-08-06 07:41:51 hcc_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
670 2011-08-06 07:41:59 osmosis has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
671 2011-08-06 07:42:07 <gmaxwell> iddo: there is. We really need to get pull 319 into bitcoin... or at least the IsStandard part of it.
672 2011-08-06 07:42:13 osmosis has joined
673 2011-08-06 07:42:20 <iddo> anyway the point is that 3rd party is useless because of bitcoin contracts, unless it's a 3rd party that actually does real-world dispute resolutions
674 2011-08-06 07:42:27 <ThomasV> gmaxwell: yes. I just thought that a revert would be cleaner than an undo
675 2011-08-06 07:42:37 <iddo> what is pull 319 ?
676 2011-08-06 07:42:44 <ThomasV> but it's not a big deal
677 2011-08-06 07:43:21 <gmaxwell> iddo: https://github.com/groffer/bitcoin/commit/dc2dfbab6a0f75070fc3b962da4eb2967e9659df
678 2011-08-06 07:43:40 <gmaxwell> iddo: UI for multiple signer transactions.
679 2011-08-06 07:44:19 <ThomasV> gmaxwell: that trade page is too big ; it would be better to split it into multiple subpages
680 2011-08-06 07:44:21 <iddo> cool
681 2011-08-06 07:44:38 <gmaxwell> iddo: but the focus now is on stablility, not new features.
682 2011-08-06 07:45:02 <iddo> this is just GUI stuff? no need to change the protocol that the miners are running, right?
683 2011-08-06 07:45:09 <gmaxwell> kinda.
684 2011-08-06 07:45:56 <gmaxwell> right now most nodes won't relay non-standard transactions (unless they are in a block), most miners won't mine them either... this is due to varrious attacks against bitcoin that have happened.
685 2011-08-06 07:46:13 <gmaxwell> So the patch also changes the definition of standard transactions to include these kinds of transactions.
686 2011-08-06 07:46:31 <iddo> ok
687 2011-08-06 07:47:28 <gmaxwell> I proposed on the list that the patch get splitâ first the IsStandard change, and that go in pronto.. so that the network will be ready once the rest goes in and people with their own builds could start using it sooner.
688 2011-08-06 07:48:15 <iddo> but you said that attacks can happen because of the IsStandard change?
689 2011-08-06 07:48:29 <gmaxwell> No, (hopefully) not for this one.
690 2011-08-06 07:49:01 <gmaxwell> There are an ~infinite number of possible kinds of transactions. The IsStandard change just adds an additional limited class.
691 2011-08-06 07:49:06 <iddo> so earlier attacks were because of some bad implementation? as opposed to inherent problem?
692 2011-08-06 07:49:35 Myckel has joined
693 2011-08-06 07:49:35 Myckel has quit (Changing host)
694 2011-08-06 07:49:35 Myckel has joined
695 2011-08-06 07:49:49 abragin has joined
696 2011-08-06 07:49:53 <gmaxwell> Yes. Which has been fixed but there has been concern about lurking implementation bugs. Also, there are chain flooding attacks which are generic (not bugs) which might be easier if you can use weird transactions.
697 2011-08-06 07:50:01 abragin has quit (Changing host)
698 2011-08-06 07:50:01 abragin has joined
699 2011-08-06 07:50:44 <gmaxwell> So the policy right now, I think... is functionality will be slowly turned back on as a need is demonstrated.
700 2011-08-06 07:50:58 <iddo> chain flooding is increasing block sizes by sending coins between addresses that you control?
701 2011-08-06 07:51:19 <gmaxwell> Or just creating TXN stuffed with garbage data, which IsStandard prevents right now.
702 2011-08-06 07:52:02 <iddo> so it just slows the network, but doesnt make the blockchain bigger?
703 2011-08-06 07:52:18 Tiggr has joined
704 2011-08-06 07:52:35 <gmaxwell> Hm? No. Doesn't even slow the network. Unmodified nodes won't even forward such transactions.
705 2011-08-06 07:53:19 <iddo> so what is the effect of txn stuffed with garbage?
706 2011-08-06 07:53:27 <gmaxwell> Making the chain bigger.
707 2011-08-06 07:53:35 <gmaxwell> Which isn't harmful here or there.
708 2011-08-06 07:54:04 <gmaxwell> But if its too easy someone will distribute "blockchainfs" and lots of people will do it, and the cost of operating bitcoin may outpace the value of operating bitcoin.
709 2011-08-06 07:54:14 <iddo> why txn of garbage is accepted into a block?
710 2011-08-06 07:54:21 <gmaxwell> It's not.
711 2011-08-06 07:54:30 <gmaxwell> Oh you mean absent IsStandard?
712 2011-08-06 07:54:33 <iddo> so why the chain gets bigger?
713 2011-08-06 07:54:46 <gmaxwell> We're talking across each other.
714 2011-08-06 07:54:56 <gmaxwell> There is no effect at all because all your peers will just drop them.
715 2011-08-06 07:55:01 MrTiggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
716 2011-08-06 07:55:10 <gmaxwell> you waste your own bandwidth (and that of your direct peers) in sending one.
717 2011-08-06 07:55:21 <iddo> so "making the chain bigger" referred to what?
718 2011-08-06 07:55:27 <gmaxwell> If we didn't have IsStandard filtering out weird transactions.
719 2011-08-06 07:55:41 <gmaxwell> Then they would go into the blockchain and they would blot it up.
720 2011-08-06 07:55:44 <gmaxwell> er bloat.
721 2011-08-06 07:56:40 <iddo> but if you only allow limited class like you said, then it's not a problem right?
722 2011-08-06 07:56:45 <gmaxwell> Correct.
723 2011-08-06 07:56:50 <iddo> cool
724 2011-08-06 07:57:10 <gmaxwell> I was just explaining why this change has to happen before people can make these transactions reliably. It's not a problem.
725 2011-08-06 07:57:58 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
726 2011-08-06 07:58:22 kluge has quit (Quit: ....)
727 2011-08-06 07:59:12 <iddo> best scenario is bitcoin price drops to $0.01, then you can make these changes without pressure
728 2011-08-06 07:59:16 RazielZ has joined
729 2011-08-06 07:59:19 <iddo> then i can buy some bitcoins
730 2011-08-06 07:59:31 <iddo> and then the price should go up because of the extra features
731 2011-08-06 08:03:55 <ThomasV> lol ; shall we drive the price down for you, iddo?
732 2011-08-06 08:04:43 <iddo> if you implement cool features then you will only drive the price up
733 2011-08-06 08:06:20 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,mtgox
734 2011-08-06 08:06:20 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":10.99,"low":9.5,"avg":10.141563316,"vwap":10.090118487,"vol":30184,"last":9.82115,"buy":9.82125,"sell":9.83951}}
735 2011-08-06 08:06:26 <Diablo-D3> heh
736 2011-08-06 08:06:28 <Diablo-D3> prices are dropping
737 2011-08-06 08:08:35 BTCTrader_ is now known as BTCTrader
738 2011-08-06 08:08:35 jtaylor has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
739 2011-08-06 08:08:47 jtaylor has joined
740 2011-08-06 08:11:05 E-sense has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
741 2011-08-06 08:11:46 E-sense has joined
742 2011-08-06 08:17:12 da2ce7 has joined
743 2011-08-06 08:22:26 Rabbit67890 has joined
744 2011-08-06 08:22:37 Tiggr is now known as MrTiggr
745 2011-08-06 08:27:50 hachque has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
746 2011-08-06 08:33:05 larsivi has joined
747 2011-08-06 08:44:13 E-sense has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
748 2011-08-06 08:44:44 E-sense has joined
749 2011-08-06 08:46:27 danbri has joined
750 2011-08-06 08:46:32 Clipse has joined
751 2011-08-06 08:48:15 <shadders> for noncerange mining extension is specified if miner returns a valid share with nonce outside range?
752 2011-08-06 08:48:30 <shadders> *is behaviour specified
753 2011-08-06 08:48:34 TD has joined
754 2011-08-06 08:54:26 Ken` has joined
755 2011-08-06 09:00:42 d33tah has joined
756 2011-08-06 09:01:02 <d33tah> got a question
757 2011-08-06 09:01:14 <d33tah> is it planned to add qrcode support to the official bitcoin client?
758 2011-08-06 09:01:25 <d33tah> i think there should be some standard for it
759 2011-08-06 09:01:52 osmosis has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
760 2011-08-06 09:02:39 osmosis has joined
761 2011-08-06 09:02:53 osmosis has quit (Client Quit)
762 2011-08-06 09:03:20 osmosis has joined
763 2011-08-06 09:04:58 Clipse has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
764 2011-08-06 09:08:11 Tracker- has joined
765 2011-08-06 09:08:28 <d33tah> what do you think of bitcoin having its own URI standard?
766 2011-08-06 09:08:37 <d33tah> like bitcoin://adress/1blahblahblah
767 2011-08-06 09:09:25 Tracker has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
768 2011-08-06 09:09:38 SISUbtcX has joined
769 2011-08-06 09:10:52 <Diablo-D3> that gets rehashed periodically
770 2011-08-06 09:10:56 <Diablo-D3> no one ever proceeds with it
771 2011-08-06 09:11:06 <d33tah> huh?
772 2011-08-06 09:11:23 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
773 2011-08-06 09:11:30 <Diablo-D3> lots of talk, no action
774 2011-08-06 09:11:55 sgornick has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
775 2011-08-06 09:12:03 <d33tah> which might mean that noone wants it hard enough :P
776 2011-08-06 09:12:08 <d33tah> and the qrcodes?
777 2011-08-06 09:12:18 <Diablo-D3> same problem
778 2011-08-06 09:12:24 <d33tah> hm
779 2011-08-06 09:12:35 <d33tah> is there a plan for adding comments for transactions?
780 2011-08-06 09:13:50 datagutt has joined
781 2011-08-06 09:15:04 <Diablo-D3> same problem.
782 2011-08-06 09:15:13 <d33tah> uh-uh
783 2011-08-06 09:15:22 <d33tah> maybe there should be more bounties?
784 2011-08-06 09:15:43 d4de has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
785 2011-08-06 09:16:26 d33tah is now known as deetah
786 2011-08-06 09:16:50 <Diablo-D3> aaaaaaand same problem.
787 2011-08-06 09:17:16 <deetah> that's one I could take care of, provided i'd get some fee ;d
788 2011-08-06 09:17:46 <Diablo-D3> lol
789 2011-08-06 09:17:48 Tiggr has joined
790 2011-08-06 09:17:53 <deetah> any possible?
791 2011-08-06 09:18:02 <deetah> i mean, you got any working bounty system?
792 2011-08-06 09:18:27 <Diablo-D3> the closest there is to one is just starting a forum thread and getting people to pledge
793 2011-08-06 09:18:36 MrTiggr has quit (Disconnected by services)
794 2011-08-06 09:18:43 Tiggr is now known as MrTiggr
795 2011-08-06 09:18:57 <deetah> i think there might be another way of getting the pledges
796 2011-08-06 09:18:58 BurningToad has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
797 2011-08-06 09:19:26 <deetah> make them donate in advance, with the promise of returning the whole amount if the bounty doesn't get open
798 2011-08-06 09:21:35 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
799 2011-08-06 09:21:52 <deetah> what do you think?
800 2011-08-06 09:22:38 larsivi_ has joined
801 2011-08-06 09:22:48 Tiggr has joined
802 2011-08-06 09:22:59 <doublec> who would hold the advance donations?
803 2011-08-06 09:23:12 <deetah> that's a good question. i dunno.
804 2011-08-06 09:23:17 <doublec> it's been suggested before, and like Diablo-D3's previous responses, intertia has been low for people to do it
805 2011-08-06 09:23:24 joepie91 has joined
806 2011-08-06 09:23:36 MrTiggr has quit (Disconnected by services)
807 2011-08-06 09:23:38 ike-exe has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
808 2011-08-06 09:23:39 Tiggr is now known as MrTiggr
809 2011-08-06 09:23:44 joepie91 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
810 2011-08-06 09:24:17 <deetah> i think that such system could be fairly easy to start
811 2011-08-06 09:24:27 joepie91 has joined
812 2011-08-06 09:24:31 <deetah> and then it would just be the law of demand and supply to get stuff done
813 2011-08-06 09:24:45 <deetah> anyway, i dunno who to make a bank
814 2011-08-06 09:25:32 <doublec> you also get problems of deciding who gets the bounty if multiple groups work on it
815 2011-08-06 09:25:36 <deetah> guess no project admin would volunteer to take it up once a whole system would be ready?
816 2011-08-06 09:25:48 <doublec> and people being annoyed if the money they gave for the bounty is awarded for a solution they don't agree with
817 2011-08-06 09:26:19 <deetah> that's just the risk they gotta accept. expectations would have to be specified very tightly.
818 2011-08-06 09:26:33 joepie91 has quit (Client Quit)
819 2011-08-06 09:26:58 <deetah> i mean, it's a functionality. it's supposed to do something, no matter what way, provided the result is correct. if someone has a better idea, let him make his own bounty
820 2011-08-06 09:28:21 <deetah> and for the groups... i think it should be single-dev until people'd figure out how to split the rewards
821 2011-08-06 09:30:27 <doublec> if you think it's a good idea, do it
822 2011-08-06 09:30:32 <deetah> ;)
823 2011-08-06 09:30:52 <deetah> it would need some sketching
824 2011-08-06 09:31:05 <deetah> could I count on some fees once it'd be done?
825 2011-08-06 09:31:41 <doublec> i have no idea
826 2011-08-06 09:32:17 <deetah> and there is no other bounty system other than arranging on the forums and gathering the money?
827 2011-08-06 09:34:14 <mabus> what on earth would be the point of a bitcoin URI
828 2011-08-06 09:34:28 <mabus> and who is adding support for it to every program to make it useful
829 2011-08-06 09:34:40 <deetah> well, i think browsers would be enough
830 2011-08-06 09:34:51 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
831 2011-08-06 09:35:25 <mabus> enough to accomplish what
832 2011-08-06 09:35:36 <deetah> it'd be convenient - you see a link to bitcoin://, you just click it and you can see with your client, what's the person's balance, transactions, and could send some money
833 2011-08-06 09:36:20 <mabus> ok so i write a firefox extension that replaces bitcoin:// with blockexplorer.com/ , collect bounty, profit?
834 2011-08-06 09:36:49 <deetah> plus, combined with qrcodes, it would make a coherent standard allowing transactions to send via mobile devices
835 2011-08-06 09:36:58 <deetah> not really, integration with the client is the key
836 2011-08-06 09:37:23 <deetah> there's quite a lot written on the bitcoin wiki
837 2011-08-06 09:38:08 <mabus> so you click in your browser and it manipulates your bitcoin client
838 2011-08-06 09:38:13 <mabus> this does not make sense to me
839 2011-08-06 09:38:28 <deetah> rather sends a message
840 2011-08-06 09:38:35 <deetah> like with e-mails
841 2011-08-06 09:38:42 <deetah> a message to the client
842 2011-08-06 09:38:47 <deetah> suggesting to make a payment
843 2011-08-06 09:40:00 testx0r has joined
844 2011-08-06 09:40:59 testx0r has quit (Client Quit)
845 2011-08-06 09:42:39 HaltingState has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
846 2011-08-06 09:43:20 TD has joined
847 2011-08-06 09:43:28 mosi has joined
848 2011-08-06 09:45:24 <Blitzboom> any idea if the 0.4 is going to be in the near future?
849 2011-08-06 09:45:31 <Blitzboom> the release
850 2011-08-06 09:48:04 HaltingState has joined
851 2011-08-06 09:48:44 erle- has joined
852 2011-08-06 09:49:08 burst has joined
853 2011-08-06 09:50:17 <deetah> i'm doing some sketchwork on the bounty system
854 2011-08-06 09:50:27 <deetah> and i found two issues
855 2011-08-06 09:50:57 <deetah> first - let's say a dev takes up a bounty. i think the bounty should be lock so nobody else can take it up. how to limit the time until it gets reopened?
856 2011-08-06 09:51:25 <mtrlt> locking does not scale
857 2011-08-06 09:51:28 <deetah> second - how to decide whether the bounty was solved or not? project admin? voting?
858 2011-08-06 09:51:45 klikklak has joined
859 2011-08-06 09:51:49 <mtrlt> and you can just say that "i'll lock" and never do anything and everything grinds to a halt :P
860 2011-08-06 09:52:12 <deetah> mtrlt: didn't think of it. you're right. then what? proof of work? first to commit?
861 2011-08-06 09:53:22 <mtrlt> dunno, i'm better at noticing faults than creating something new :P
862 2011-08-06 09:53:35 <deetah> make it a brainstorm. any ideas, even stupid ones
863 2011-08-06 09:53:40 <deetah> ?
864 2011-08-06 09:54:35 liori has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
865 2011-08-06 09:54:47 Tracker- is now known as Tracker
866 2011-08-06 09:54:53 <deetah> doublec: still there?
867 2011-08-06 09:54:56 E-sense has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
868 2011-08-06 09:55:13 erle- has quit (Quit: CETERVMÂAVTEMÂCENSEOÂCVTTENBERCÂESSEÂDELENDVM)
869 2011-08-06 09:55:30 E-sense has joined
870 2011-08-06 09:55:46 <deetah> and another issue, quite important
871 2011-08-06 09:55:52 <deetah> should we let users add bounties, or devs?
872 2011-08-06 09:56:47 <deetah> like "plx let me make the bitcoin client bg pink" made by user, then donated by others and finally a dev contributes a patch, or
873 2011-08-06 09:57:19 <deetah> "i'm willing to add qrcode support to bitcoin client for 200BTC" made by a dev, then users donating till they reach the price?
874 2011-08-06 09:57:24 <deetah> the first model sounds better to me
875 2011-08-06 09:58:19 <josephcp> is there an easy way to get a list of orphan blocks?
876 2011-08-06 09:58:24 Kolky has quit (Quit: Bye bye!)
877 2011-08-06 09:58:36 <deetah> any comments?
878 2011-08-06 09:58:40 <josephcp> by block hash
879 2011-08-06 09:59:26 <Ken`> deetah: both?
880 2011-08-06 10:01:06 <deetah> hm. there are two ways to connect that. either we make the both groups the same and just let the users donate until somebody interested in coding shows up, or we let the devs make the devs make willing offers
881 2011-08-06 10:01:40 Tiggr has joined
882 2011-08-06 10:02:38 MrTiggr has quit (Disconnected by services)
883 2011-08-06 10:02:46 Tiggr is now known as MrTiggr
884 2011-08-06 10:03:36 <doublec> deetah: maybe something like cosource.com http://web.archive.org/web/20000304121144/http://www.cosource.com/info/what.html
885 2011-08-06 10:04:00 Kolky has joined
886 2011-08-06 10:04:32 <doublec> deetah: they don't exist anymore so maybe they're model wasn't successful :)
887 2011-08-06 10:05:03 <Ken`> what's wrong with using a forum for these purposes anyway
888 2011-08-06 10:05:47 <burst> deetah: bounties are a good way to incentivize development, but bitcoin really needs the investment of some serious backers to produce the tools that will be atractive to laymen
889 2011-08-06 10:07:04 <deetah> to make backers come, the app must be more convenient
890 2011-08-06 10:07:14 <Ken`> well with Ruxum's new support for Asian currencies, perhaps some bounties can be outsourced ;)
891 2011-08-06 10:07:19 <deetah> the more esrious the client looks, the more chances for backers to come
892 2011-08-06 10:07:27 <deetah> imho it's gotta be shiny at some part
893 2011-08-06 10:07:41 <Ken`> being shiny usually comes at the cost of security..
894 2011-08-06 10:07:49 <wumpus> burst: I don't agree "investment of bankers" is neccesarily needed. The open source model has worked very well for quite some projects...
895 2011-08-06 10:08:33 <burst> not bankers, backers
896 2011-08-06 10:08:35 <deetah> doublec: and what about the first authority? i mean the dev would have to send his proposals without the incentive
897 2011-08-06 10:08:44 <deetah> what about voting?
898 2011-08-06 10:08:52 <wumpus> have you seen the qt ui? it is already a lot 'shinier'
899 2011-08-06 10:10:25 <burst> there are some great tools coming out. go bitcoin!
900 2011-08-06 10:11:17 <wumpus> and an UI designer is helping me with making it even better... things are going forward nicely
901 2011-08-06 10:11:50 <deetah> anyway, what do you think of user approving the dev's submissions by voting? 30% of non-anonymous votes would make the submission get accepted and the money would be sent to the dev
902 2011-08-06 10:13:25 huk has quit ()
903 2011-08-06 10:15:43 <burst> I would like to see a bitcoin app and pc client that allow easy two-way transactions between them. enough of the online wallets
904 2011-08-06 10:16:04 <wumpus> yep
905 2011-08-06 10:16:22 <wumpus> qr codes would be great for that
906 2011-08-06 10:16:56 <deetah> woulda coulda shoulda :P
907 2011-08-06 10:17:30 <wumpus> it's on my list, but it's very lonely in active bitcoin developer land
908 2011-08-06 10:17:54 <burst> I'll never trust an online wallet, even mt gox only has a little at a time
909 2011-08-06 10:18:34 <wumpus> the current online wallet paradignm indeed doesn't work
910 2011-08-06 10:18:47 <wumpus> it should be more like an encrypted database accessed by the client
911 2011-08-06 10:19:25 <wumpus> so that the 'storage facility' cannot get the actual data, a bit like how some competitors to dropbox work...
912 2011-08-06 10:20:26 <wumpus> this would solve two problems, one you can easily back it up, two the provider cannot run with the coins
913 2011-08-06 10:20:38 toffoo has quit ()
914 2011-08-06 10:21:55 <burst> qr codes are fine, the interface can be simple, it just needs to use a webcam and smartphone cam to xfer back and forth. then the pc can encrypt the wallet and back it up for storage with the smartphone holding "walking around" money
915 2011-08-06 10:22:10 <wumpus> it would need support in the client for other (remote) database backends, though
916 2011-08-06 10:22:21 koleg has joined
917 2011-08-06 10:22:24 <wumpus> which isn't rocket science but not entirely trivial either
918 2011-08-06 10:23:10 * Eliel wonders if the timejacking attack was being targeted at mybitcoin.
919 2011-08-06 10:24:53 <wumpus> I might give it a spin but the TODO list is already very very long
920 2011-08-06 10:25:25 Rabbit67890 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
921 2011-08-06 10:25:27 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
922 2011-08-06 10:25:51 <wumpus> Eliel: let's hope so
923 2011-08-06 10:26:17 <Eliel> their system would have been quite vulnerable to it
924 2011-08-06 10:26:27 <wumpus> if there's any use for this 'attack' it is to find stolen coins, if it cannot work for that it's pointless
925 2011-08-06 10:26:34 <Eliel> considering the details revealed in the latest update
926 2011-08-06 10:27:53 wolfspraul has quit (Quit: leaving)
927 2011-08-06 10:28:05 wolfspraul has joined
928 2011-08-06 10:28:06 <wumpus> huh what timejacking attack are you talking about? I thought you meant blitcoin
929 2011-08-06 10:28:16 <Eliel> but, that's one more site that fell because it was built before the security aspects of bitcoin needed to be taken seriously. Even though it sounds like they did take security seriously.
930 2011-08-06 10:28:30 <Eliel> no, that's not timejacking
931 2011-08-06 10:28:42 <wumpus> then what do you mean?
932 2011-08-06 10:28:44 <Eliel> http://culubas.blogspot.com/2011/05/timejacking-bitcoin_802.html
933 2011-08-06 10:28:48 <Eliel> this describes the attack
934 2011-08-06 10:29:17 <Eliel> also, there was some kind of group that announced they're doing a timejacking attack on bitcoin network.
935 2011-08-06 10:30:03 <Eliel> I don't have a link to the announcement as I only heard of it second hand myself
936 2011-08-06 10:30:28 <wumpus> from what I understood there was an exploit in the mybitcoin merchant system
937 2011-08-06 10:30:48 <wumpus> probably some simple input validation fail
938 2011-08-06 10:31:04 <Eliel> yes, their system took a single block to mean a transaction was verified
939 2011-08-06 10:32:10 ike-exe has joined
940 2011-08-06 10:32:22 <wumpus> could be, but until service providers stop using naive php scripts, I think an attack on that is much more likely than an attack on bitcoin itself
941 2011-08-06 10:32:53 <Eliel> timejacking attack gives an attacker 2 hours to make 6 blocks in the usual case. However, since mybitcoin accepted just one block as verification, it made the attack a lot easier.
942 2011-08-06 10:33:11 <wumpus> if the mybitcoin guy could blame the bitcoin system itself he would.. he'd embrace anything he could blame except himself :-)
943 2011-08-06 10:33:33 <Eliel> as far as I can see, he doesn't look to be blaming people
944 2011-08-06 10:33:37 <doublec> he dones't need to blame anything - he's anyonymous and could just disappear
945 2011-08-06 10:33:41 koleg has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
946 2011-08-06 10:33:45 <wumpus> exactly.. which is probably why he made a mistake himself
947 2011-08-06 10:34:36 <doublec> wumpus: they seem to be taking the blame from what I can tell
948 2011-08-06 10:34:48 <wumpus> yes
949 2011-08-06 10:35:08 <Eliel> they also appear to realize people aren't going to be using them anymore.
950 2011-08-06 10:35:23 <burst> wouldn't simply introducing transaction fees incentivise non-pooling miners and increase network security?
951 2011-08-06 10:35:54 <wumpus> everyone can introduce transaction fees
952 2011-08-06 10:36:01 <wumpus> a lot of miners already require them
953 2011-08-06 10:36:01 <Eliel> so they're just allowing people to get their coins (as much as they can still pay) and are then shutting down (and releasing the source code)
954 2011-08-06 10:36:48 <Eliel> if the bigger pools joined together and decided to only include transactions with certain size fees, it would slow lower fee transactions a lot.
955 2011-08-06 10:36:55 <wumpus> I hope they point out the security problem in their source code, otherwise the hackers will have a blast with the clone services using it :p
956 2011-08-06 10:37:23 <Eliel> wumpus: well, I doubt too many bitcoin users are too hot on any webwallet right now
957 2011-08-06 10:38:32 <mabus> meh, people are still using mtgox
958 2011-08-06 10:38:35 <mabus> including me
959 2011-08-06 10:38:44 <wumpus> it does seem that the exchanges are the most reliable 'webwallets' at this moment, yes mtgox was hacked too but at least they had protections in place to make sure the coins remained in the system
960 2011-08-06 10:39:10 <wumpus> and some of them are starting to offer two factor auth
961 2011-08-06 10:39:12 Blitzboom has quit (Changing host)
962 2011-08-06 10:39:12 Blitzboom has joined
963 2011-08-06 10:39:31 <doublec> wumpus: I only know of two webwallets so it's hard to compare
964 2011-08-06 10:39:37 <wumpus> so I guess they are the future banks of bitcoin
965 2011-08-06 10:40:15 <mtrlt> yep combined bank and exchange makes more sense :p
966 2011-08-06 10:41:52 Clipse has joined
967 2011-08-06 10:42:43 marf_away has joined
968 2011-08-06 10:46:55 ike-exe has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
969 2011-08-06 10:50:16 joepie91 has joined
970 2011-08-06 10:56:29 E-sense has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
971 2011-08-06 10:58:10 suriv has joined
972 2011-08-06 10:58:49 <wumpus> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=34838.msg433720#msg433720
973 2011-08-06 11:00:40 slush1 has joined
974 2011-08-06 11:03:25 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
975 2011-08-06 11:15:15 TheAncientGoat has joined
976 2011-08-06 11:16:30 <sacarlson> wumpus: ya I love bitcoin-qt
977 2011-08-06 11:16:47 <sacarlson> wumpus: is that some how connected to you?
978 2011-08-06 11:18:14 <sacarlson> I've never even seen the first before (1) Multiple wallet support. Create/Open/Close wallet file. that sounds cool
979 2011-08-06 11:19:23 slush1 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
980 2011-08-06 11:21:14 Tiggr has joined
981 2011-08-06 11:22:34 MrTiggr has quit (Disconnected by services)
982 2011-08-06 11:22:39 Tiggr is now known as MrTiggr
983 2011-08-06 11:25:15 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
984 2011-08-06 11:25:32 <wumpus> sacarlson: yes it's badly needed
985 2011-08-06 11:25:54 <sacarlson> wumpus: good idea
986 2011-08-06 11:26:22 <sacarlson> wumpus: my prime goal is to add offline import export
987 2011-08-06 11:27:20 <sacarlson> I guess I use your user interface of bitcoint-qt in my multicoin-qt
988 2011-08-06 11:27:58 <wumpus> cool :) please contribute things back if they're generally useful
989 2011-08-06 11:28:14 <sacarlson> wumpus: I publish on github
990 2011-08-06 11:28:20 Bachfischer has joined
991 2011-08-06 11:29:12 <wumpus> btw what you mean with offline import export? of transactions, or keys?
992 2011-08-06 11:29:13 <sacarlson> wumpus: https://github.com/sacarlson/MultiCoin-qt but I consider it expermental
993 2011-08-06 11:29:27 <wumpus> it's all experimental at this stage, but we got to get the ball rolling
994 2011-08-06 11:29:36 <sacarlson> wumpus: offline import export transactions sorry
995 2011-08-06 11:30:17 <wumpus> there's ton of great ideas floating around for ages, they need to be implemented! :D
996 2011-08-06 11:31:12 <sacarlson> wumpus: yes that why I created multicoin to try to pull the stuf I liked into a group
997 2011-08-06 11:32:23 <sacarlson> wumpus: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=24209.msg300830#msg300830
998 2011-08-06 11:32:32 <wumpus> we should somehow make these projects get some more profile / exposure
999 2011-08-06 11:32:49 <sacarlson> wumpus: and my present focus of next incorportation is https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=28278.msg372731#msg372731
1000 2011-08-06 11:33:13 <wumpus> I'm a bit afraid my rally on the forums will only attract trolls and dusts, but it's worth a try I guess..
1001 2011-08-06 11:34:08 <sacarlson> wumpus: I push you git on my forum as it's the best in gui interface that I know
1002 2011-08-06 11:34:29 ThomasV has joined
1003 2011-08-06 11:35:11 <wumpus> okay, I don't know that much about gui git interfaces, qt-creator also has something built-in but it is very basic
1004 2011-08-06 11:35:34 Bachfischer has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1005 2011-08-06 11:36:17 erus` has joined
1006 2011-08-06 11:36:56 <sacarlson> wumpus: I don't consider myself a programer more of an integrator
1007 2011-08-06 11:37:35 <sacarlson> and first stage quality control
1008 2011-08-06 11:38:58 slush has joined
1009 2011-08-06 11:45:30 <sacarlson> with multicoin-qt we get to use your nice bitcoin-qt interface now on namecoin and soon BeerTokens
1010 2011-08-06 11:45:33 <HaltingState> wumpus, "t the exchanges are the most reliable 'webwallets' at this moment" dont store money in mtgox; it will go down or be taken down someday. its not worth risking
1011 2011-08-06 11:45:40 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1012 2011-08-06 11:47:02 <sacarlson> HaltingState: that's why we have escrow incorporated into MultiCoin so we hopefully won't need exhanges as much in the future
1013 2011-08-06 11:48:01 <sacarlson> HaltingState: or you just keep your deposit in an exchange in an escrow to back your activity
1014 2011-08-06 11:49:47 <mabus> lol beertokens
1015 2011-08-06 11:49:47 <mabus> wtf
1016 2011-08-06 11:50:40 <mabus> oh, thank you urbandictionary
1017 2011-08-06 11:52:06 <HaltingState> sacarlson, what is multicoin
1018 2011-08-06 11:52:44 <sacarlson> HaltingState: for details on MultiCoin see: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=24209.msg300830#msg300830
1019 2011-08-06 11:53:20 <sacarlson> mabus: for details on BeerTokens see: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=9493.msg136917#msg136917
1020 2011-08-06 11:53:44 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1021 2011-08-06 11:54:28 <sacarlson> HaltingState: in short MultiCoin is a branch of bitcoins with some small changes added
1022 2011-08-06 11:55:30 <sacarlson> HaltingState: MultiCoin continues to keep synced with changes in bitcoin as they arise
1023 2011-08-06 11:55:52 ike-exe has joined
1024 2011-08-06 11:59:02 <HaltingState> sacarlson, does anyone use multicoin
1025 2011-08-06 11:59:30 <HaltingState> are there multicoin exchanges
1026 2011-08-06 11:59:38 <sacarlson> HaltingState: I don't have a tracker of how many people use multicoin if that's what you mean
1027 2011-08-06 11:59:53 <HaltingState> gimme links to multicoin sites or information about it
1028 2011-08-06 11:59:58 <sacarlson> HaltingState: multicoin is a client just like bitcoin
1029 2011-08-06 12:00:22 <HaltingState> branch of bitcoin source; new client; not new block chain
1030 2011-08-06 12:00:26 <sacarlson> HaltingState: it works with bitcoins, namecoins, weeds, testnet and .....
1031 2011-08-06 12:00:30 <HaltingState> i thought you were talking about a new block chain
1032 2011-08-06 12:00:36 <HaltingState> what language is multicoin written in
1033 2011-08-06 12:00:55 <sacarlson> HaltingState: (06:47:29 PM) sacarlson: HaltingState: for details on MultiCoin see: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=24209.msg300830#msg300830
1034 2011-08-06 12:00:57 <HaltingState> sacarlson, what is weeds?
1035 2011-08-06 12:01:58 <sacarlson> HaltingState: weeds is also discritbed in the article as being a proof of concept test chain
1036 2011-08-06 12:02:30 <HaltingState> multicoin is written in C. It is very easy to insert backdoors/buffer overflow exploits in C code, that are difficult or impossible to detect. Sort of worries me.
1037 2011-08-06 12:02:36 DukeOfURL has joined
1038 2011-08-06 12:02:49 <sacarlson> HaltingState: Multicoin is writen in C++ it's the same code as bitcoin just branched
1039 2011-08-06 12:03:10 <HaltingState> Has anyone fuzzed the mainline bitcoin client?
1040 2011-08-06 12:03:18 <sacarlson> HaltingState: you can see the changes made in the git history
1041 2011-08-06 12:03:56 <sacarlson> HaltingState: fuzzed?
1042 2011-08-06 12:04:01 somuchwin2 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1043 2011-08-06 12:04:08 bauerbob has joined
1044 2011-08-06 12:04:39 <HaltingState> fuzzing is a method where you supply random input to program at any point that accepts outside input, to get it to crash
1045 2011-08-06 12:05:03 somuchwin has joined
1046 2011-08-06 12:05:08 <HaltingState> it is one method that people find javascript exploits for IE etc... or find zero days
1047 2011-08-06 12:05:37 <HaltingState> http://www.infosecinstitute.com/blog/2005/12/fuzzers-ultimate-list.html
1048 2011-08-06 12:05:39 <sacarlson> HaltingState: nope never seen any signs of such an exploit in bitcoin.
1049 2011-08-06 12:07:12 <sacarlson> HaltingState: only one I've heard being used in your list is Data retrieval with SQL Injection Hacking
1050 2011-08-06 12:07:44 <bauerbob> tcatm: hi, neofutur said you might be able to help me. i want to compare btc prices to other indexes, so i built a script that weights the prices from http://bitcoincharts.com/t/trades.csv?symbol=bitmarketEUR per day. unfortunately this url provides only the last few days. i tried adding "&start=0" as it says in the wiki, but that parameter has no effect at all
1051 2011-08-06 12:07:52 <sacarlson> HaltingState: but that's on the server website side of bitcoin exploits not really releated to bitcoin but it's infrastructure
1052 2011-08-06 12:08:02 sytse has quit (Read error: No route to host)
1053 2011-08-06 12:08:03 TD has joined
1054 2011-08-06 12:08:26 <HaltingState> I think we will start to see mainline clients getting hacked over network; worries me
1055 2011-08-06 12:08:55 <sacarlson> HaltingState: easy to hack a windows system that can capture the walet file
1056 2011-08-06 12:09:21 <sacarlson> HaltingState: but the safeguard for that is not keep all you money in the online walet
1057 2011-08-06 12:09:55 <sacarlson> HaltingState: not so easy on a linux system
1058 2011-08-06 12:09:55 <HaltingState> exactly, thats why i would not keep an online wallet
1059 2011-08-06 12:10:21 <sacarlson> HaltingState: online I mean on your system being used on the network
1060 2011-08-06 12:11:40 <HaltingState> the people going after bitcoin will not be using zerodays on linux network services being run by non-servers/end user computers
1061 2011-08-06 12:12:40 <neofutur> my choice is having my wallet on a secure dedicated server ssh , bitcoind
1062 2011-08-06 12:12:54 <sacarlson> HaltingState: I think normal people don't know how to secure a windows system, most people will find at some point that an online system will be more secure
1063 2011-08-06 12:12:58 <tcatm> bauerbob: full history will be available again soon
1064 2011-08-06 12:12:59 <neofutur> available everywhere, mine, and pretty secure
1065 2011-08-06 12:13:26 <HaltingState> sacarlson, you cannot secure a windows system because microsoft refuses to patch bugs unless you release 0-days publicly
1066 2011-08-06 12:13:32 <neofutur> and ssh is available nearly everywhere even on phones like android . . .
1067 2011-08-06 12:13:35 <HaltingState> and then it still takes them months
1068 2011-08-06 12:13:45 <bauerbob> tcatm: great! thank you very much
1069 2011-08-06 12:13:46 <sacarlson> HaltingState: well stop using windows then
1070 2011-08-06 12:13:53 jan__ has joined
1071 2011-08-06 12:13:54 <HaltingState> who uses windows?
1072 2011-08-06 12:14:03 <sacarlson> HaltingState: I don't know but not me
1073 2011-08-06 12:14:21 bitcoinDRdotCom has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1074 2011-08-06 12:14:56 <sacarlson> It's time for me to become inebreated
1075 2011-08-06 12:15:20 <sacarlson> it's time to go out and have my beer
1076 2011-08-06 12:15:30 <sacarlson> nice chat all
1077 2011-08-06 12:17:36 <jan__> hey! i have generated coins on the testnet... so i have transactions of category "immature". but with which json api call can i access those coins? they don't seem to be assigned to any (not even the server) account, someone has an idea?
1078 2011-08-06 12:18:11 <phantomcircuit> jan__, they dont really exist until you have 120 confirms
1079 2011-08-06 12:18:16 <phantomcircuit> so they probably show up no where
1080 2011-08-06 12:18:25 <phantomcircuit> but listtransactions might show it
1081 2011-08-06 12:19:52 <jan__> ahh. cool! thanks a lot! that is it. only slighty over 100 confirms right now. and yes, i have seen this via listtransactions... 120 is the magic boundary... ok... cool to know! thx
1082 2011-08-06 12:23:31 p0s has joined
1083 2011-08-06 12:27:16 kish` is now known as TRIPLE|A
1084 2011-08-06 12:28:39 ThomasV has joined
1085 2011-08-06 12:30:14 erle- has joined
1086 2011-08-06 12:30:15 [Tycho] has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1087 2011-08-06 12:34:55 [Tycho] has joined
1088 2011-08-06 12:35:53 xelister has joined
1089 2011-08-06 12:38:20 erska_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1090 2011-08-06 12:38:37 erska has joined
1091 2011-08-06 12:42:18 sytse has joined
1092 2011-08-06 12:42:19 dvide has joined
1093 2011-08-06 12:46:22 shawn-p has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1094 2011-08-06 12:49:04 shadders has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1095 2011-08-06 12:52:20 shawn-p has joined
1096 2011-08-06 12:57:29 asher^ has joined
1097 2011-08-06 13:04:02 noagendamarket has joined
1098 2011-08-06 13:05:00 jan__ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1099 2011-08-06 13:05:48 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1100 2011-08-06 13:09:14 erle- has quit (Quit: CETERVMÂAVTEMÂCENSEOÂCVTTENBERCÂESSEÂDELENDVM)
1101 2011-08-06 13:17:15 Xunie has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1102 2011-08-06 13:20:11 TD has joined
1103 2011-08-06 13:20:32 TD has quit (Client Quit)
1104 2011-08-06 13:23:28 <RealSolid> ;;btc stats
1105 2011-08-06 13:23:29 <gribble> Error: "btc" is not a valid command.
1106 2011-08-06 13:24:43 koleg has joined
1107 2011-08-06 13:33:41 koleg has joined
1108 2011-08-06 13:33:41 koleg has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1109 2011-08-06 13:35:44 marf_away has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1110 2011-08-06 13:36:59 abragin has quit ()
1111 2011-08-06 13:40:28 abragin has joined
1112 2011-08-06 13:41:44 marf_away has joined
1113 2011-08-06 13:47:00 <sacarlson> well I got rained out here so now I'm back
1114 2011-08-06 13:49:32 <makomk> Evil thought: I bet some variant of dakami's attack could be used to locate nodes close enough to big miners to launch a single-confirmation double spend from.
1115 2011-08-06 13:50:23 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1116 2011-08-06 13:55:54 shLONG has joined
1117 2011-08-06 13:56:36 shLONG has quit (Client Quit)
1118 2011-08-06 13:58:06 ewal-otg has joined
1119 2011-08-06 13:59:10 Lenovo01 has joined
1120 2011-08-06 13:59:57 Lenovo01 has left ()
1121 2011-08-06 14:02:15 RobinPKR has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1122 2011-08-06 14:02:33 RobinPKR has joined
1123 2011-08-06 14:06:57 Lenovo01 has joined
1124 2011-08-06 14:07:44 * luke-jr wonders who likes turtles
1125 2011-08-06 14:07:49 xelister has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1126 2011-08-06 14:08:41 Graet has joined
1127 2011-08-06 14:08:59 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: Patrick McFarland master * r5c370b8 / src/main/java/com/diablominer/DiabloMiner/DiabloMiner.java : Remove rollNTimeExpire variable and use refresh/1000, make LP flush all ... https://github.com/Diablo-D3/DiabloMiner/commit/5c370b8cc61f7ecfd6d02b0f5d94d8876be69f7d
1128 2011-08-06 14:10:56 karnac has joined
1129 2011-08-06 14:11:05 Veladon has joined
1130 2011-08-06 14:11:28 Veladon has quit (Client Quit)
1131 2011-08-06 14:11:33 shadders has joined
1132 2011-08-06 14:13:14 Lenovo01 has left ("Leaving")
1133 2011-08-06 14:17:00 altamic has joined
1134 2011-08-06 14:17:23 <shadders> whoops... just realised pushpool vs poolserverj test had a wee issue... pushpool shares table was innodb, psj's was myisam.
1135 2011-08-06 14:17:44 <Diablo-D3> so both tests were wrong
1136 2011-08-06 14:17:57 <shadders> preliminary restests show about 50% improvement for pushpool performance over the initial tests...
1137 2011-08-06 14:18:35 <shadders> improvement is only for submits, requests are the same
1138 2011-08-06 14:19:05 <shadders> psj still over double the submit speed but will have to repeat all the tests that involved submits...
1139 2011-08-06 14:20:11 <shadders> Diablo-D3: the first two sets of test were valid because they didn't touch that table...
1140 2011-08-06 14:21:21 <Diablo-D3> the tests are not valid because who the hell is dumb enough to use mysql
1141 2011-08-06 14:21:55 <shadders> Figured I should make full disclosure asap in case someone else noticed and accused me of rigging it (which is why I provided all the test configs)
1142 2011-08-06 14:22:09 DaQatz has joined
1143 2011-08-06 14:22:57 SISUbtcX has quit (Quit: SISUbtcX)
1144 2011-08-06 14:23:32 <shadders> Well actually I don't know who's using what db engines... I figure any pushpool pool large enough to DB bound would have to... postgres doesn't offer non-transactional, sqlite doesn't offer replicated dbs..
1145 2011-08-06 14:23:49 larsivi_ is now known as larsivi
1146 2011-08-06 14:24:56 [Tycho] has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1147 2011-08-06 14:25:37 ewal-otg has quit (Quit: ewal-otg)
1148 2011-08-06 14:27:08 RazielZ has joined
1149 2011-08-06 14:28:37 yellowhat has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1150 2011-08-06 14:29:10 [Tycho] has joined
1151 2011-08-06 14:30:16 <Diablo-D3> shadders: pg is several times faster than mysql
1152 2011-08-06 14:30:23 <Diablo-D3> so the argument is moot
1153 2011-08-06 14:31:01 <shadders> pg faster for writes against MyISAM? got a reference?
1154 2011-08-06 14:31:26 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1155 2011-08-06 14:31:34 <Diablo-D3> myisam is not datasafe thus cannot be used in any production setups.
1156 2011-08-06 14:31:46 [Tycho] has quit (Changing host)
1157 2011-08-06 14:31:46 [Tycho] has joined
1158 2011-08-06 14:31:57 molecular has joined
1159 2011-08-06 14:32:42 Tiggr has joined
1160 2011-08-06 14:33:38 MrTiggr has quit (Disconnected by services)
1161 2011-08-06 14:33:40 Tiggr is now known as MrTiggr
1162 2011-08-06 14:33:44 <shadders> bs... it depends how it's being used... shares table only needs a single insert per row, no further writes after that. You know if it wrote successfully at the end of the query. Unless the db crashes in the middle of the insert, but there are far more likely reasons for shares going missing than that
1163 2011-08-06 14:34:09 yellowhat has joined
1164 2011-08-06 14:34:16 <Diablo-D3> dont care.
1165 2011-08-06 14:34:25 <Diablo-D3> I will not allow mysql anywhere near my shit.
1166 2011-08-06 14:34:58 burst has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1167 2011-08-06 14:35:24 <lianj> square shit
1168 2011-08-06 14:35:26 Kolky has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1169 2011-08-06 14:39:01 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1170 2011-08-06 14:39:29 <shadders> you shit in a database? what sort of index you use?
1171 2011-08-06 14:40:01 Kolky has joined
1172 2011-08-06 14:41:03 <shadders> what happens when you rollback a transaction?
1173 2011-08-06 14:43:35 <lianj> the smell stays
1174 2011-08-06 14:43:54 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1175 2011-08-06 14:44:46 <sytse> when you rollback a transaction, your shit will be moved from the database room to the memories room
1176 2011-08-06 14:44:50 <sytse> so don't enter the memories room
1177 2011-08-06 14:44:59 <sytse> the smell might cost you your life
1178 2011-08-06 14:45:21 <shadders> that's cool... I was worried it would go back where it came from...
1179 2011-08-06 14:45:32 <sytse> (also, don't go to work for the database, you'll have to trolley shit everywhere)
1180 2011-08-06 14:55:24 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1181 2011-08-06 14:57:10 Tiggr has joined
1182 2011-08-06 14:57:39 MrTiggr has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1183 2011-08-06 15:01:13 BitcoinForNewegg has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1184 2011-08-06 15:01:35 Tiggr is now known as MrTiggr
1185 2011-08-06 15:03:52 BitcoinForNewegg has joined
1186 2011-08-06 15:04:19 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1187 2011-08-06 15:05:54 HardDisk_WP has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
1188 2011-08-06 15:06:49 HardDisk_WP has joined
1189 2011-08-06 15:08:56 HardDisk_WP has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
1190 2011-08-06 15:09:19 HardDisk_WP has joined
1191 2011-08-06 15:09:40 karnac has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1192 2011-08-06 15:10:34 altamic has quit (Quit: altamic)
1193 2011-08-06 15:10:55 codler has joined
1194 2011-08-06 15:16:29 shLONG has joined
1195 2011-08-06 15:18:58 agent-x has joined
1196 2011-08-06 15:20:56 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1197 2011-08-06 15:22:38 erle- has joined
1198 2011-08-06 15:23:13 Kolky has quit (Ping timeout: 251 seconds)
1199 2011-08-06 15:25:47 <topi`> makomk: indeed, it would be possible to do such an attack using dakami's tools to pinpoint biggest miners and then ddos them for the duration of the double spend attack
1200 2011-08-06 15:26:20 <topi`> but then again, there are clever ways to protect your business from dos
1201 2011-08-06 15:27:29 <makomk> topi`: I was more thinking pick miners that take a long time to hear about each other's blocks and send them conflicting transactions.
1202 2011-08-06 15:27:59 mf has quit (2!~kvirc@c-98-220-229-38.hsd1.il.comcast.net|Quit: KVIrc 4.0.1 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
1203 2011-08-06 15:28:19 <makomk> Sooner or later you'll get lucky and manage to get a spend that's reverted by a chain rearrangement after one block.
1204 2011-08-06 15:28:49 Doktor99__ has joined
1205 2011-08-06 15:31:31 <topi`> hmm
1206 2011-08-06 15:31:54 DontMindMe has joined
1207 2011-08-06 15:32:13 <topi`> with some probability P that you guessed right who's forging the next block :)
1208 2011-08-06 15:33:38 <topi`> makomk: are you the guy behind the FPGA miner code? :) that sounds like an interesting project
1209 2011-08-06 15:36:02 <CIA-103> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-p2p: Stefan Thomas master * rdfce321 / .npmignore : Ignore build-cc folder in NPM release. See #25. - http://bit.ly/nsYGxm https://github.com/bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-p2p/commit/dfce3211d7a124f53ab90a5cb313a05748295212
1210 2011-08-06 15:36:11 price_ has joined
1211 2011-08-06 15:39:13 WakiMiko_ has joined
1212 2011-08-06 15:41:13 WakiMiko has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1213 2011-08-06 15:42:53 E-sense has joined
1214 2011-08-06 15:45:31 e0s_ has joined
1215 2011-08-06 15:45:40 e0s_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1216 2011-08-06 15:46:29 enquirer has joined
1217 2011-08-06 15:50:00 <Doktor99__> super noob question: why are there 2 hashes per trial. Why not just end with SHA256(header), and be done?
1218 2011-08-06 15:50:26 wardearia has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1219 2011-08-06 15:50:45 <asher^> <insert pimp my ride meme>
1220 2011-08-06 15:51:07 ThomasV has joined
1221 2011-08-06 15:53:39 <tcatm> Doktor99__: there is no good reason for that. satoshi decided to use 2x sha256
1222 2011-08-06 15:55:28 <Doktor99__> I guess it's arbitrary
1223 2011-08-06 15:55:37 <GMP> Doktor99__: my guess would be: when partial collisions in 1xSHA256 will be found, chances are 2x thing can remain secure
1224 2011-08-06 15:56:45 <Doktor99__> right, but SHA256(SHA265(x)) is not more 'secure' than SHA256(x), right?
1225 2011-08-06 15:57:36 <mtrlt> what do you mean by secure
1226 2011-08-06 15:57:38 <Doktor99__> it takes twice as much work, so if SHA(x) had been used by Satoshi, then the difficultly would be double to maintain the same block generation rate (approximately)
1227 2011-08-06 15:57:42 <mtrlt> if what GMP said is right, it is more secure imo.
1228 2011-08-06 16:02:20 DukeOfURL has joined
1229 2011-08-06 16:04:03 eastender has joined
1230 2011-08-06 16:04:16 deetah has quit (Read error: No route to host)
1231 2011-08-06 16:04:57 wardearia has joined
1232 2011-08-06 16:04:59 wardearia has quit (Changing host)
1233 2011-08-06 16:04:59 wardearia has joined
1234 2011-08-06 16:06:24 Kolky has joined
1235 2011-08-06 16:10:58 underscor has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1236 2011-08-06 16:13:30 agent-x has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1237 2011-08-06 16:16:02 eastender has quit (Quit: Nettalk6 - www.ntalk.de)
1238 2011-08-06 16:16:58 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1239 2011-08-06 16:23:13 E-sense has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1240 2011-08-06 16:23:40 E-sense has joined
1241 2011-08-06 16:23:53 erle- has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1242 2011-08-06 16:29:06 price_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1243 2011-08-06 16:29:31 koleg has joined
1244 2011-08-06 16:33:01 koleg has quit (2!kvirc@95.81.245.242|Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1245 2011-08-06 16:34:22 DontMindMe has quit (Quit: Nettalk6 - www.ntalk.de)
1246 2011-08-06 16:35:42 bauerbob has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1247 2011-08-06 16:39:46 TD has joined
1248 2011-08-06 16:46:33 Zarutian has joined
1249 2011-08-06 16:47:15 zeropointo has joined
1250 2011-08-06 16:51:40 miuch has joined
1251 2011-08-06 16:53:17 SISUbtc has joined
1252 2011-08-06 16:53:53 E-sense has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
1253 2011-08-06 16:54:30 E-sense has joined
1254 2011-08-06 16:57:37 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1255 2011-08-06 17:01:22 danbri has joined
1256 2011-08-06 17:02:44 karnac has joined
1257 2011-08-06 17:04:41 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1258 2011-08-06 17:05:34 dbitcoin has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1259 2011-08-06 17:05:34 owowo has joined
1260 2011-08-06 17:05:51 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1261 2011-08-06 17:06:43 dbitcoin has joined
1262 2011-08-06 17:07:52 <neofutur> hi all, i m trying to choose one of the forks of jgarzik s cpuminer on github
1263 2011-08-06 17:08:07 <neofutur> anyone here can recommend on of those forks ?
1264 2011-08-06 17:08:31 <lfm> I am running cgminer. it seems ok
1265 2011-08-06 17:09:15 <neofutur> https://github.com/jgarzik/cpuminer/network
1266 2011-08-06 17:09:21 <neofutur> there are so many forks
1267 2011-08-06 17:09:28 d33tah has joined
1268 2011-08-06 17:10:10 <neofutur> i m already using cpuminer and will stick to it but which fork should I choose to upgrade it . . . .
1269 2011-08-06 17:11:11 <neofutur> ah yes cgminer is the most active fork
1270 2011-08-06 17:11:17 <neofutur> thanks lfm
1271 2011-08-06 17:11:47 <neofutur> you confirm mi idea of choosing the most active / most merging one
1272 2011-08-06 17:12:11 <neofutur> SerajewelKS: I also switched to a fork of your bitcoin-mining-proxy today
1273 2011-08-06 17:15:41 ike-exe_ has joined
1274 2011-08-06 17:16:25 <makomk> topi`: sorry, had to go do something. I'm one of the people that works on the FPGA miner code, yeah. This largely involves cursing Xilinx's tools at the moment.
1275 2011-08-06 17:16:56 ike-exe has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1276 2011-08-06 17:17:05 ike-exe_ is now known as ike-exe
1277 2011-08-06 17:18:14 E-sense has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
1278 2011-08-06 17:18:51 E-sense has joined
1279 2011-08-06 17:21:55 <topi`> makomk: are there any good open source tools for FPGAs nowadays?
1280 2011-08-06 17:22:38 <topi`> but I suppose I don't need the Xilinx tool if somebody else makes the design for me? just so that I only need to flash the bitstream.
1281 2011-08-06 17:25:31 <makomk> There aren't really any open source tools for them at all.
1282 2011-08-06 17:25:38 devrandom has joined
1283 2011-08-06 17:27:13 <topi`> that's bad :/
1284 2011-08-06 17:28:14 <makomk> It's unavoidable, probably; they're fairly exotic hardware that it's hard to design tools for and that the manufacturers refuse to release low-level programming details for.
1285 2011-08-06 17:28:26 aquatic has joined
1286 2011-08-06 17:28:50 <topi`> hmm, maybe I need to fund a project for open hardware FPGAs ;)
1287 2011-08-06 17:29:07 <makomk> Heheheheheheh.
1288 2011-08-06 17:30:04 <jrmithdobbs> topi`: some of the vendor's tools are free but none are open that i know of
1289 2011-08-06 17:33:18 <neofutur> noob question, what FPGA means ? 3D graphics cards ?
1290 2011-08-06 17:33:21 wardearia has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1291 2011-08-06 17:33:58 <jrmithdobbs> field programmable gate array
1292 2011-08-06 17:36:40 <jrmithdobbs> neofutur: http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=FPGA
1293 2011-08-06 17:38:28 sgornick has joined
1294 2011-08-06 17:38:57 E-sense has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
1295 2011-08-06 17:39:31 E-sense has joined
1296 2011-08-06 17:40:47 zeropointo has quit (Quit: leaving)
1297 2011-08-06 17:41:02 <neofutur> thanks jrmithdobbs
1298 2011-08-06 17:41:39 <neofutur> argh "enable javascript to use LMGTFY" ;(
1299 2011-08-06 17:41:50 <neofutur> will have to lauch a graphical browser later ;(
1300 2011-08-06 17:43:10 miuch has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1301 2011-08-06 17:48:58 wardearia has joined
1302 2011-08-06 17:52:58 dr_win has joined
1303 2011-08-06 17:53:28 <ahbritto> Is the transaction fee policy spelled out somewhere?
1304 2011-08-06 17:58:43 E-sense has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
1305 2011-08-06 17:59:00 <ahbritto> In particular, the minimum fees for pools and for forwarded transactions?
1306 2011-08-06 17:59:15 E-sense has joined
1307 2011-08-06 17:59:37 osmosis has joined
1308 2011-08-06 18:01:29 <diki> it really will be tempting to hold find a block for a pool but not sumbit it
1309 2011-08-06 18:01:34 <diki> ...
1310 2011-08-06 18:01:36 <diki> let me rephrase
1311 2011-08-06 18:01:54 <diki> If i find a block but not submit it to the pool, it will be very tempting to find a way to redeem it
1312 2011-08-06 18:03:06 d33tah has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1313 2011-08-06 18:03:08 ThomasV has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1314 2011-08-06 18:06:36 <marf_away> its impossible
1315 2011-08-06 18:13:30 Cusipzzz has joined
1316 2011-08-06 18:17:19 B0g4r7 has joined
1317 2011-08-06 18:22:37 <Caesium> yes, you can't, the block is tied to the pool's wallet.
1318 2011-08-06 18:24:23 DukeOfURL has joined
1319 2011-08-06 18:25:03 asher^ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1320 2011-08-06 18:27:21 underscor has joined
1321 2011-08-06 18:28:31 <mtrlt> and the miners aren't even given the whole block
1322 2011-08-06 18:28:33 <mtrlt> only the header
1323 2011-08-06 18:33:13 <luke-jr> even if you figured out the block data, you'd screw yourself :P
1324 2011-08-06 18:33:42 <diki> screw myself?
1325 2011-08-06 18:33:46 <diki> like how?
1326 2011-08-06 18:34:18 codler has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.87 [Firefox 5.0/20110615151330])
1327 2011-08-06 18:35:33 imsaguy2 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1328 2011-08-06 18:36:58 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1329 2011-08-06 18:38:42 HarryS has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1330 2011-08-06 18:39:35 HarryS has joined
1331 2011-08-06 18:41:18 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1332 2011-08-06 18:42:38 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1333 2011-08-06 18:42:44 BurningToad has joined
1334 2011-08-06 18:46:07 underscor has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1335 2011-08-06 18:49:24 osmosis has joined
1336 2011-08-06 18:49:53 underscor has joined
1337 2011-08-06 18:53:04 Stellar has joined
1338 2011-08-06 18:55:46 min0r has joined
1339 2011-08-06 18:55:57 <min0r> does 3.24 have encrypted wallet.dat yet?
1340 2011-08-06 18:56:07 <min0r> are devs going to work on security?
1341 2011-08-06 18:58:26 <gmaxwell> What do you mean by "are devs going to work on security"?
1342 2011-08-06 18:58:58 TRIPLE is now known as A!~rr@unaffiliated/spice|kish
1343 2011-08-06 18:59:05 <luke-jr> min0r: security is an OS thing
1344 2011-08-06 18:59:21 <luke-jr> I'm pretty sure wallet.dat is already go-r
1345 2011-08-06 18:59:25 <freewil> minor thinks mybitcoin security hole was wallet security issue
1346 2011-08-06 18:59:31 <luke-jr> that's the extent of a wallet's duty
1347 2011-08-06 18:59:37 <luke-jr> lol
1348 2011-08-06 18:59:39 Titeuf_87 has joined
1349 2011-08-06 18:59:57 <min0r> as devs i think you guys should educate the community on security if you want bitcoin as a concept to succeed
1350 2011-08-06 19:00:15 <min0r> sorry but you guys are the ones designing the network and code, the lay people dont understand.
1351 2011-08-06 19:00:16 <gmaxwell> freewil: I thought mybitcoin already disclosed that they had some bug in their shopping cart interface that let someone screw with their account balance.
1352 2011-08-06 19:00:21 <luke-jr> min0r: we do. how often do I say "why are you still using Windows?"
1353 2011-08-06 19:00:31 <freewil> gmaxwell, thats what i thought too
1354 2011-08-06 19:00:35 c0ldaussie has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1355 2011-08-06 19:00:44 <gmaxwell> min0r: You've failed to answer my question. Are you only here to troll?
1356 2011-08-06 19:01:02 <luke-jr> min0r: the network and code is pretty secure
1357 2011-08-06 19:01:29 <luke-jr> but your wallet can only be as secure as your computer
1358 2011-08-06 19:01:35 <luke-jr> encryption is mainly a PR feature
1359 2011-08-06 19:01:41 <luke-jr> it doesn't REALLY give you any security
1360 2011-08-06 19:02:06 <gmaxwell> As far as your first question goes, the wallet encryption stuff is in git-trunk (next version) not 0.3.24. Though it can only barely be described as a security feature.
1361 2011-08-06 19:02:08 <XRcode> it only adds security in the case where someone gains remote access
1362 2011-08-06 19:02:15 <luke-jr> XRcode: not even then
1363 2011-08-06 19:02:26 <luke-jr> it just means when the virus steals your wallet, they have to add an extra step
1364 2011-08-06 19:02:27 <gmaxwell> XRcode: not even then, really. Or rather only under certian conditions.
1365 2011-08-06 19:02:33 <luke-jr> "Give me your passphrase if you want 10% back"
1366 2011-08-06 19:02:52 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: or just sit quietly until you unlock it, then sniff the password.
1367 2011-08-06 19:02:57 * XRcode would loose the 10%
1368 2011-08-06 19:03:01 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: that too
1369 2011-08-06 19:03:08 aquatic has quit ()
1370 2011-08-06 19:03:35 <XRcode> yeah i suppose, doesn't do much if they are determined
1371 2011-08-06 19:03:37 <freewil> luke-jr, never thought of that although that would be like getting in a car at gunpoint to go into a dark forest in the boonies
1372 2011-08-06 19:03:40 <XRcode> makes it more difficult
1373 2011-08-06 19:03:41 <XRcode> thats all
1374 2011-08-06 19:03:46 RAM2012 has joined
1375 2011-08-06 19:03:54 <gmaxwell> XRcode: the wallet stealer would just wait until you unlock then either pull the unencryted data out of bitcoin's memory, or sniff the keyboard. Once a badguy has control of your computer there is very little that can be done on the computer to stop them.
1376 2011-08-06 19:04:06 <luke-jr> I'd sniff the keyboard.
1377 2011-08-06 19:04:11 <luke-jr> that password might work for other stuff
1378 2011-08-06 19:04:24 <min0r> no. not trolling. just wondering why wallet.dat wouldn't be encrypted. AES256 is pretty trivial to implement on a single file, no?
1379 2011-08-06 19:04:28 <luke-jr> and if you're lucky, you might get online banking etc too
1380 2011-08-06 19:04:36 <luke-jr> min0r: but it doesn't help
1381 2011-08-06 19:04:47 <min0r> yes, it does help
1382 2011-08-06 19:04:50 <gmaxwell> And it's not really more difficult. Right now an attacker clicks the wallet stealer option in metasploit... later they'll just click the stealer option in metasploit (after it's been updated to to the in-memory or keyboard sniffing theft)
1383 2011-08-06 19:04:55 <luke-jr> min0r: and that's an OS thing
1384 2011-08-06 19:05:04 <min0r> if you have the encrypted file without the key, you can't access it
1385 2011-08-06 19:05:17 <gmaxwell> min0r: almost anyone who can get the file can get the key.
1386 2011-08-06 19:05:18 <min0r> so, it *helps*... i'm not saying how much it helps. but it *does help*
1387 2011-08-06 19:05:20 <luke-jr> min0r: if you have the file, you probably have the key too
1388 2011-08-06 19:05:24 c0ldaussie has joined
1389 2011-08-06 19:05:36 <gmaxwell> min0r: 11:54 < min0r> as devs i think you guys should educate the community on security if you want bitcoin as a concept to succeed
1390 2011-08-06 19:05:43 <min0r> dosen't matter... all i know is that it helps. even if its only a 0.0001% increase in security, its worth it
1391 2011-08-06 19:05:43 RAM2012 has quit (Client Quit)
1392 2011-08-06 19:05:45 <gmaxwell> By telling you it doesn't help, we're educating you.
1393 2011-08-06 19:05:56 <gmaxwell> min0r: two, go read what I wrote.
1394 2011-08-06 19:06:05 <min0r> gmaxwell, unless you have a keylogger, you cant get the key
1395 2011-08-06 19:06:08 <luke-jr> min0r: it doesn't. it just changes the method crackers use.
1396 2011-08-06 19:06:11 <gmaxwell> min0r: 11:56 < gmaxwell> As far as your first question goes, the wallet encryption stuff is in git-trunk (next version) not 0.3.24.
1397 2011-08-06 19:06:16 <XRcode> they are right
1398 2011-08-06 19:06:20 <luke-jr> min0r: unless you have custom software, you can't get the wallet
1399 2011-08-06 19:06:32 <luke-jr> and custom software can be a keylogger
1400 2011-08-06 19:06:34 <XRcode> if you break into the system and get the wallet, you will get the passphrase too
1401 2011-08-06 19:06:36 <copumpkin> "raising the bar"
1402 2011-08-06 19:06:41 <gmaxwell> min0r: In both cases the attacker has a wallet stealer program. In both cases the stealer program does what is required.
1403 2011-08-06 19:06:44 <min0r> gmaxwell: ok np
1404 2011-08-06 19:07:04 <luke-jr> actually, hmm
1405 2011-08-06 19:07:04 <gmaxwell> The improvement is very minimal. And the wallet encryption has two serious costs.
1406 2011-08-06 19:07:17 <luke-jr> there might be improvement if you're running something that allows remote file reading only
1407 2011-08-06 19:07:17 <min0r> gmaxwell, its like saying why put a lock on a door? if someone wants to rob your house, they will.... its a deterrant
1408 2011-08-06 19:07:25 tower has joined
1409 2011-08-06 19:07:27 <luke-jr> eg, possibly a misconfigured webservr
1410 2011-08-06 19:07:30 <XRcode> more people will loose their passphrase than be scammed probably
1411 2011-08-06 19:07:50 <min0r> XRcode: good point... that might be the case...
1412 2011-08-06 19:07:51 <gmaxwell> The first is that it's more criticial code which must be debugged. The first version of the wallet crypto had a bug that lost someone change, for example. Fortunately not much.
1413 2011-08-06 19:07:51 <luke-jr> ok, wallet encryption should protect from accidentally publishing your wallet file online
1414 2011-08-06 19:07:54 <luke-jr> but that's probably it
1415 2011-08-06 19:08:05 <gmaxwell> The second is that far more people will lose their passphrase, and thus all their money.
1416 2011-08-06 19:08:29 <luke-jr> IMO, losing passphrase is more likely than accidentally publishing
1417 2011-08-06 19:08:32 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: well, crypto does reduce the impact of accidental publication.
1418 2011-08-06 19:08:37 <luke-jr> let's reverse wallet crypto
1419 2011-08-06 19:08:39 <luke-jr> :p
1420 2011-08-06 19:08:48 <min0r> luke-jr: a lot of exploits give you access to files on a webserver, but maybe not ability to get root access... in that case, encrypted wallet would help
1421 2011-08-06 19:09:07 <gmaxwell> min0r: ... no it wouldn't.
1422 2011-08-06 19:09:35 <min0r> whys that? if i have the file but not the key i cant get coins
1423 2011-08-06 19:09:36 <luke-jr> ok, so crypto on webservers :P
1424 2011-08-06 19:09:36 <gmaxwell> If you have access to the wallet.dat you almost certantly have access to the process that has access to it.
1425 2011-08-06 19:09:59 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: nah, think of someone accidentally symlinking their wallet.dat into htdocs
1426 2011-08-06 19:10:05 <luke-jr> it's POSSIBLE, but not likely
1427 2011-08-06 19:10:13 <XRcode> lol
1428 2011-08-06 19:10:33 <gmaxwell> min0r: If the webserver can spend, an attacker with the same permissions as the webserver user can spend.
1429 2011-08-06 19:10:42 <gmaxwell> (even without root)
1430 2011-08-06 19:10:56 <gmaxwell> If they don't they wouldn't be able to get to an unencrypted wallet.dat.
1431 2011-08-06 19:11:00 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: suid CGI.
1432 2011-08-06 19:11:20 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: sure, but then you don't need encryption either.
1433 2011-08-06 19:11:38 denisx has joined
1434 2011-08-06 19:12:37 <min0r> gmaxwell, what about less sophisticated theifs...? i.e. some thug on the street mugs someone and steals their laptop. the bitcoin client isn't encrypted the theif can easily spend. not the case with encryption
1435 2011-08-06 19:12:46 <XRcode> it makes sense, encyrption isn't that great of a help...
1436 2011-08-06 19:12:58 <gmaxwell> min0r: Yes, it helps there.
1437 2011-08-06 19:13:00 <XRcode> less sophisticated theifs probably can't get your wallet.dat
1438 2011-08-06 19:13:12 <gmaxwell> I just doesn't help in most of the cases people initially think it will help.
1439 2011-08-06 19:13:29 <gmaxwell> It also creates a serious risk of passphrase loss.
1440 2011-08-06 19:13:37 SISUbtc has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPad - http://colloquy.mobi)
1441 2011-08-06 19:13:53 <gmaxwell> the street-thug case should be better addressed by using whole disk encryption on your laptop.
1442 2011-08-06 19:13:59 <mtrlt> http://ripple-project.org/ "a project to build a new kind of monetary system ..." thoughts?
1443 2011-08-06 19:14:00 <gmaxwell> I can't believe anyone doesn't anymore.
1444 2011-08-06 19:14:11 <min0r> gmaxwell, well, then a big disclaimer should pop up on the client 'if you lose the password your coins will be lost forever'... etc
1445 2011-08-06 19:14:30 <luke-jr> min0r: you shouldn't keep wallet on a laptop ;)
1446 2011-08-06 19:14:37 <gmaxwell> mtrlt: we've talked about it before. Ripple is distributed credit, it's also kinda vaporware.
1447 2011-08-06 19:14:47 <min0r> gmaxwell, again, the reality is that 90% of the population are not versed in security....
1448 2011-08-06 19:15:07 imsaguy2 has joined
1449 2011-08-06 19:15:30 <gmaxwell> min0r: yes, right so the encryption will make them more vulnerable. They won't believe how likely they are to lose their password because they're not versed. They'll think the encryption protects them from wallet stealing worms, becuase they're not versed, etc.
1450 2011-08-06 19:15:36 <min0r> whether they 'should' or shouldn't have full disk encryption won't help what should be done in reality
1451 2011-08-06 19:16:01 <gmaxwell> As far as the disk crypto goesâ it really should just be a default. The OS vedors are behaving unethically by not making it a default.
1452 2011-08-06 19:16:04 <XRcode> if i disappeared for a year, i could see myself forgetting some passphrases
1453 2011-08-06 19:16:14 <gmaxwell> XRcode: sure.
1454 2011-08-06 19:16:30 <XRcode> considering they are mostly 20chars+
1455 2011-08-06 19:16:31 <XRcode> lol
1456 2011-08-06 19:16:46 <min0r> gmaxwell, i agree with you on that... but its the same thing i guess... 'what if they lose their passphrase, all the data is lost'
1457 2011-08-06 19:16:54 <min0r> thats why its optional
1458 2011-08-06 19:17:17 <gmaxwell> min0r: it's true that its the same thing, but it practice it means most people are not used to that kind of risk.
1459 2011-08-06 19:17:20 <min0r> anyway, im assuming encryption is going to be optional in 3.25 anyway right?
1460 2011-08-06 19:17:27 <gmaxwell> I think it's optional because OS vedors are lazy.
1461 2011-08-06 19:17:47 <min0r> gmaxwell, what about the impact on performance ;)
1462 2011-08-06 19:17:47 <gmaxwell> (fedora install lets you select it, but doesn't even warn you about data loss)
1463 2011-08-06 19:18:10 <XRcode> that's lazy, it should warn for sure
1464 2011-08-06 19:18:24 <gmaxwell> min0r: it's insignificant... your CPU can decrypt 10x faster than the disk can read. Especially on the new i7 stuff that has hardware AES (then it's more like 500x faster).
1465 2011-08-06 19:18:25 <XRcode> people don't understand that stuff
1466 2011-08-06 19:18:58 <gmaxwell> min0r: 0.4 will be the next version unless there is an emergency that causes a 0.3.24.
1467 2011-08-06 19:19:06 <gmaxwell> er 0.3.25.
1468 2011-08-06 19:19:19 <gmaxwell> If there is a 0.3.25 (not likely) it won't have encryption.
1469 2011-08-06 19:19:21 <XRcode> i want to encrypt my two ssd's and see how they perform
1470 2011-08-06 19:19:26 <XRcode> i have a new i7
1471 2011-08-06 19:19:52 genjix has joined
1472 2011-08-06 19:20:03 <genjix> da2ce7: hey, see pm
1473 2011-08-06 19:20:04 genjix has left ()
1474 2011-08-06 19:20:08 <gmaxwell> XRcode: I haven't used a non encrypted disk for yearsâ a long time back I RMAed a drive and WD sent me a replacement... the first few sectors were zeroed, but the rest had someone elses data!
1475 2011-08-06 19:20:22 <XRcode> wow
1476 2011-08-06 19:20:35 <gmaxwell> XRcode: since you can't wipe a broken drive before RMAing or disposing it, I figured the solution was to _always_ use encryption.
1477 2011-08-06 19:20:47 <gmaxwell> When I started it was a measurable performance loss, not so much anymore.
1478 2011-08-06 19:20:54 bitcoinDRdotCom has joined
1479 2011-08-06 19:21:05 <mtrlt> gmaxwell: how do you keep the password/key secure?
1480 2011-08-06 19:21:27 <min0r> gmaxwell, why isn't there a sticky thread on bitcoin.org forum regarding the latest build and changes?
1481 2011-08-06 19:21:28 <gmaxwell> mtrlt: My own usage or bitcoin wallet crypto?
1482 2011-08-06 19:21:35 <mtrlt> your encrypted hd
1483 2011-08-06 19:21:52 <XRcode> gmaxwell: i have smashed a few hd's where an RMA would have been possible
1484 2011-08-06 19:21:59 <XRcode> for that reason
1485 2011-08-06 19:22:10 <min0r> gmaxwell, Latest version: 0.3.24 *OLD VERSIONS HARM THE NETWORK AND YOUR SECURITY* <-- if its this important there should be a global sticky thread on the forums for latest announcements from devs
1486 2011-08-06 19:22:18 <min0r> imo
1487 2011-08-06 19:22:22 <mtrlt> gmaxwell: usb sticks in a safe? :p
1488 2011-08-06 19:22:28 <mtrlt> in safes*
1489 2011-08-06 19:22:29 <gmaxwell> mtrlt: I just use a boring passphrase. It's probably not that secureâ I'd be vulnerable to a keyboard bug for example. But I'm mostly concerned with theft and failed drives, so it doesn't matter too much.
1490 2011-08-06 19:22:48 <mtrlt> so if you forget the passphrase, all is lost?
1491 2011-08-06 19:23:06 <XRcode> yes
1492 2011-08-06 19:23:18 <gmaxwell> Indeed. Well, my SO knows it too, so she'd have to forget as well.
1493 2011-08-06 19:23:27 <mtrlt> hmm yea, backups are important :p
1494 2011-08-06 19:23:33 <gmaxwell> My encrypted wallet bitcoin key has a written copy in a safe.
1495 2011-08-06 19:24:10 <gmaxwell> XRcode: yea, so encryption would have saved you from having to smash those disks.
1496 2011-08-06 19:25:06 <min0r> gmaxwell, it would be cool if the next version of the client gives you that key in decimal format, so that n00bs dont have to extract it manually from wallet.dat
1497 2011-08-06 19:25:20 <XRcode> yeah
1498 2011-08-06 19:25:36 <gmaxwell> min0r: thats a planned 0.4 feature too, though it's not in git trunk yet... there is a patch.
1499 2011-08-06 19:25:55 <gmaxwell> min0r: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/220
1500 2011-08-06 19:26:01 <min0r> gmaxwell, oh, great... very cool
1501 2011-08-06 19:26:08 <XRcode> you have a 69$ drive, with possibly thousands of dollars in work, sources, bitcoins etc
1502 2011-08-06 19:26:15 <XRcode> don't rma it, smash it
1503 2011-08-06 19:26:23 <XRcode> unless it's encrypted
1504 2011-08-06 19:26:27 <XRcode> like you say
1505 2011-08-06 19:26:28 bitcoinDRdotCom has quit ()
1506 2011-08-06 19:26:59 <gmaxwell> In my case where I'd RMAed that driveâ it was a lot more than $69 in value though, otherwise I probably wouldn't have RMAed it.
1507 2011-08-06 19:27:24 <gmaxwell> (it was one of the first commercially available 4 gigabyte IDE drives)
1508 2011-08-06 19:27:33 <XRcode> wow
1509 2011-08-06 19:27:37 <XRcode> old scool
1510 2011-08-06 19:27:40 <XRcode> :)
1511 2011-08-06 19:27:53 <gmaxwell> hah not really! drive sizes grew fast!
1512 2011-08-06 19:27:53 <XRcode> i had a 2GB ide drive in my first PC
1513 2011-08-06 19:28:14 <XRcode> must have been around 96
1514 2011-08-06 19:28:16 <gmaxwell> The first hard drive I had was 10MB.
1515 2011-08-06 19:28:36 <XRcode> 10MB lol
1516 2011-08-06 19:28:53 <gmaxwell> Then later I got an RLL controller that increased the capacity of the drive to 20MB.
1517 2011-08-06 19:29:05 bitcoinDRdotCom has joined
1518 2011-08-06 19:29:29 <XRcode> i have four 2TB's and four 1.5TB drives now
1519 2011-08-06 19:29:43 <XRcode> os boots from two ssd's in raid 0
1520 2011-08-06 19:30:05 <XRcode> takes about 7-8 seconds to boot
1521 2011-08-06 19:30:08 <gmaxwell> I have >50TB storage at home now.
1522 2011-08-06 19:30:25 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1523 2011-08-06 19:30:26 <XRcode> nice
1524 2011-08-06 19:30:33 <mtrlt> how much of that storage are you using? :P
1525 2011-08-06 19:30:35 <gmaxwell> (not in SSDs, yet, alas)
1526 2011-08-06 19:30:45 <gmaxwell> mtrlt: only about 20TB
1527 2011-08-06 19:30:49 <mtrlt> heh
1528 2011-08-06 19:30:51 <XRcode> i was really happy when i got my ssds
1529 2011-08-06 19:30:53 <mtrlt> my data isn't even 1 TB :(
1530 2011-08-06 19:30:56 <XRcode> well worth the 200$ i spent
1531 2011-08-06 19:31:32 <XRcode> i got two ocz vertex 2's
1532 2011-08-06 19:31:35 <XRcode> 60GB
1533 2011-08-06 19:31:39 <gmaxwell> hell, the data I use for video compression development is almost 1TB on its own.
1534 2011-08-06 19:32:01 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1535 2011-08-06 19:32:01 <gmaxwell> XRcode: yea, my laptop is SSD.. I'll never use anything else in a laptop again.
1536 2011-08-06 19:32:21 <XRcode> yeah i have one of the same drives in my laptop
1537 2011-08-06 19:32:33 <XRcode> no raid... it's almost as fast as my desktop
1538 2011-08-06 19:32:45 <XRcode> about 10 second boots compared to 7-8
1539 2011-08-06 19:33:48 gut4 has joined
1540 2011-08-06 19:33:51 <XRcode> i got a toshiba x500, it came with two 500GB sata drives, right away i pulled one of them and sold it to my friend, replacing it with an ssd
1541 2011-08-06 19:33:53 <gmaxwell> 'boots' hah.
1542 2011-08-06 19:34:15 <gmaxwell> I don't notice the booting times of my machines, too busy setting the time on my oven and microwave whenever they boot.
1543 2011-08-06 19:34:26 <XRcode> lol
1544 2011-08-06 19:34:30 prax has joined
1545 2011-08-06 19:35:07 <XRcode> i noticed it alot because for a while i was having mobo problems, it would randomly reboot out of nowhere
1546 2011-08-06 19:35:18 <XRcode> Asus P8P67 WS Revolution
1547 2011-08-06 19:35:25 <XRcode> they replaced it for me and now its fine
1548 2011-08-06 19:35:39 <gmaxwell> The lowest uptime here is my laptop, with 6 days... and thats just because I was travling last week and had to swap batteries.
1549 2011-08-06 19:36:58 <XRcode> i hardly even use my laptop lately
1550 2011-08-06 19:37:08 <XRcode> its just there for travelling really
1551 2011-08-06 19:37:38 <XRcode> its a bit too big and clunky
1552 2011-08-06 19:37:48 <XRcode> its 18.5 inch
1553 2011-08-06 19:38:05 <XRcode> wieghs like 50lbs
1554 2011-08-06 19:38:07 <XRcode> lol
1555 2011-08-06 19:38:50 <diki> use kilos, please
1556 2011-08-06 19:39:43 <XRcode> i was exagerating, it feels that heavy sometimes
1557 2011-08-06 19:39:46 <makomk> Hmmmmm. I presume that if someone creates a block containing transactions that they never broadcast to the network, and that block gets orphaned, the transactions should be picked up somehow and inserted into a new block?
1558 2011-08-06 19:39:47 <XRcode> like 22kg
1559 2011-08-06 19:39:55 <diki> 22 kilo laptop
1560 2011-08-06 19:39:59 <XRcode> its huge
1561 2011-08-06 19:40:02 <diki> are you in the 70s my friend?
1562 2011-08-06 19:40:08 <XRcode> look up the toshiba qosmio x500
1563 2011-08-06 19:40:20 <XRcode> i ordered it, then when i got i was like holy hell
1564 2011-08-06 19:40:27 <XRcode> this isn't a laptop
1565 2011-08-06 19:40:31 <XRcode> its a portable PC
1566 2011-08-06 19:40:35 <diki> looks like a normal laptop to me
1567 2011-08-06 19:40:48 <XRcode> ya till you try to carry it around
1568 2011-08-06 19:40:55 <XRcode> or find a case for it
1569 2011-08-06 19:41:14 min0r has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1570 2011-08-06 19:42:05 dvide has quit ()
1571 2011-08-06 19:42:46 <XRcode> it doesn't fit any cases i have tried it in
1572 2011-08-06 19:43:01 gut4 has quit (Quit: gut4)
1573 2011-08-06 19:43:08 <XRcode> the only thing that i can get it to fit in is a gene simmons moneybag..
1574 2011-08-06 19:43:15 <XRcode> and its not really a laptop case
1575 2011-08-06 19:45:00 <enquirer> i haven't rebooted my laptop in months - it's either sleep or hibernate
1576 2011-08-06 19:45:10 <diki> i am looking at a video of the laptop
1577 2011-08-06 19:45:13 <diki> it aint heavy
1578 2011-08-06 19:45:19 <XRcode> lol ok
1579 2011-08-06 19:45:22 * XRcode owns one
1580 2011-08-06 19:45:39 <XRcode> im sure the video tells you how heavy it feels to carry around
1581 2011-08-06 19:45:48 <XRcode> annd how it doesn't fit any laptop cases
1582 2011-08-06 19:46:34 <diki> it's 4.5 kilos
1583 2011-08-06 19:46:37 <diki> lol
1584 2011-08-06 19:46:39 <diki> not 22
1585 2011-08-06 19:47:01 <XRcode> yah did you not read the part where i said, "i was exagerating"
1586 2011-08-06 19:47:11 <diki> nope
1587 2011-08-06 19:47:20 <XRcode> [02:34pm] <XRcode> i was exagerating, it feels that heavy sometimes
1588 2011-08-06 19:47:26 <diki> ...
1589 2011-08-06 19:47:34 <diki> you made me think it actually was 22 kilos
1590 2011-08-06 19:47:45 * XRcode didn't try to
1591 2011-08-06 19:47:57 <diki> how does it do in games?
1592 2011-08-06 19:48:05 <XRcode> not bad actually
1593 2011-08-06 19:48:06 SISUbtcX has joined
1594 2011-08-06 19:48:24 <Caesium> 22kg laptop wouldn't really be a laptop, it would crush your legs :p
1595 2011-08-06 19:48:26 <diki> for an nvidia
1596 2011-08-06 19:48:56 <XRcode> it will play all of the new games
1597 2011-08-06 19:48:59 <XRcode> it does well for a laptop
1598 2011-08-06 19:49:34 <XRcode> but its way too big and bulky to be practical for carrying around with you
1599 2011-08-06 19:50:06 <XRcode> the power pack is the size of a brick
1600 2011-08-06 19:50:10 djoot has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1601 2011-08-06 19:50:31 <XRcode> and wieghs a few pounds by itself
1602 2011-08-06 19:51:26 <XRcode> when i got the thing, the box said portable personal computer on the side of it
1603 2011-08-06 19:51:50 mmoya has joined
1604 2011-08-06 19:52:14 <XRcode> the only thing that i actually love about it, is the sound
1605 2011-08-06 19:52:22 <XRcode> it has awesome speakers for a laptop
1606 2011-08-06 19:55:47 <XRcode> luke-jr, you still here?
1607 2011-08-06 19:56:09 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
1608 2011-08-06 19:59:43 AmazingPudding is now known as bonsaikitten
1609 2011-08-06 20:04:28 devon_hillard has joined
1610 2011-08-06 20:06:12 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1611 2011-08-06 20:06:54 SISUbtcX has quit (Quit: SISUbtcX)
1612 2011-08-06 20:15:37 abragin has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1613 2011-08-06 20:17:41 abragin has joined
1614 2011-08-06 20:17:41 abragin has quit (Changing host)
1615 2011-08-06 20:17:41 abragin has joined
1616 2011-08-06 20:20:32 E-sense has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
1617 2011-08-06 20:22:44 <grbgout> is there any benefit to saving addr.dat when backing up a wallet?
1618 2011-08-06 20:22:51 <gmaxwell> No, not really.
1619 2011-08-06 20:23:00 <grbgout> would it cause more problems than benefits?
1620 2011-08-06 20:23:06 <gmaxwell> Yes.
1621 2011-08-06 20:23:10 <grbgout> k, thanks.
1622 2011-08-06 20:23:53 <grbgout> no harm in saving bitcoin.conf, though, of course?
1623 2011-08-06 20:23:56 <gmaxwell> Saving it might cause you to find neighbors slightly faster on startup, except for the fact that valid addresses are constantly changing. ... so if you restore more than a little bit later it would mostly be giving you crap addresses.
1624 2011-08-06 20:24:02 <gmaxwell> No harm, indeed.
1625 2011-08-06 20:24:16 <gmaxwell> DNSseed mostly fixes fast startup in any case.
1626 2011-08-06 20:24:24 <grbgout> ah, so those aren't the addresses you see in getaddressesbyaccount?
1627 2011-08-06 20:24:33 <gmaxwell> nono..
1628 2011-08-06 20:24:35 <gmaxwell> hah
1629 2011-08-06 20:24:36 <grbgout> k
1630 2011-08-06 20:24:41 <gmaxwell> They're IP addresses of bitcoin nodes.
1631 2011-08-06 20:24:47 * grbgout taps his nose.
1632 2011-08-06 20:24:51 <grbgout> I figured that as you elaborated
1633 2011-08-06 20:25:05 <grbgout> thanks again
1634 2011-08-06 20:25:08 <gmaxwell> Np.
1635 2011-08-06 20:25:19 <grbgout> Power loss a few weeks ago seems to have screwed one of my servers more than expected :\
1636 2011-08-06 20:25:22 <grbgout> time to backup
1637 2011-08-06 20:28:58 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1638 2011-08-06 20:30:07 x6763 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1639 2011-08-06 20:32:56 * freewil is away: I'm away
1640 2011-08-06 20:33:31 B0g4r7_ has joined
1641 2011-08-06 20:34:12 shLONG has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1642 2011-08-06 20:35:25 <grbgout> Just to be absolutely certain: I should be able to take this backup, leave its bitcoin instance stopped, install bitcoin on a different PC, copy over the wallet, start bitcoin on the new machine, and confirm the wallet was successfully backed-up. Then...
1643 2011-08-06 20:35:51 <grbgout> I can stop the new instance of bitcoin, and restart the original instance of bitcoin on the initial PC without having to worry about any badness, correct?
1644 2011-08-06 20:36:37 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1645 2011-08-06 20:36:37 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
1646 2011-08-06 20:36:42 <_W_> no guarantees from me, but that certainly sounds correct
1647 2011-08-06 20:36:49 * grbgout nods
1648 2011-08-06 20:36:55 x6763 has joined
1649 2011-08-06 20:38:47 Nick_ has joined
1650 2011-08-06 20:38:59 Nicksasa is now known as Nicksasa_
1651 2011-08-06 20:39:05 Nick_ is now known as Nicksasa
1652 2011-08-06 20:39:36 npouillard has quit (Quit: leaving)
1653 2011-08-06 20:40:09 Nicksasa has quit (Client Quit)
1654 2011-08-06 20:40:19 Nicksasa_ is now known as Nicksasa
1655 2011-08-06 20:42:49 djoot has joined
1656 2011-08-06 20:45:28 klikklak has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1657 2011-08-06 20:49:45 npouillard has joined
1658 2011-08-06 21:00:37 hugolp has joined
1659 2011-08-06 21:01:11 Burgundy has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1660 2011-08-06 21:02:51 Xunie has joined
1661 2011-08-06 21:09:11 huk has joined
1662 2011-08-06 21:10:58 oaklzy has joined
1663 2011-08-06 21:12:29 Burgundy has joined
1664 2011-08-06 21:22:05 oaklzy has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1665 2011-08-06 21:23:30 EPiSKiNG- has quit ()
1666 2011-08-06 21:25:54 Stellar has quit (Quit: Signed)
1667 2011-08-06 21:25:59 ThomasV has joined
1668 2011-08-06 21:29:14 hugolp has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.1.1 Equilibrium http://www.kvirc.net/)
1669 2011-08-06 21:34:17 Zagitta has joined
1670 2011-08-06 21:35:47 * freewil is back (gone 01:02:48)
1671 2011-08-06 21:41:48 yebyen has joined
1672 2011-08-06 21:42:14 <grbgout> damn, I think the RAM is shot.
1673 2011-08-06 21:48:22 danbri has joined
1674 2011-08-06 21:50:29 AAA_awright_ has joined
1675 2011-08-06 21:51:14 burp_ has joined
1676 2011-08-06 21:51:31 osmosis has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1677 2011-08-06 21:51:54 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1678 2011-08-06 21:52:17 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1679 2011-08-06 21:53:07 abragin has quit ()
1680 2011-08-06 21:53:09 mmoya has joined
1681 2011-08-06 21:53:51 AAA_awright__ has joined
1682 2011-08-06 21:54:01 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1683 2011-08-06 21:57:20 AAA_awright_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1684 2011-08-06 21:58:42 msquared86 has joined
1685 2011-08-06 22:00:38 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1686 2011-08-06 22:01:14 <msquared86> hey guys is there a way i can tell the client were my wallet file is at instead of the default .bitcoin folder in my home directory(im using linux)
1687 2011-08-06 22:01:22 noagendamarket has joined
1688 2011-08-06 22:02:39 AAA_awright__ is now known as AAA_awright
1689 2011-08-06 22:02:49 <gmaxwell> msquared86: datadir lets you specify where it looks for data.
1690 2011-08-06 22:04:04 grbgout has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1691 2011-08-06 22:05:00 Cherothald has joined
1692 2011-08-06 22:05:17 WakiMiko_ has quit (Quit: waki out)
1693 2011-08-06 22:05:36 <msquared86> gmaxwell: is that an option to pass to it like the addnode?
1694 2011-08-06 22:07:04 <XRcode> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Running_Bitcoin
1695 2011-08-06 22:07:14 <XRcode> look there msquared86
1696 2011-08-06 22:07:31 <msquared86> awsome thanks
1697 2011-08-06 22:07:39 <XRcode> the answer is yes, but you will find much more info there
1698 2011-08-06 22:08:06 <msquared86> so is it better to run the deamon or the gui client
1699 2011-08-06 22:08:13 <msquared86> daemon*
1700 2011-08-06 22:08:42 <XRcode> up to you, i don't really see one as better than the other
1701 2011-08-06 22:08:48 <XRcode> it depends what you are doing
1702 2011-08-06 22:09:11 <msquared86> i didnt think so either
1703 2011-08-06 22:09:15 <XRcode> if the gui is running, you can still use commandline
1704 2011-08-06 22:11:07 <msquared86> ok was about to test that lol
1705 2011-08-06 22:11:23 <msquared86> cool that means i can run the gui and put it on a seperate desktop :)
1706 2011-08-06 22:12:05 <msquared86> those node that the wiki lists are they updated often or are they rather old?
1707 2011-08-06 22:12:06 <XRcode> yes
1708 2011-08-06 22:12:20 <XRcode> do you want a few good nodes?
1709 2011-08-06 22:12:30 <msquared86> yea sure
1710 2011-08-06 22:12:32 <XRcode> i have a couple nodes on 1000mbps links
1711 2011-08-06 22:12:43 <msquared86> these are the ones i have atm
1712 2011-08-06 22:12:46 <msquared86> -addnode=174.127.101.54 -addnode=173.193.232.154
1713 2011-08-06 22:13:01 <XRcode> there you go
1714 2011-08-06 22:13:04 <XRcode> those are mine :D
1715 2011-08-06 22:13:17 <msquared86> lol sweet i think you gave them to me actually lol
1716 2011-08-06 22:13:19 <XRcode> both are 1000mbps
1717 2011-08-06 22:13:58 <XRcode> both of them usually have around 60-100 connections
1718 2011-08-06 22:14:29 <Doktor99__> i am sure this is old news, but when are encrypted wallets coming native to the client/
1719 2011-08-06 22:14:40 <msquared86> cool now i have a server and hos would i tun it into a node and is it resource dependant?
1720 2011-08-06 22:15:17 <msquared86> how*
1721 2011-08-06 22:15:23 <XRcode> what kind of server
1722 2011-08-06 22:16:01 HardDisk_WP has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1723 2011-08-06 22:16:38 <XRcode> win? linux?
1724 2011-08-06 22:16:54 <msquared86> its my web server im running 3 sites off of sitting in a DC in florida its intel sadly and its got 16g ram 1Tb drive ubuntu 10 lts
1725 2011-08-06 22:17:31 bitcoinbulletin has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1726 2011-08-06 22:17:33 <XRcode> just install the bitcoin client
1727 2011-08-06 22:17:36 <XRcode> and run it all the time
1728 2011-08-06 22:17:41 <msquared86> thats all huh
1729 2011-08-06 22:17:46 <msquared86> nice
1730 2011-08-06 22:17:48 <XRcode> with a high number of allowed connections
1731 2011-08-06 22:17:55 <XRcode> if you want a well-connected node
1732 2011-08-06 22:18:35 <Doktor99__> forums answered my question: encrypted wallets are a planned feature for 0.4.0
1733 2011-08-06 22:18:37 EPiSKiNG- has joined
1734 2011-08-06 22:18:46 <Doktor99__> so I ask: when is that expected to be released?
1735 2011-08-06 22:18:58 <msquared86> hmm wonder if i should put my wallet and everything on the server
1736 2011-08-06 22:19:12 <msquared86> its locked down an i know its secure as shit
1737 2011-08-06 22:19:46 <XRcode> take the appropriate precautions and you should be fine
1738 2011-08-06 22:23:10 davex__ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1739 2011-08-06 22:25:19 eoss has joined
1740 2011-08-06 22:25:20 davex__ has joined
1741 2011-08-06 22:25:20 eoss has quit (Changing host)
1742 2011-08-06 22:25:20 eoss has joined
1743 2011-08-06 22:25:39 bitcoinbulletin has joined
1744 2011-08-06 22:27:02 HardDisk_WP has joined
1745 2011-08-06 22:27:03 HardDisk_WP has quit (Changing host)
1746 2011-08-06 22:27:03 HardDisk_WP has joined
1747 2011-08-06 22:29:10 <msquared86> hmm
1748 2011-08-06 22:29:21 <msquared86> so how to i connect to the rpc
1749 2011-08-06 22:31:01 <XRcode> setup your user and password in the config
1750 2011-08-06 22:31:16 <gmaxwell> you set a rpcuser/rpcpassword in the config, then just run bitcoind from the commandline and it will connect.
1751 2011-08-06 22:32:34 <msquared86> hmm error loading blkindex.dat
1752 2011-08-06 22:37:48 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1753 2011-08-06 22:39:45 <msquared86> are there more commands then what the wiki shows for bitcoind? @ XRcode
1754 2011-08-06 22:42:37 ThomasV has joined
1755 2011-08-06 22:44:15 <msquared86> XRcode: haha what is this supposed to mean lol
1756 2011-08-06 22:44:17 <msquared86> {"result":null,"error":{"code":-32700,"message":"Parse error"},"id":null}
1757 2011-08-06 22:46:18 <XRcode> hrmm
1758 2011-08-06 22:46:25 <msquared86> hmm ok so the rpc uses 8332 what is 8333 for ?
1759 2011-08-06 22:46:37 <XRcode> 8333 is the bitcoind port
1760 2011-08-06 22:46:59 <XRcode> bitcoin clients talk to eachother on that port
1761 2011-08-06 22:47:00 <msquared86> o ok
1762 2011-08-06 22:47:23 <XRcode> 8332 is for rpc, which you would use to connect your miner
1763 2011-08-06 22:47:37 <msquared86> but yea i go to 127.0.0.1:8332 and i get that error
1764 2011-08-06 22:48:09 <XRcode> does it not have permission to read/write to those files maybe
1765 2011-08-06 22:48:33 <gmaxwell> msquared86: did you restart after setting it?
1766 2011-08-06 22:48:35 <msquared86> hmmm it is running on the encrypted drive
1767 2011-08-06 22:48:39 <gmaxwell> (restart bitcoin)
1768 2011-08-06 22:48:40 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1769 2011-08-06 22:48:40 groffer has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1770 2011-08-06 22:48:51 <msquared86> after setting what ?
1771 2011-08-06 22:49:34 <makomk> Is there any particular reason backupwallet's functionality isn't accesible through the UI, out of interest?
1772 2011-08-06 22:50:24 <msquared86> this is the command i used to start bitcoind
1773 2011-08-06 22:50:27 <msquared86> ./bitcoind -conf=/media/encrypted_save/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf -gen -datadir=/media/encrypted_save/.bitcoin/ -upnp -daemon -rcpssl
1774 2011-08-06 22:50:42 <gmaxwell> oh, you have to do more config to use ssl rpc.
1775 2011-08-06 22:50:55 <gmaxwell> (and I have no clue whats required for that)
1776 2011-08-06 22:50:56 <msquared86> o lemme turn it off for the moment then
1777 2011-08-06 22:51:03 <msquared86> certificates mos tlikley
1778 2011-08-06 22:51:10 <msquared86> i can create them and self sign them later
1779 2011-08-06 22:51:13 <gmaxwell> well, right.
1780 2011-08-06 22:51:43 <msquared86> thats actually prolly what it is altho im connecting throught local host so it shouldnt matter meh all well lol.
1781 2011-08-06 22:52:49 <msquared86> same thing altho it prolly has no browser interface
1782 2011-08-06 22:53:15 <gmaxwell> ... browser?
1783 2011-08-06 22:53:21 <XRcode> ??
1784 2011-08-06 22:53:25 <gmaxwell> yea, no bitcoin has no browser interface. :)
1785 2011-08-06 22:53:35 <gmaxwell> you use bitcoind to connect to the rpc.
1786 2011-08-06 22:53:35 <Eliel> makomk: I don't think there is.
1787 2011-08-06 22:54:00 <Eliel> makomk: I think it would be an excellent addition to bitcoin UI to have "backup wallet" in there that would open a save file dialog.
1788 2011-08-06 22:54:01 <gmaxwell> makomk: I can't think of why, other than the fact that it's mostly useful from cron. :)
1789 2011-08-06 22:55:41 groffer has joined
1790 2011-08-06 22:55:41 devrandom has joined
1791 2011-08-06 22:55:54 <Eliel> gmaxwell: it would be useful in the menu so even computer illiterate users would have a reasonable chance of being able to backup their wallet without help.
1792 2011-08-06 22:56:40 <msquared86> what is bitcoind exactly
1793 2011-08-06 22:56:53 <gmaxwell> msquared86: bitcoin without the gui.
1794 2011-08-06 22:56:59 <msquared86> ok thought so
1795 2011-08-06 22:57:07 <XRcode> perhaps a backup button in the client that pops up dialogue box asking you where you would like to backup your wallet.dat to
1796 2011-08-06 22:57:09 <gmaxwell> msquared86: but it's _also_ a CLI interface to the rpc.
1797 2011-08-06 22:57:28 <XRcode> would help illiterate people back it up to say, a usb drive
1798 2011-08-06 22:58:07 <msquared86> unless they encrypt there usb drive with a randomly thought up password that they wrote down and cant read now or remmeber ...... :P
1799 2011-08-06 22:58:35 * msquared86 cant believe that happened
1800 2011-08-06 23:00:02 <gmaxwell> msquared86: common failure mode. This is why I'm confident the encrypted wallet functionality will result in more total coinloss.
1801 2011-08-06 23:00:28 <gmaxwell> Everyone thinks their memory is reliable, so few take the reasonable precautions.
1802 2011-08-06 23:00:47 <msquared86> if the lock and unlock self encryption is left to the user yea for sure
1803 2011-08-06 23:00:48 <Eliel> yes... many are in for a rude awakening from that belief.
1804 2011-08-06 23:01:07 <gmaxwell> It's made worse by the fact that people are frequently cautioned to not write down passwords... which is often not great advice but it's _terrible_ for passwords that can't ever be recovered.
1805 2011-08-06 23:01:56 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1806 2011-08-06 23:01:57 <msquared86> and ppl think just cause there using say linux there secure and not going to get hacked
1807 2011-08-06 23:02:01 <gmaxwell> If you use wallet encryption, you _should_ write down the password. And put that backup copy someplace safe (e.g. in a safe) seperate from the computer.
1808 2011-08-06 23:02:26 <makomk> Eliel: I was thinking the same thing.
1809 2011-08-06 23:02:28 <Eliel> gmaxwell: you could perhaps counteract that by having bitcoin UI remind people that if it's forgotten, there's no way to use the wallet.
1810 2011-08-06 23:02:39 <XRcode> im a target now, since i started working on my pool site i have had a huge increase in intrusion attempts
1811 2011-08-06 23:02:41 <XRcode> sshd:
1812 2011-08-06 23:02:41 <XRcode> Authentication Failures:
1813 2011-08-06 23:02:41 <XRcode> unknown (polybitshosting.com): 27288 Time(s)
1814 2011-08-06 23:02:41 <XRcode> root (polybitshosting.com): 3504 Time(s)
1815 2011-08-06 23:02:41 <XRcode> mysql (polybitshosting.com): 62 Time(s)
1816 2011-08-06 23:02:42 <msquared86> that wont help them remmeber
1817 2011-08-06 23:02:55 <gmaxwell> Eliel: I think the gui does that. (I'm not sure because I don't use the GUI so I didn't pay much attention to that part of the patch)
1818 2011-08-06 23:02:57 * XRcode investigates
1819 2011-08-06 23:02:58 <Eliel> and encourage them to write it down somewhere and store it in a safe place. At least until they're certain they remember it.
1820 2011-08-06 23:03:21 <gmaxwell> XRcode: if you use key auth the attackers give up right away.
1821 2011-08-06 23:03:27 <msquared86> yea see XRcode, but you have the smarts to enable logging and to have a firewall and take the correct precautions
1822 2011-08-06 23:03:51 <msquared86> im still haveing trouble getting a miner compiled
1823 2011-08-06 23:04:02 <gmaxwell> Eliel: even after you're sure you remember itâ if you don't use it for a while you'll forget. Or, e.g. if you get sick or tack a blow to the head that can also cause some lost memories.
1824 2011-08-06 23:04:05 <msquared86> my gcc compiler is to new lol
1825 2011-08-06 23:04:21 <XRcode> they are wasting their time anyways
1826 2011-08-06 23:04:53 <gmaxwell> Eliel: we discussed on IRC making the system give you an encoded version of the password, and making you write it down by forcing you to enter it on another dialog.
1827 2011-08-06 23:05:19 <gmaxwell> But I think the assumption is that people would just write it down using notepad and end up leaving it on the computer.
1828 2011-08-06 23:05:26 <msquared86> what the encryption should be is a randomly generated key dependant on the OS,the CPU, and maybe something else the things that dont get schanged often
1829 2011-08-06 23:05:44 <msquared86> a hardware based key
1830 2011-08-06 23:05:51 <Eliel> gmaxwell: I'd think most people would prefer paper.
1831 2011-08-06 23:05:52 <gmaxwell> msquared86: so great, you upgrade your hdd and lose all your coins?
1832 2011-08-06 23:05:52 <msquared86> encryption key rather
1833 2011-08-06 23:06:06 <gmaxwell> Eliel: perhaps, well, its something that could still be done in the future.
1834 2011-08-06 23:06:25 <msquared86> true but hardware key is dependant on keepingthe same hardware
1835 2011-08-06 23:06:48 <gmaxwell> e.g. enter your key, (next dialog) here is your recovery code, you MUST write it down, (next dialog) enter your recovery code. Don't know it? ha ha start again.
1836 2011-08-06 23:06:49 <msquared86> but if you go by things like OS motherboard or cpu the hardware that doesnt get changed often
1837 2011-08-06 23:06:53 Zagitta has quit ()
1838 2011-08-06 23:07:07 <gmaxwell> msquared86: great, so my MB _fails_ and I'm screwed? thats terrible.
1839 2011-08-06 23:07:43 <Eliel> gmaxwell: better make it not copy&pasteable too :)
1840 2011-08-06 23:07:44 <gmaxwell> plus someone with access to copy your wallet could probably copy that data too.
1841 2011-08-06 23:07:50 <gmaxwell> Eliel: yea, that much is obvious.
1842 2011-08-06 23:07:52 <Eliel> that should end up with most people using paper
1843 2011-08-06 23:07:55 <XRcode> yeah, that's not a good idea
1844 2011-08-06 23:08:06 <gmaxwell> Eliel: think so? I wouldn't. But I admit I'm weird.
1845 2011-08-06 23:08:17 <Eliel> gmaxwell: you're a techie :D
1846 2011-08-06 23:08:25 <XRcode> hardware failure should != lost coins
1847 2011-08-06 23:08:29 <gmaxwell> Eliel: one option would be to have a print function built in. Hopefully people would use that.
1848 2011-08-06 23:08:29 <XRcode> lol
1849 2011-08-06 23:08:40 Zagitta has joined
1850 2011-08-06 23:08:43 <Eliel> people with printers very likely would.
1851 2011-08-06 23:08:57 <msquared86> the key generation itself should be taken out of the users control
1852 2011-08-06 23:09:02 <msquared86> for the most part
1853 2011-08-06 23:09:17 <msquared86> or hash the shit outta there password
1854 2011-08-06 23:09:18 <gmaxwell> Eliel: it would actually be nice to have a full paper-wallet-backup function that produces QR-code private keys.. I couldn't find any small public domain QR encoder software though.
1855 2011-08-06 23:09:30 <gmaxwell> msquared86: it hashes the shit out of their password.
1856 2011-08-06 23:09:49 <Eliel> yes, full paper backup would be very nice too :)
1857 2011-08-06 23:09:50 <gmaxwell> Minimum of 25k rounds of sha-512, but its usually higher unless your computer is slow.
1858 2011-08-06 23:10:03 <Eliel> then you could easily include the wallet backup in your will, for example.
1859 2011-08-06 23:10:17 shLONG has joined
1860 2011-08-06 23:10:32 <gmaxwell> Eliel: I have a paper backup of my savings wallet... but you have to be a computer ninja to create such a thing. :)
1861 2011-08-06 23:11:23 <Eliel> gmaxwell: I read somewhere that doing SHA-256 twice loses a bit less than one bit of entropy. Are you familiar with the theory behind such?
1862 2011-08-06 23:11:47 <gmaxwell> Eliel: it's not simply stacked, it's using an apropriate key strenghtening algorithim.
1863 2011-08-06 23:12:17 <Eliel> ah, that sounds better then
1864 2011-08-06 23:12:43 <msquared86> uh oh
1865 2011-08-06 23:12:46 <gmaxwell> Eliel: You probably lose more than one, fwiw (due to interal collissions in SHA256). Though for most cases it doesn't matter. 128 bits of entropy is amply secure on physical grounds.
1866 2011-08-06 23:13:57 <gmaxwell> The key strenghtening iterates something like x=H(x||password||counter)
1867 2011-08-06 23:14:06 <b4epoche_> gmaxwell: my client spits out QR codes of priv keys
1868 2011-08-06 23:14:15 <Eliel> but I do like that the process to get the key from the password is slow :)
1869 2011-08-06 23:14:19 <gmaxwell> b4epoche_: oh you ended up implementing that, enh? cool.
1870 2011-08-06 23:14:56 <gmaxwell> Eliel: It takes 100ms IIRC. (unless your computer is really slow, then it takes however long 25k iterations takes)
1871 2011-08-06 23:15:04 <gmaxwell> b4epoche_: what QR library did you end up using?
1872 2011-08-06 23:15:09 <b4epoche_> yea, the only problem is that the only c-based qr generation library I found is LGPL which I'm not sure if compatible
1873 2011-08-06 23:15:24 <b4epoche_> qrencode is the name of the lib
1874 2011-08-06 23:15:29 <Eliel> wasn't one of the libraries bitcoin is using already LGPL?
1875 2011-08-06 23:15:55 <b4epoche_> I asked around about the LGPL and people didn't seen to be sure
1876 2011-08-06 23:15:55 <msquared86> damn
1877 2011-08-06 23:15:58 <gmaxwell> well, it's "compatible" with bitcoin's licensing, for sure.
1878 2011-08-06 23:16:11 shLONG has quit ()
1879 2011-08-06 23:16:13 <msquared86> lemme guess the blkindex is were all the blocks i dl are stored huh
1880 2011-08-06 23:16:15 <gmaxwell> But I'd assume anything included internally would want to be MIT/X11 licensed.
1881 2011-08-06 23:16:20 <gmaxwell> msquared86: kinda.
1882 2011-08-06 23:16:29 <gmaxwell> msquared86: its the index to the blocks you've downloaded.
1883 2011-08-06 23:16:37 <msquared86> but i were to say delete that file i would have to re download
1884 2011-08-06 23:16:42 <gmaxwell> Yes.
1885 2011-08-06 23:16:46 <msquared86> fuck lol
1886 2011-08-06 23:17:04 <msquared86> is that block chain on sourceforge updated
1887 2011-08-06 23:17:28 <b4epoche_> gmaxwell: yea, I was asking about including it in the official client
1888 2011-08-06 23:17:28 <gmaxwell> doesn't matter if its updated... if you get an old one you'll catch it up, better than a full re-download.
1889 2011-08-06 23:17:43 <msquared86> true i think i still have the link for it
1890 2011-08-06 23:17:56 <gmaxwell> b4epoche_: hm. Well, since it could just be linked to, I think that would probably be okay, especially since it's not a core feature.
1891 2011-08-06 23:18:23 <gmaxwell> E.g. someone who wanted to make a propritary all binary bitcoin client based on the official one could just leave out that feature.
1892 2011-08-06 23:18:33 <gmaxwell> (though who the @#$@ would run that?!?)
1893 2011-08-06 23:18:40 <b4epoche_> yea, I remember the consensus being "it's probably fine but we better ask someone else to make sure"
1894 2011-08-06 23:18:47 <msquared86> hmm it seems my bitcoin address has changed i thought it never changed?
1895 2011-08-06 23:19:10 <gmaxwell> msquared86: you don't have "a bitcoin address" you have many addresses.
1896 2011-08-06 23:19:44 <gmaxwell> you can still recieve money at all the old ones your client knows about (and it will know about all of them unless your wallet has been damaged)
1897 2011-08-06 23:19:55 <msquared86> aahh cool
1898 2011-08-06 23:20:48 <gmaxwell> b4epoche_: what do your paper backups look like?
1899 2011-08-06 23:20:52 <msquared86> gmaxwell: if you were to go buy some bitcoins what site would you buy them from mtgox traderhill or bitcoin market
1900 2011-08-06 23:21:19 <b4epoche_> gmaxwell: well at present just a grid of QR codes
1901 2011-08-06 23:21:25 <gmaxwell> mtgox is still the largest, most liquid exchange.
1902 2011-08-06 23:21:49 <msquared86> even though noone trusts them lol atleast not hte guys in #bitcoin
1903 2011-08-06 23:21:52 <msquared86> lol
1904 2011-08-06 23:21:57 moa7 has joined
1905 2011-08-06 23:21:59 <gmaxwell> b4epoche_: thats probably reasonable. I suppose there is an argument against putting a notice at the top: "THIS IS A BITCOIN WALLET BACKUP. ITS WORTH LOTS OF MONEY. PLEASE STEAL IT"
1906 2011-08-06 23:22:25 <b4epoche_> gmaxwell: yea, it is still really just a proof-of-concept
1907 2011-08-06 23:22:29 <b4epoche_> http://snapplr.com/3a7p
1908 2011-08-06 23:22:43 <b4epoche_> testnet in case anyone wants to scan them ;-)
1909 2011-08-06 23:22:54 <gmaxwell> heheh
1910 2011-08-06 23:23:13 <msquared86> wow mtgox is at 7.54
1911 2011-08-06 23:23:14 <gmaxwell> I suppose it might make sense to print the address under each QR code.
1912 2011-08-06 23:23:50 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1913 2011-08-06 23:24:13 <b4epoche_> gmaxwell: yea, but there's kinda a space issue. I need to think about how to organize all the information in relatively tight space (i.e. a few pages)
1914 2011-08-06 23:24:48 <gmaxwell> b4epoche_: how many private keys are you getting per page that way?
1915 2011-08-06 23:24:48 <b4epoche_> that's why it's really just a grid atm⦠I haven't put much thought into it
1916 2011-08-06 23:24:51 <gmaxwell> Also, what mode are you using?
1917 2011-08-06 23:25:16 <gmaxwell> you're at least fitting one key per QR, right?
1918 2011-08-06 23:25:18 Myckel has quit (Quit: Ik ga weg)
1919 2011-08-06 23:25:53 <b4epoche_> well, atm, there is 9x12 on a page
1920 2011-08-06 23:26:10 <b4epoche_> but I can always shrink/grow the QR images
1921 2011-08-06 23:26:30 Diablo-D3 has joined
1922 2011-08-06 23:26:35 <b4epoche_> it's the base58 version of the key
1923 2011-08-06 23:26:52 b4epoche_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1924 2011-08-06 23:26:52 <gmaxwell> I guess thats easiest to read.
1925 2011-08-06 23:27:06 <gmaxwell> Might be interesting to sort the keys by balance.
1926 2011-08-06 23:27:38 b4epoche_ has joined
1927 2011-08-06 23:28:01 <b4epoche_> sorry, satellite internet sux...
1928 2011-08-06 23:28:19 <b4epoche_> [19:20:35] <b4epoche_> well, atm, there is 9x12 on a page
1929 2011-08-06 23:28:19 <b4epoche_> [19:20:52] <b4epoche_> but I can always shrink/grow the QR images
1930 2011-08-06 23:28:19 <b4epoche_> [19:21:17] <b4epoche_> it's the base58 version of the key
1931 2011-08-06 23:28:26 <b4epoche_> not sure if that went through
1932 2011-08-06 23:29:49 <gmaxwell> Yep. got it.
1933 2011-08-06 23:30:09 <gmaxwell> looks like you missed:
1934 2011-08-06 23:30:12 <gmaxwell> 16:21 < b4epoche_> it's the base58 version of the key
1935 2011-08-06 23:30:14 <gmaxwell> 16:21 < gmaxwell> I guess thats easiest to read.
1936 2011-08-06 23:30:15 <gmaxwell> 16:21 < gmaxwell> Might be interesting to sort the keys by balance.
1937 2011-08-06 23:31:06 <b4epoche_> they're just grabbed via sipa's walletdump'ing code
1938 2011-08-06 23:32:02 B0g4r7_ has joined
1939 2011-08-06 23:34:44 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1940 2011-08-06 23:34:44 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
1941 2011-08-06 23:38:12 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1942 2011-08-06 23:38:12 groffer has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1943 2011-08-06 23:42:45 Rabbit67890 has joined
1944 2011-08-06 23:43:56 Rabbit67890 has quit (Client Quit)
1945 2011-08-06 23:45:14 Rabbit67890 has joined
1946 2011-08-06 23:45:24 davex__ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1947 2011-08-06 23:47:14 Stellar has joined
1948 2011-08-06 23:52:07 devrandom has joined
1949 2011-08-06 23:52:07 groffer has joined
1950 2011-08-06 23:54:40 Zagitta has quit ()
1951 2011-08-06 23:54:50 Titeuf_87 has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
1952 2011-08-06 23:58:37 <MrSam> bleh
1953 2011-08-06 23:58:38 hrngfd has joined
1954 2011-08-06 23:58:38 <MrSam> ntgox
1955 2011-08-06 23:58:41 <MrSam> here we go again