1 2012-12-26 00:04:43 TwilightSparklee has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
  2 2012-12-26 00:20:23 Detritus has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
  3 2012-12-26 00:26:24 zeks2 has quit ()
  4 2012-12-26 00:27:17 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
  5 2012-12-26 00:32:33 zeks2 has joined
  6 2012-12-26 00:33:05 freakazoid has joined
  7 2012-12-26 00:35:40 zeks2 has quit ()
  8 2012-12-26 00:35:55 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  9 2012-12-26 00:59:13 kiceek has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 10 2012-12-26 01:06:28 TwilightSparklee has joined
 11 2012-12-26 01:19:24 TwilightSparklee has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
 12 2012-12-26 01:19:41 Tritonio has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 13 2012-12-26 01:26:14 TwilightSparklee has joined
 14 2012-12-26 01:34:48 graingert has joined
 15 2012-12-26 01:34:58 graingert has left ()
 16 2012-12-26 01:39:36 ByteUnit has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 17 2012-12-26 01:41:32 TwilightSparklee has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
 18 2012-12-26 01:42:21 Lefont has joined
 19 2012-12-26 01:44:23 <Lefont> Hey there merry christmas everyone!... was hoping someone could help me with a question i have? I am trying to install bitcoinD on an amazon server server ...any one know of any guides that can help me do this
 20 2012-12-26 01:45:31 <pigeons> only thing i can think is amazon uses ecdsa-less openssl i think so roll your own openssl for bitcoin
 21 2012-12-26 01:46:17 <Scrat> pigeons: or not use AMI
 22 2012-12-26 01:46:31 <pigeons> yeah or that
 23 2012-12-26 01:49:11 <da2ce7> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2128
 24 2012-12-26 01:53:01 <Lefont> not sure what you mean pigeon? ..also i am working on a web project and we decided to host on amazon..so for right now i dont have a choice...we orginaly had the headless bitcoind cient running on another amazon instance but we had to upgrade it...it was set up by someone else =(
 25 2012-12-26 01:54:15 <pigeons> well you have a choice cause you can run debian on aws
 26 2012-12-26 01:54:44 <pigeons> but yeah it runs on amazon linux, but you need to compile an openssl that has ecdsa support
 27 2012-12-26 01:58:11 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 28 2012-12-26 02:00:54 Azelphur has quit (Excess Flood)
 29 2012-12-26 02:03:34 Azelphur has joined
 30 2012-12-26 02:03:37 Lefont has left ()
 31 2012-12-26 02:04:56 MC1984 has joined
 32 2012-12-26 02:06:53 Detritus has joined
 33 2012-12-26 02:08:30 freakazoid has joined
 34 2012-12-26 02:12:23 dvide has quit ()
 35 2012-12-26 02:14:08 mykhal has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 36 2012-12-26 02:15:06 mmoya_ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 37 2012-12-26 02:17:08 Kiba has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 38 2012-12-26 02:19:56 mykhal has joined
 39 2012-12-26 02:26:48 harkon has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 40 2012-12-26 02:26:56 harkon_ has joined
 41 2012-12-26 02:27:46 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 42 2012-12-26 02:40:05 skeledrew has joined
 43 2012-12-26 02:48:29 <gmaxwell> wumpus: Can you explain ExitTimeout to me? (in particular why do we have it and why only on win32?)  The commit that added it wasn't super informative. :P
 44 2012-12-26 02:59:03 cheako has quit (Quit: Client exiting)
 45 2012-12-26 03:06:35 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: how much work would it be to make a variant of the satoshi client that forwards all transactions it receives?  it is just as simple as changing MIN_TX_FEE and MIN_RELAY_TX_FEE to zero?
 46 2012-12-26 03:07:54 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: (err, not ALL tx, just the low-fee tx that wouldn't normally be forwarded)
 47 2012-12-26 03:10:59 <Luke-Jr> etotheipi_: that's not how I do it, at least
 48 2012-12-26 03:11:20 <etotheipi_> well, how *do* you do it?
 49 2012-12-26 03:11:43 <Luke-Jr> http://gitorious.org/~Luke-Jr/bitcoin/luke-jr-bitcoin/commits/free_relay
 50 2012-12-26 03:12:02 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: define all?  That would avoid the fee related filtering. But not non-standardness checks. Watcha trying to accomplish?
 51 2012-12-26 03:12:13 <Luke-Jr> etotheipi_: actually, you also need to bypass the non-standard checks
 52 2012-12-26 03:12:34 <gmaxwell> Relaying by itself isn't going to do you any good if your peers won't relay either.
 53 2012-12-26 03:13:38 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell, I'm writing a monitoring script that will run (as usual) with bitcoind as my gateway to the network
 54 2012-12-26 03:13:58 <etotheipi_> and I just want to make sure that any zero-fee tx that the bitcoind instance sees make it to my script
 55 2012-12-26 03:14:15 <Luke-Jr> etotheipi_: like #Bitcoin-watch ?
 56 2012-12-26 03:14:41 <etotheipi_> Luke-Jr: I don't know what that is
 57 2012-12-26 03:14:54 <Luke-Jr> /j #bitcoin-watch
 58 2012-12-26 03:15:18 <etotheipi_> but yeah, I'm not trying to send zero-fee tx, I just want to make sure that bitcoind forwards them to me (and I guess all the peers)
 59 2012-12-26 03:16:54 <gmaxwell> yea, you don't want what you think you want.
 60 2012-12-26 03:17:10 <gmaxwell> Presumably for monitoring you actually want to see invalid transactions, right?
 61 2012-12-26 03:17:19 <gmaxwell> But if you relay those to your peers they will ban your IP.
 62 2012-12-26 03:17:53 rubbabandman has joined
 63 2012-12-26 03:18:09 * Luke-Jr ponders if 0.8 is going to ban blockchain.info O.o
 64 2012-12-26 03:18:11 <gmaxwell> (not to mention that you'll be a DOS multiplier— which is why nodes get banned for black and white invalidity where it can be easily detected)
 65 2012-12-26 03:18:42 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: what do you mean by "invalid"?
 66 2012-12-26 03:18:51 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: what, because of noncanonical signatures? no— we wouldn't DoS for that, and they've mostly fixed it.
 67 2012-12-26 03:18:55 kiba has joined
 68 2012-12-26 03:19:01 rubbabandman has quit (Client Quit)
 69 2012-12-26 03:19:03 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: because master is DoS-banning for invalid P2SH
 70 2012-12-26 03:19:25 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: are they forwarding invalid p2sh?
 71 2012-12-26 03:19:33 <etotheipi_> I don't want "invalid" in the strictest sense
 72 2012-12-26 03:19:34 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: I imagine so, since they index them
 73 2012-12-26 03:19:48 <etotheipi_> I just want transactions that normally wouldn't meet the fee requirement
 74 2012-12-26 03:19:59 <etotheipi_> and I know stock bitcoind will not forward such transactions
 75 2012-12-26 03:20:05 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: okay, then turning down your fee requirements would work.
 76 2012-12-26 03:20:17 <gmaxwell> If you start opening up other things you may risk your node getting banned.
 77 2012-12-26 03:20:31 <Luke-Jr> I think even my return 0 from GetMinFee will still implicate the free-flooding code
 78 2012-12-26 03:20:43 <etotheipi_> it sounds like there's a subnetwork of nodes that have also turned down the fee reqt
 79 2012-12-26 03:20:54 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: no, not really.
 80 2012-12-26 03:21:07 <Luke-Jr> etotheipi_: *mostly* just me/Eligius
 81 2012-12-26 03:21:25 <gmaxwell> (there were some vague efforts, and at times even luke's own nodes haven't managed to do it)
 82 2012-12-26 03:21:49 <gmaxwell> and luke's don't set them at zero.
 83 2012-12-26 03:21:54 <gmaxwell> IIRC.
 84 2012-12-26 03:22:11 <etotheipi_> I seem to remember hearing in the past that lots of tx that normally wouldn't be free... will still get mined , usually
 85 2012-12-26 03:22:35 <etotheipi_> that means there must be at least one significant miner, and some critical threshold of nodes that forward them (I guess it wouldn't have to be a large proportion)
 86 2012-12-26 03:22:35 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: Nope.
 87 2012-12-26 03:23:19 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: There is a lot of confusion that arises because the free criteria changes, and because big pools process their own transactions. (also, luke has his backdoor agreements with varrious folks)
 88 2012-12-26 03:23:19 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: I do zero for relaying
 89 2012-12-26 03:23:34 <etotheipi_> well... I guess I'll find out
 90 2012-12-26 03:23:39 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: er, changes was ambigious, I mean its time dependant.
 91 2012-12-26 03:24:07 <Luke-Jr> hmm, valgrind is behaving very oddly
 92 2012-12-26 03:24:41 <Luke-Jr> realloc(p, 0x7fffffff) is returning NULL, yet it claims ==6394==   total heap usage: 2 allocs, 1 frees, 2,147,483,648 bytes allocated
 93 2012-12-26 03:24:41 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: there is, for example that crazy ShadowHerringbone guy on the forum who is utterly convinced that the fee rules are purely local because he has had successful txn "violating" them— but whats really happening is that he forms a txn that violates them and then just retransmits them until they actually do get relayed.
 94 2012-12-26 03:25:25 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
 95 2012-12-26 03:26:16 TwilightSparklee has joined
 96 2012-12-26 03:28:40 <etotheipi_> you don't get banned for that, correct?
 97 2012-12-26 03:29:22 <gmaxwell> Nope.
 98 2012-12-26 03:30:17 <gmaxwell> I'm having a hard time being clear tonight, I see—  "until they actually do get relayed" because the criteria depends on how many confirmations a transaction has, so a couple more blocks is often enough to get a transaction over the hump.
 99 2012-12-26 03:30:28 <stealth222> I'm working on a listener architecture that can plug in to filter any messages from peers and pass them through to another component
100 2012-12-26 03:30:51 <stealth222> so you can do that without relaying invalid stuff to peers
101 2012-12-26 03:32:01 <stealth222> I'd also love to be able to receive notifications on strange transactions and doublespend attempts and stuff like that
102 2012-12-26 03:32:11 <gmaxwell> Yea, that what you'd want for a monitoring thing.
103 2012-12-26 03:32:24 <gmaxwell> stealth222: keep in mind that it's super duper lossy for doublespend attempts since they aren't relayed.
104 2012-12-26 03:32:54 nus- has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
105 2012-12-26 03:33:11 <stealth222> gmaxwell: to really do doublespend attempt detection, you'd have to be connected to the right set of peers
106 2012-12-26 03:33:14 nus- has joined
107 2012-12-26 03:33:27 <stealth222> probably miners are the best bet
108 2012-12-26 03:33:33 <SomeoneWeird> does the satoshi client actually ban nodes ?
109 2012-12-26 03:33:35 <gmaxwell> SomeoneWeird: sure.
110 2012-12-26 03:33:45 <SomeoneWeird> ic
111 2012-12-26 03:33:47 <SomeoneWeird> TIL
112 2012-12-26 03:33:47 <etotheipi_> well, I'm trying to detect something fairly specific and unexciting, so I don't need anything flexible or customizable
113 2012-12-26 03:34:05 <etotheipi_> I just want to make sure I see all valid tx, not just the ones with the correct fee
114 2012-12-26 03:34:15 <Luke-Jr> SomeoneWeird: only if they blatently violate immovable rules
115 2012-12-26 03:34:19 <stealth222> the simplest approach, etotheipi, is probobably to stick in your own custom code into ProcessMessage and send that stuff over to another program
116 2012-12-26 03:34:21 B0g4r7_ has joined
117 2012-12-26 03:34:36 <Luke-Jr> SomeoneWeird: like flooding blocks with low hashes
118 2012-12-26 03:35:07 <gmaxwell> stealth222: "to really do doublespend" even thats really lossy. You can't identify most of the miners in any case, nothing obligates them to realay any particular transactions, etc.
119 2012-12-26 03:35:33 <stealth222> gmaxwell, I'm saying hypothetically - if you could
120 2012-12-26 03:35:43 <etotheipi_> stealth222: actually I think the minfee() returns zero thing is perfect... I've already got an armory-based listener connect to my bitcoind hearing the relayed tx
121 2012-12-26 03:35:43 <stealth222> if you could know the mempool of a good set of miners
122 2012-12-26 03:35:52 <gmaxwell> stealth222: We could extend the protocol to make doublespend detection pretty reliable absent a Finney attack, but until we do no matter how hard you try it will be pretty flaky.
123 2012-12-26 03:36:09 <SomeoneWeird> ah, makes sense Luke-Jr
124 2012-12-26 03:36:38 <stealth222> gmaxwell: I suppose you're right. I still think a listener architecture that supports custom filters is a good idea :)
125 2012-12-26 03:37:02 <gmaxwell> stealth222: sure sure, I agree. useful for stuff, but not guarding against conflicting transactions.
126 2012-12-26 03:37:46 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
127 2012-12-26 03:37:46 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
128 2012-12-26 03:37:51 <gmaxwell> stealth222: if you feel like doing more wallet stuff with the reference client— we really ought be be able to return negative confirmations (e.g. for transactions which are conflicted and are expected to never confirm— e.g. they should show -N confirmations where N is the depth of the earliest conflict in the chain)
129 2012-12-26 03:39:35 <Luke-Jr> ^ once this is done, allowing users to delete transactions with -6 confirms would probably be trivial
130 2012-12-26 03:39:35 <stealth222> ah, yes. I could certainly do that
131 2012-12-26 03:41:24 <gmaxwell> Yea, we should stop relaying at -1 (for one, that identifies us as the source/dest of the txn!).  And allow switching a transaction directly into an 'aborted' state directly at -6.
132 2012-12-26 03:41:38 <etotheipi_> when's the last time the fee rules were changed?  is it possible that there's a sufficient subset of nodes still running an older version that would essentially have different forwarding/acceptance rules?
133 2012-12-26 03:42:38 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: over a year ago, and the prior rules required higher fees.
134 2012-12-26 03:42:38 <Luke-Jr> etotheipi_: pretty likely
135 2012-12-26 03:42:38 <Luke-Jr> etotheipi_: Deepbit still runs 0.3.x
136 2012-12-26 03:43:03 <etotheipi_> I don't really care which direction.. the important part is being able to exploit the split
137 2012-12-26 03:43:03 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: you're missing the word 'sufficient'
138 2012-12-26 03:43:04 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: exploit for what purpose?
139 2012-12-26 03:43:52 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: if you want to doublespend sdice, you can just use luke's pool as he'll mine txn with much lower fees than most nodes will relay.
140 2012-12-26 03:44:06 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: my only concern was whether transactions can be created that will be accepted by one subnetwork but not the others
141 2012-12-26 03:44:31 <gmaxwell> There should also probably be an abort-requested state that you can put a transaction in so long as it has <=0 confirms, which stops relaying and converts into an abort state after 144 blocks or something.
142 2012-12-26 03:44:41 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: uh. define accepted?
143 2012-12-26 03:45:06 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: forwarded and/or mined
144 2012-12-26 03:45:23 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: in the chain? No that would be horrible. For relay? sure. well— some nodes at least. No reason to think that the oddball nodes form a connected partition.
145 2012-12-26 03:45:50 <stealth222> it would also be nice to know how long the dependency chain for an unconfirmed transaction is. That's to say, how many transactions would need to get confirmed until it can get confirmed
146 2012-12-26 03:46:01 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: didn't you just say that Luke's pull will mine such tx?
147 2012-12-26 03:46:16 <stealth222> and perhaps also get a fee total for all these transactions
148 2012-12-26 03:46:20 <stealth222> and size
149 2012-12-26 03:46:26 <stealth222> so you can assess double-spend risk
150 2012-12-26 03:46:31 <gmaxwell> the last fee change was over a year ago, it decreased the basefee for relay/mining from 0.01. Any node running code that old will tend to mine invalid blocks. If there are miners with different criteria they've been modified by their operators.
151 2012-12-26 03:46:49 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: luke's _pool_.
152 2012-12-26 03:47:50 fiesh_ has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
153 2012-12-26 03:49:07 <etotheipi_> er... yeah, "pool"
154 2012-12-26 03:49:07 <Luke-Jr> I think there's a disconnect on meanings here. All nodes will accept any valid transaction in blocks, that is consistent across ~all clients.
155 2012-12-26 03:49:07 <gmaxwell> stealth222: what you really want to know is the _size_ of a transaction including all its unconfirmed parents, or better— the group priority.. though no one yet uses that for txn decisions.
156 2012-12-26 03:49:07 <Luke-Jr> But they vary on what they will put in their own
157 2012-12-26 03:49:07 <etotheipi_> Luke-Jr: agreed...
158 2012-12-26 03:51:43 TwilightSparklee has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
159 2012-12-26 03:51:45 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: Yes, luke runs non-standard rules but in may ways he is unique in that. (though there are other pools with some differences in their behavior)
160 2012-12-26 03:51:45 fiesh has joined
161 2012-12-26 03:52:50 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
162 2012-12-26 03:52:50 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: unfortunately it's basically impossible to sniff out the behavior because you can't see any private dealings. :(
163 2012-12-26 03:52:51 <gmaxwell> e.g. luke's pool mines txn's selected by parties he has business relationships with even if they wouldn't meet even his rules. And all major pools mine their own payouts even if they wouldn't meet their own inclusion rules.
164 2012-12-26 03:52:51 <gmaxwell> what you can try to do is observe when things don't get mined.
165 2012-12-26 03:52:51 Cory has quit ()
166 2012-12-26 03:52:51 <gmaxwell> But even that is lossy, — some parties block all dice transactions now. so you might guess that txn with those fees aren't enough to get them mined, when in fact they are but they're being selectively blocked.
167 2012-12-26 03:54:56 <gmaxwell> so on my public node with 98 peers currently I see that I have one peer that is old enough that it wouldn't fail to relay a low priority txn.
168 2012-12-26 03:55:03 <gmaxwell> 0.3.19 will, IIRC.
169 2012-12-26 03:56:09 <gmaxwell> but ...         "startingheight" : 178622,
170 2012-12-26 03:56:09 <gmaxwell> it's stuck.
171 2012-12-26 04:01:01 <etotheipi_> one other clarification:  it's true that if bitcoind relays a tx, that bitcoind instance also added it to its memory pool, so any conflicting tx will be DOA?
172 2012-12-26 04:01:27 <etotheipi_> are there instances where bitcoind forwards but doesn't add it to its own pool?
173 2012-12-26 04:09:04 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: all actions with a txn recieved from the network get conditioned on the node accepting it into its mempool.
174 2012-12-26 04:09:05 <gmaxwell> That said, I believe a node with a local wallet will rebroadcast its own _conflicted_ transactions.
175 2012-12-26 04:09:05 <stealth222> gmaxwell: so the scenario you're considering presumably only deals with transactions in the mempool, right?
176 2012-12-26 04:09:05 <stealth222> for the negative confirmation thing
177 2012-12-26 04:09:05 <stealth222> I'm still getting acquainted with the details of all the reference client structures
178 2012-12-26 04:09:05 <gmaxwell> stealth222: the negative confirmations would be in the _chain_. Yea, not entirely trivial.
179 2012-12-26 04:10:40 <stealth222> is it the case that all transactions stored in the reference client are either in the main chain or are in the mempool?
180 2012-12-26 04:10:40 <gmaxwell> e.g. you'd have a unconfirmed txn in the wallet (and presumably the mempool) and then it gets conflicted by a new block. This ejects it from the mempool and the wallet should read -1.
181 2012-12-26 04:10:40 <gmaxwell> stealth222: No, the wallet has transactions in it too.
182 2012-12-26 04:10:40 <stealth222> oh, right. so then the scenario is you receive bitcoins, the transaction is stored in your wallet (it goes through the mempool first), then a block comes in that conflicts, it gets removed from the mempool but stays in your wallet?
183 2012-12-26 04:10:40 <gmaxwell> So for example, if someone pays you, and then that payment is conflicted by a block the payment will only exist in your wallet— it's not permitted in the mempool because its invalid relative to the current chain.  If there is a reorg and the conflict falls out you'll rebroadcast and potentially get it back in.
184 2012-12-26 04:10:40 <gmaxwell> Bingo.
185 2012-12-26 04:10:40 <gmaxwell> And right now it just shows confirms forever.
186 2012-12-26 04:10:40 <gmaxwell> This is especially annoying if you're the sender and only some of the inputs it consumes are conflicted.
187 2012-12-26 04:10:40 <gmaxwell> As that basically locks up some of your funds and makes then forever unspendable (until you get out a hex editor)
188 2012-12-26 04:10:40 <stealth222> what if both transactions are to that wallet? will the wallet ever see the second one?
189 2012-12-26 04:10:40 <gmaxwell> And as a reciever you don't discover you've been robbed until much later.
190 2012-12-26 04:11:56 <gmaxwell> stealth222: It will.
191 2012-12-26 04:11:56 <stealth222> so the second one will be treated correctly by the wallet but not the first
192 2012-12-26 04:11:56 <stealth222> that's to say, the one that does get confirmed
193 2012-12-26 04:12:06 <gmaxwell> Right. Well 'correctly' ... it'll just show as an unconfirmed txn forever.
194 2012-12-26 04:13:27 <gmaxwell> So it would be good if we could show negative confirmations— the reciever would learn they got robbed faster.. and we could allow the sender to eventually 'abort' a hopeless transaction. (if we just allow random aborting people would footgun themselves by aborting transactions which aren't at all hopeless)
195 2012-12-26 04:13:27 skeledrew has quit (Quit: Instantbird 1.3 -- http://www.instantbird.com)
196 2012-12-26 04:14:10 <stealth222> so this is then *only* an issue with wallet transactions. not mempool transactions, right?
197 2012-12-26 04:14:10 <gmaxwell> Right.
198 2012-12-26 04:15:27 <stealth222> getrawtransaction won't keep returning the killed transaction
199 2012-12-26 04:15:27 <stealth222> but gettransaction will
200 2012-12-26 04:15:27 <stealth222> correct?
201 2012-12-26 04:15:27 <gmaxwell> the fact that getrawtransaction doesn't consult the wallet seems a bit buggy to me. :P
202 2012-12-26 04:15:27 owowo has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
203 2012-12-26 04:15:28 <gmaxwell> but yes.
204 2012-12-26 04:16:49 <stealth222> I'm trying to work with what's there but with an eye towards an eventual split between the block chain/relay engine and the wallet
205 2012-12-26 04:16:49 Z0rZ0rZ0r1 has joined
206 2012-12-26 04:16:49 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Disconnected by services)
207 2012-12-26 04:16:49 <gmaxwell> Hm! point.
208 2012-12-26 04:16:49 Impaler has joined
209 2012-12-26 04:18:05 <gmaxwell> The data you need for this is 'txn X got consumed at height Y'  the blockchain can easily tell us if its currently available for spending or not— but getting the height is problematic.
210 2012-12-26 04:18:54 <gmaxwell> I wonder if actually counting the negative height is worth it then. :-/ Since you can't just query the utxo set for that information.
211 2012-12-26 04:18:54 <stealth222> yeah, we'd need to store another index to make retrieval fast
212 2012-12-26 04:18:54 <gmaxwell> yea, thats not worth it.
213 2012-12-26 04:20:09 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: thoughts on this?
214 2012-12-26 04:20:09 owowo has joined
215 2012-12-26 04:20:17 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
216 2012-12-26 04:20:17 [7] has joined
217 2012-12-26 04:22:42 <stealth222> the behavior you're describing is very problematic, though - it's begging for a solution
218 2012-12-26 04:23:54 <stealth222> if we don't index the block chain to make arbitrary retrieval fast, at least we can check the wallet for conflicts when adding a tx to the mempool
219 2012-12-26 04:24:05 <stealth222> or when synching, rather
220 2012-12-26 04:24:05 <stealth222> and conflicted transactions can be flagged
221 2012-12-26 04:24:05 <gmaxwell> Right but that breaks the wallet chain abstraction barrier.
222 2012-12-26 04:24:32 <stealth222> yeah, it's far from ideal
223 2012-12-26 04:24:32 <gmaxwell> (esp because it needs to handle reorgs)
224 2012-12-26 04:24:42 <gmaxwell> The alternative is to just note that its parent transactions appear to not exist.
225 2012-12-26 04:24:46 <gmaxwell> E.g. the confirms is negative, we just don't know how negative it is.
226 2012-12-26 04:25:14 skeledrew has joined
227 2012-12-26 04:26:09 <stealth222> or yet another alternative is to add an RPC call to do a slow recursive search
228 2012-12-26 04:28:17 <stealth222> presumably this isn't something someone would be doing very frequently
229 2012-12-26 04:30:28 <gmaxwell> uh. it should be displayed in the UI in a very clear way. Is every 20ms not frequently? :P
230 2012-12-26 04:30:29 <stealth222> the wallet shows 0 conf. the recipient starts to suspect they might have gotten cheated, they can then invoke a check
231 2012-12-26 04:30:29 <gmaxwell> (e.g. a conflicted txn should turn red and display unhappy faces and skulls and crossbones and such)
232 2012-12-26 04:30:29 <stealth222> or we can have a timer
233 2012-12-26 04:30:29 <stealth222> if a transaction remains at 0 confirmations for a certain amount of time, we do the check
234 2012-12-26 04:30:29 <gmaxwell> Rescaning the blockchain isn't viable long term no matter how infrequently you hope to poll it. For one, the node may not even have the data.
235 2012-12-26 04:31:35 <stealth222> the long term solution is to have a way of querying block by transaction hash
236 2012-12-26 04:31:35 <gmaxwell> but the most important data— is the transaction potentially viable from my perspective— is always available and cheaply so.
237 2012-12-26 04:31:35 <gmaxwell> stealth222: no, thats not viable for a general node.
238 2012-12-26 04:31:35 <gmaxwell> we just took out the ability to do that in git. 0.7.x can.
239 2012-12-26 04:31:35 <gmaxwell> having an full index over past transactions means you can't forget them, and it's a rather large and growing index (>>1gb now) which is expensive to maintain and increases the cost of running a node.
240 2012-12-26 04:31:47 <stealth222> what about a bloom filter over spent outputs?
241 2012-12-26 04:32:10 <gmaxwell> stealth222: you need to be able to reorg.
242 2012-12-26 04:32:54 <gmaxwell> subtraction from a bloom filter requires a full reconstruction. Unless you have a counting bloom filter, which greatly increases the size, and still leaves it lossy.
243 2012-12-26 04:32:54 <gmaxwell> I also don't see what that accomplishes.
244 2012-12-26 04:32:55 <gmaxwell> You can tell when an input is not spendable by the unspent txoutset returning nothing.
245 2012-12-26 04:33:46 <gmaxwell> You just can't tell why it's not spendable. e.g. where it was conflicted, by whom, or if the parent never existed in the first place.
246 2012-12-26 04:34:07 <gmaxwell> (though I don't think we'll ever accept an orphan txn into the wallet.)
247 2012-12-26 04:34:07 <gmaxwell> (though I don't think we'll ever accept an orphan txn into the wallet.)
248 2012-12-26 04:38:48 <gmaxwell> I suppose that this is better in any case. How would a Confirmations: -conflict_depth   work when a txn itself wasn't conflicted, but one of its inputs was? I suppose you could state that height, but it gets messy.
249 2012-12-26 04:40:09 <stealth222> you'd have to recurse the inputs, no?
250 2012-12-26 04:41:18 <gmaxwell> Yes, but then the idea of tracking the height of conflicts with just your wallet txn becomes messy and you end up needing to potentially track it for all parents
251 2012-12-26 04:42:45 t7 has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
252 2012-12-26 04:45:51 <stealth222> there are two conflicting objectives here: 1) the ability to perform fast queries on arbitrary bitcoin data. 2) a lightweight client that provides a wallet which doesn't require connecting to a trusted server
253 2012-12-26 04:45:51 <gmaxwell> nope.
254 2012-12-26 04:45:51 <gmaxwell> :P
255 2012-12-26 04:45:51 <stealth222> if I'm wrong, please enlighten me :)
256 2012-12-26 04:48:17 <gmaxwell> It's not a question of running a 'a lightweight client', its a question keeping it viable to run a bitcoin node on commodity hardware at all.
257 2012-12-26 04:48:17 <stealth222> a bitcoin node shouldn't have to store all the data locally - but the bitcoin protocol should still allow queries of it
258 2012-12-26 04:48:17 <gmaxwell> And, sure, support for fast queries on arbitrary bitcoin data is fine as an optional thing— for local block explorer stuff.. but it's not something we can make wallet functionality depend on.
259 2012-12-26 04:48:17 <gmaxwell> stealth222: yes/no.
260 2012-12-26 04:53:40 <gmaxwell> It's not acceptable to ask nodes to process queries for data which is unrelated to the current operation of the network.
261 2012-12-26 04:53:40 freakazoid has joined
262 2012-12-26 04:53:43 <gmaxwell> The problem is that if you require a 1 tb index of historic data to run a bitcoin node (so that it can answer queries for your 'lite wallets') then basically no one will do it— except perhaps people who have a financial or economic-political interest in giving dishonest replies.
263 2012-12-26 04:53:44 <stealth222> or in charging fees for the service
264 2012-12-26 04:53:45 <gmaxwell> So we're unwilling to add any query capability facing the public network which isn't ~free once you're taking the cost of enforcing the bitcoin rules.
265 2012-12-26 04:53:47 <gmaxwell> Sure. Thats possible too— but it rapidly diverges from your "which doesn't require connecting to a trusted server" if you expect a wallet to use it.
266 2012-12-26 04:53:47 <stealth222> right - that's my point
267 2012-12-26 04:53:47 <gmaxwell> Well I'm not following you then.  A wallet's basic functionality doesn't actually need queries which are expensive for a node which is doing the minimum required to validate the chain. It does if you want fancy block explorerish functionality.
268 2012-12-26 04:53:48 wumpus has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
269 2012-12-26 05:31:21 wumpus has joined
270 2012-12-26 05:33:09 <gmaxwell> not sure what version you're looking at— here that code is in wallet.cpp.
271 2012-12-26 05:33:09 <stealth222> I'm looking at bitcoin/bitcoin master, I believe
272 2012-12-26 05:33:09 <stealth222> err
273 2012-12-26 05:33:09 <stealth222> sorry, yeah
274 2012-12-26 05:33:09 <stealth222> I meant wallet.cpp
275 2012-12-26 05:33:09 <stealth222> sorry :p
276 2012-12-26 05:33:09 owowo has quit (Quit: sayonara)
277 2012-12-26 05:33:09 <stealth222> so if any of the transaction inputs are not in a block, the wallet ignores it?
278 2012-12-26 05:33:09 <gmaxwell> I just mean that the wallet currently only tracks transactions which are IsMine (or IsFromMe). No, it doesn't ignore those.
279 2012-12-26 05:33:10 <gmaxwell> (the code you're pointing at is the timestamp tracking stuff)
280 2012-12-26 05:33:10 owowo has joined
281 2012-12-26 05:33:10 <gmaxwell> stealth222: when a txn is accepted into the mempool it means that the parents are either spendable in the chain, or in the mempool already.  Those transactions get handed to the wallet for inspection, and if they are from/to the wallet it takes them.
282 2012-12-26 05:33:10 wumpus has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
283 2012-12-26 06:01:55 wumpus has joined
284 2012-12-26 06:20:00 Impaler has joined
285 2012-12-26 06:30:20 owowo has quit (Quit: sayonara)
286 2012-12-26 06:30:36 root2 has joined
287 2012-12-26 06:30:49 owowo has joined
288 2012-12-26 06:36:37 owowo has quit (Quit: sayonara)
289 2012-12-26 06:36:54 LargoG has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
290 2012-12-26 06:37:17 owowo has joined
291 2012-12-26 06:43:28 forgot has joined
292 2012-12-26 06:46:52 <forgot> how does increasing job.time per second affect mining rate?
293 2012-12-26 06:47:34 Godzilla123 has joined
294 2012-12-26 06:49:04 <Godzilla123> Hi I have a question that I am hoping to get the answer for without looking into the source :P
295 2012-12-26 06:49:50 <Godzilla123> When is a unspent output removed from the pool of unspent outputs? Does the client wait for the output to be included in a mined block or immediately as it is referenced?
296 2012-12-26 06:51:16 owowo has quit (Quit: sayonara)
297 2012-12-26 06:51:41 owowo has joined
298 2012-12-26 06:53:27 <gmaxwell> Godzilla123: which pool of unspent outputs? The database used for validating blocks or the wallets unspent outputs which are kept for spending?
299 2012-12-26 06:54:09 <gmaxwell> The former is updated when there is a new block, the latter is updated when the wallet creates or sees a transaction spending them.
300 2012-12-26 06:54:12 owowo has quit (Client Quit)
301 2012-12-26 06:54:35 owowo has joined
302 2012-12-26 06:54:55 <gmaxwell> New transactions are also explicitly checked against conflicts in the mempool, so you can think of it as a temporary overlay on the set of spendable transactions for the purpose of validating currently unconfirmed transactions.
303 2012-12-26 06:55:15 <gmaxwell> (but not blocks— since there is no promise that your mempool is consistent with anyone elses)
304 2012-12-26 06:57:58 <forgot> should I set noncebase to a random number after everytime I get a new job or modify job.time to get expected mining rate?
305 2012-12-26 07:02:46 <Godzilla123> gmaxwell: The database used for validating blocks (i,e., unspent outputs of other's wallets)
306 2012-12-26 07:03:10 <Godzilla123> gmaxwell: thanks :)
307 2012-12-26 07:07:55 owowo has quit (Quit: sayonara)
308 2012-12-26 07:08:09 <kiba> anyone want to join the BAM development army?
309 2012-12-26 07:08:46 owowo has joined
310 2012-12-26 07:08:56 <kiba> pew pew pew bam! bam! bam! trububububububub
311 2012-12-26 07:09:53 <kiba> I guess I should keep developing my game until it's compelling enough to attract fans and developers
312 2012-12-26 07:27:04 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
313 2012-12-26 07:28:20 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
314 2012-12-26 07:28:28 JZavala has joined
315 2012-12-26 07:28:43 owowo has quit (Quit: sayonara)
316 2012-12-26 07:31:29 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
317 2012-12-26 07:33:45 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
318 2012-12-26 07:37:04 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
319 2012-12-26 07:38:00 maaku has joined
320 2012-12-26 07:56:14 root2 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
321 2012-12-26 07:57:26 toffoo has quit ()
322 2012-12-26 08:00:03 nus- has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
323 2012-12-26 08:11:46 <Luke-Jr> http://imgur.com/gallery/F1yGP
324 2012-12-26 08:13:43 one_zero has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
325 2012-12-26 08:13:51 <gmaxwell> "Features:  * Impervious to antenna damage."
326 2012-12-26 08:16:26 MrTiggr has joined
327 2012-12-26 08:22:22 <kiba> so I got invisible combat working pretty ok
328 2012-12-26 08:22:46 * kiba only observes the combat activity with debug logs
329 2012-12-26 08:25:15 skeledrew has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
330 2012-12-26 08:28:39 skeledrew has joined
331 2012-12-26 08:41:07 mmoya_ has joined
332 2012-12-26 08:45:53 MrTiggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
333 2012-12-26 08:57:04 MrTiggr has joined
334 2012-12-26 09:01:49 forgot has quit (Quit: 暂离)
335 2012-12-26 09:06:25 CodesInChaos has joined
336 2012-12-26 09:10:14 libcoin has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
337 2012-12-26 09:15:06 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
338 2012-12-26 09:22:37 Godzilla123 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
339 2012-12-26 09:31:08 <wumpus> gmaxwell: I did not introduce it, now looking at v0.3.22rc1 and it's already there
340 2012-12-26 09:32:06 <wumpus> maybe it was a workaround for some wx on windows issue?
341 2012-12-26 09:32:36 <wumpus> I doubt it's needed anymore
342 2012-12-26 09:42:48 CodesInChaos has joined
343 2012-12-26 09:48:22 nus has joined
344 2012-12-26 09:55:33 dparrish has quit (Quit: leaving)
345 2012-12-26 09:56:36 RazielZ has joined
346 2012-12-26 10:08:42 PiZZaMaN2K has joined
347 2012-12-26 10:09:29 dparrish has joined
348 2012-12-26 10:17:05 rdymac has joined
349 2012-12-26 10:23:13 rdymac has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
350 2012-12-26 10:35:31 rdymac has joined
351 2012-12-26 11:02:02 pooler has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.89 [Firefox 17.0.1/20121129151842])
352 2012-12-26 11:07:28 rdymac has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
353 2012-12-26 11:10:39 kiba has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
354 2012-12-26 11:12:37 kiceek has joined
355 2012-12-26 11:22:08 <boin> suck it up gmaxwell
356 2012-12-26 11:23:17 <boin> what a sucker you are, gmaxwell
357 2012-12-26 11:23:44 <boin> learn to lose
358 2012-12-26 11:25:09 ovidiusoft has joined
359 2012-12-26 11:26:59 <boin> keep playing "master of bitcoin"
360 2012-12-26 11:27:15 <boin> as if it's your property
361 2012-12-26 11:28:03 <boin> you don't own us. you dont make the rules
362 2012-12-26 11:29:22 Internet13 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
363 2012-12-26 11:31:50 Internet13 has joined
364 2012-12-26 11:36:13 Impaler has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
365 2012-12-26 12:00:02 MrTiggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
366 2012-12-26 12:06:26 TwilightSparklee has joined
367 2012-12-26 12:11:05 <MC1984> wow i would be really quite angry if i had something with an aerial that wasnt even connected to anything
368 2012-12-26 12:15:03 <Scrat> GOD DAMN CHINESE
369 2012-12-26 12:15:06 <Scrat> anger unleashed
370 2012-12-26 12:16:01 <MC1984> the hokey mem cards coing out of chinese factories are the worst
371 2012-12-26 12:16:29 <MC1984> theyre like 2gbyte chips with a 64gbyte controller, you shit is NOT SAFE on such a card
372 2012-12-26 12:16:46 <MC1984> but they show up as what you paid for
373 2012-12-26 12:27:45 att___ has joined
374 2012-12-26 12:29:06 <sipa> gmaxwell, wumpus: iirc it's always been there
375 2012-12-26 12:30:38 att__ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
376 2012-12-26 12:44:43 TwilightSparklee has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
377 2012-12-26 13:05:19 kiceek has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
378 2012-12-26 13:05:50 kiceek has joined
379 2012-12-26 13:11:12 [7] has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
380 2012-12-26 13:20:13 bencoder has joined
381 2012-12-26 13:20:34 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
382 2012-12-26 13:21:24 bencoder has left ()
383 2012-12-26 13:35:27 att___ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
384 2012-12-26 13:37:29 att__ has joined
385 2012-12-26 13:37:37 <boin> gmaxwell is a ratings troll. he is posting inflammatory, extraneous and off-topic ratings on the WoT database. i think he should be rating-banned from gribble
386 2012-12-26 13:37:54 <boin> but is he? nope. he owns it!
387 2012-12-26 13:38:54 daybyter has joined
388 2012-12-26 13:43:28 mykhal has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
389 2012-12-26 13:43:30 <boin> you're faking it, gmaxwell
390 2012-12-26 13:43:52 mykhal has joined
391 2012-12-26 13:51:38 <MC1984> the fact that youre being such a baby about it says to me his bad rating of you is on the money
392 2012-12-26 13:52:32 agricocb has joined
393 2012-12-26 14:02:56 att__ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
394 2012-12-26 14:04:32 att__ has joined
395 2012-12-26 14:06:59 <boin> no, gmaxwell is the baby
396 2012-12-26 14:07:02 <boin> can't admit defeat
397 2012-12-26 14:07:09 <boin> he won't apologize
398 2012-12-26 14:07:30 Guest12415 has joined
399 2012-12-26 14:07:38 <boin> my bad rating of him is spot on, i'd say
400 2012-12-26 14:08:06 <boin> you know you are wrong, gmaxwell
401 2012-12-26 14:08:18 <boin> be the better man
402 2012-12-26 14:08:25 <boin> (or what's the expression)
403 2012-12-26 14:08:47 <boin> take it like a man, gmaxwell!
404 2012-12-26 14:09:09 <boin> you can't have everything, you know
405 2012-12-26 14:09:26 <boin> can't have everything you want in life, gmaxwell
406 2012-12-26 14:11:22 t7 has joined
407 2012-12-26 14:11:28 <boin> this is what you owe me, gmaxwell: 617.28 EUR  426.23 USD  4.6765 BTC
408 2012-12-26 14:12:45 <boin> gmaxwell is such a troll, and also, such a "douche" and "dipshit"
409 2012-12-26 14:13:06 <boin> you KNOW what you did wrong, gmaxwell!
410 2012-12-26 14:13:22 <boin> explain me, gmaxwell. i won't explain myself. YOU will explain me
411 2012-12-26 14:13:59 <boin> you see, i am always right, and if i do something weird, it's perfectly justified
412 2012-12-26 14:15:19 Guest12415 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
413 2012-12-26 14:19:55 <boin> who wants to pick up the debt?
414 2012-12-26 14:21:11 Scrat has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
415 2012-12-26 14:21:23 <kjj> you are off topic.  stfu
416 2012-12-26 14:21:42 <boin> kick gmaxwell out of here so he can't do his business. that's on-topic
417 2012-12-26 14:22:02 <kjj> no, dumbass, this isn't a business channel.  this is the development channel
418 2012-12-26 14:22:27 <boin> i used to work on the business channel, until he started banning me
419 2012-12-26 14:23:00 <kjj> well, I've spent a good part of the last half hour hoping that an op would wake up and ban you from here, so I guess I'm not surprised by that
420 2012-12-26 14:23:00 <boin> man, gmaxwell, you are such a dumbass
421 2012-12-26 14:23:28 <boin> i learn new words every day
422 2012-12-26 14:23:57 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
423 2012-12-26 14:23:57 <kjj> put "ignore" on your list
424 2012-12-26 14:24:30 <boin> everybody, ignore gmaxwell!
425 2012-12-26 14:29:45 a1111 has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
426 2012-12-26 14:37:19 pierre` has joined
427 2012-12-26 14:38:29 att__ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
428 2012-12-26 14:40:17 att__ has joined
429 2012-12-26 14:45:41 BTCOxygen has joined
430 2012-12-26 14:45:55 BTCOxygen is now known as a1111
431 2012-12-26 14:48:27 TwilightSparklee has joined
432 2012-12-26 14:49:48 rubbabandman has joined
433 2012-12-26 14:50:21 skeledrew has quit (Quit: Instantbird 1.3 -- http://www.instantbird.com)
434 2012-12-26 14:52:45 rdymac has joined
435 2012-12-26 14:55:21 PiZZaMaN2K is now known as PiZZaMaN2K|away
436 2012-12-26 14:57:56 Nesetalis has quit (Quit: <+shponka> how does one scissor with four people <+shponka> hypercube tribadism)
437 2012-12-26 14:59:23 <boin> i think everybody should just stop talking to this gmaxwell character
438 2012-12-26 14:59:29 <boin> don't feed the trolls
439 2012-12-26 15:00:21 <boin> hey, i hear he used to hit on women. what a creep!
440 2012-12-26 15:00:53 <boin> i think he is mentally deranged
441 2012-12-26 15:01:10 TwilightSparklee has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
442 2012-12-26 15:01:34 <boin> you don't want people like that near you
443 2012-12-26 15:02:55 <boin> find some other channel, gmaxwell, or some other network
444 2012-12-26 15:03:03 <boin> this place isn't for you
445 2012-12-26 15:03:54 <boin> you know what, i'll give you a nice encouragement talk, like i'm your idol or something, before i shun you too (because it's supposed to happen)
446 2012-12-26 15:06:13 <boin> also, who deals with this guy? how can someone do business of any kind with a person like him?
447 2012-12-26 15:06:25 <boin> is he serious?
448 2012-12-26 15:07:03 <boin> man, i pity this guy
449 2012-12-26 15:07:11 zooko has joined
450 2012-12-26 15:09:22 <boin> heh
451 2012-12-26 15:10:25 <kjj> finally!
452 2012-12-26 15:10:50 <gmaxwell> Sorry. I have to sleep sometimes…
453 2012-12-26 15:11:05 <kinlo> perhaps we need a few more chanops :)
454 2012-12-26 15:11:26 <MC1984> you really pissed in that guys cornflakes greg
455 2012-12-26 15:13:22 paraipan has joined
456 2012-12-26 15:13:43 Tykling has quit (Excess Flood)
457 2012-12-26 15:14:24 Nesetalis has joined
458 2012-12-26 15:14:34 Tykling has joined
459 2012-12-26 15:16:04 Tykling has quit (Excess Flood)
460 2012-12-26 15:20:05 Tykling has joined
461 2012-12-26 15:21:33 daybyter has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
462 2012-12-26 15:22:33 malaimo has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
463 2012-12-26 15:32:50 stealth222 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
464 2012-12-26 15:34:53 Zarutian has joined
465 2012-12-26 15:34:54 rdymac has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
466 2012-12-26 15:36:55 rdymac has joined
467 2012-12-26 15:47:39 EPiSKiNG- has quit ()
468 2012-12-26 15:50:07 rdymac has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
469 2012-12-26 15:57:36 D34TH has joined
470 2012-12-26 15:57:52 rdymac has joined
471 2012-12-26 15:58:02 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: does this sound right to you?  my crappy little listening script only watches for zero-conf tx that are forwarded by bitcoind and new blocks... on new blocks it removes any zero-conf tx sitting in memory... after running for 12 hours it had about 1000 zero-conf tx
472 2012-12-26 15:58:26 <etotheipi_> *remove any zero-conf tx _in that block_ from memory
473 2012-12-26 16:02:16 housh has joined
474 2012-12-26 16:05:01 Joric has joined
475 2012-12-26 16:09:02 nus has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
476 2012-12-26 16:09:22 nus has joined
477 2012-12-26 16:10:56 <sipa> etotheipi_: you will probably accumulate conflicting transactions over.te thwn
478 2012-12-26 16:11:02 <sipa> over time
479 2012-12-26 16:11:04 <sipa> then
480 2012-12-26 16:11:51 freakazoid has joined
481 2012-12-26 16:12:37 <etotheipi_> sipa: so there's that many?
482 2012-12-26 16:12:50 <sipa> apparently
483 2012-12-26 16:13:22 <gmaxwell> It's now become popular to try to double spend zero conf accepting things.
484 2012-12-26 16:13:36 <etotheipi_> ahh, that's what I'm missing
485 2012-12-26 16:13:43 <etotheipi_> checking for zero-conf tx that were invalidated
486 2012-12-26 16:14:04 * jgarzik might look into mempool TX expiration, as an early 2013 project
487 2012-12-26 16:14:53 <etotheipi_> right now, I'm really just trying to put together a super-minimal python/armoryengine watcher as a template to put into my examples directory
488 2012-12-26 16:15:07 <etotheipi_> and trying to figure out if it's useful at all
489 2012-12-26 16:15:29 <etotheipi_> (or buggy)
490 2012-12-26 16:15:33 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: It's sort of interesting to ponder how tightly related that is to replacement. After all, if you'd allow expiration under some criteria than you should be willing to accept a replacement under at least those criteria.
491 2012-12-26 16:16:35 <gmaxwell> (and probably less, since replacement can be permitted which has strictly less risk of resulting in people getting robbed)
492 2012-12-26 16:17:17 <etotheipi_> that's what always bothered me about it (though I couldn't determine if it was avoidable), was that any deterministic guarantee that a tx will be invalidated makes for deterministic exploits
493 2012-12-26 16:17:38 gavinandresen has joined
494 2012-12-26 16:17:50 <etotheipi_> but at the same time... you might as well get it out there and let people start abusing it and the economy will adapt to it
495 2012-12-26 16:19:17 <housh> etotheipi_: don't talk to him! don't feed him!
496 2012-12-26 16:19:38 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: well non-determinstic falure can only be avoided by prior determinstic failure, and non-determinstic failure may be harder to defend against.
497 2012-12-26 16:20:06 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: you've really been pissing some people off, haven't you?
498 2012-12-26 16:20:46 <etotheipi_> or is this all the same person re-logging in under different names?
499 2012-12-26 16:20:50 <gmaxwell> Yes.
500 2012-12-26 16:21:33 dvide has joined
501 2012-12-26 16:26:21 etotheipi_ has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
502 2012-12-26 16:26:37 etotheipi_ has joined
503 2012-12-26 16:28:26 <sipa> jgarzik: can you op me here?
504 2012-12-26 16:28:29 TwilightSparklee has joined
505 2012-12-26 16:28:52 <sipa> not sure about the chanserv command to do so, though
506 2012-12-26 16:28:59 <jgarzik> sipa: can you auth with nickserv?
507 2012-12-26 16:29:09 <sipa> i'm not? sec
508 2012-12-26 16:29:09 <gmaxwell> sipa: I thought you were?
509 2012-12-26 16:29:44 sipa has quit (Changing host)
510 2012-12-26 16:29:44 sipa has joined
511 2012-12-26 16:29:45 <gmaxwell> Ah, I see you're not.
512 2012-12-26 16:29:56 <sipa> only on #bitcoin
513 2012-12-26 16:30:01 <sipa> i'm authed
514 2012-12-26 16:30:34 <sipa> hmm, and via chanserv?
515 2012-12-26 16:31:07 <jgarzik> I think there might be forms to fill out or something
516 2012-12-26 16:31:10 <jgarzik> I dunno
517 2012-12-26 16:31:28 <jgarzik> I am the "owner" of #bitcoin-*, so in theory you could tell me how to do it :)
518 2012-12-26 16:31:51 <jgarzik> or do it via gribble
519 2012-12-26 16:32:19 <sipa> /msg ChanServ ACCESS #bitcoin-dev ADD sipa OP
520 2012-12-26 16:32:54 <jgarzik> sipa: done
521 2012-12-26 16:33:06 <D34TH> or instead of +o set +O
522 2012-12-26 16:33:41 TwilightSparkl-1 has joined
523 2012-12-26 16:33:46 <sipa> thanks!
524 2012-12-26 16:34:01 rdponticelli_ has joined
525 2012-12-26 16:34:55 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
526 2012-12-26 16:36:48 TwilightSparklee has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
527 2012-12-26 16:42:40 TwilightSparkl-1 has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
528 2012-12-26 16:47:09 <etotheipi_> are there going to be any changes to the peer finding/connection behavior in 0.8?  There's been this problem in the past with bitcoind/-qt maxing out connections and now allowing incoming connection from localhost Armory
529 2012-12-26 16:47:30 <etotheipi_> but there appears to be no problem with stock bitcoin-qt/d
530 2012-12-26 16:48:04 <etotheipi_> but now someone is reporting that Armory can't connect to their stock "turbo" build, though it works fine with 0.7
531 2012-12-26 16:52:04 Joric has quit ()
532 2012-12-26 16:52:10 <maaku> imho connection from 127.0.0.1 should take priority over all else...
533 2012-12-26 16:52:20 skeledrew has joined
534 2012-12-26 16:53:09 impulse has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
535 2012-12-26 16:53:18 <etotheipi_> maaku: I thought so, too, but gmaxwell pointed out that if you use tor, it appears that all connections come from localhost
536 2012-12-26 16:53:37 <maaku> hrm. that is troublesome
537 2012-12-26 16:53:52 <etotheipi_> but what do I know about tor?  (never used it)
538 2012-12-26 16:54:37 <maaku> i've thought for a while that we've needed a addnode json-rpc command
539 2012-12-26 16:54:48 <maaku> which would probably solve your use case
540 2012-12-26 16:55:06 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: "turbo" ? ... that old network abusive patch that opens up thousands of connections? Tell them not to run that.
541 2012-12-26 16:55:18 impulse has joined
542 2012-12-26 16:55:40 <jgarzik> etotheipi_: there are definitely peer finding changes planned
543 2012-12-26 16:55:41 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: I'm talking about sipa's build
544 2012-12-26 16:55:41 <gmaxwell> maaku: tools like p2pool and armory connect to bitcoind— making them listen for connections from bitcoind would be kind of odd.
545 2012-12-26 16:55:52 <jgarzik> for I.B.D.
546 2012-12-26 16:55:56 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: ah.
547 2012-12-26 16:56:10 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: he labeled it the "turbo" branch
548 2012-12-26 16:56:32 nus has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
549 2012-12-26 16:56:52 nus has joined
550 2012-12-26 17:00:11 <gmaxwell> I wonder how people are getting filled up nodes, my public node seems pretty stable at around 100 connections.
551 2012-12-26 17:00:56 rdymac has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
552 2012-12-26 17:04:56 altamic has joined
553 2012-12-26 17:05:00 altamic has quit (Client Quit)
554 2012-12-26 17:06:18 <sipa> etotheipi_, maaku: one idea is to add sort of 'whitelisted' peers, which would always get in, and whose transactions would always be relayed (even if already known to the mempool)
555 2012-12-26 17:06:21 owowo has joined
556 2012-12-26 17:06:34 da2ce7_d has joined
557 2012-12-26 17:06:43 <sipa> an idea was adding a second P2P listening port, by default only bound to localhost, which would get this behaviour
558 2012-12-26 17:07:37 <sipa> another idea is peer rotation (i've been doing some simulations even for that), where sometimes a new connection would be attempted, and if it succeeds, have it replace another connection, so the network becomes more dynamic
559 2012-12-26 17:09:06 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
560 2012-12-26 17:09:11 <sipa> i have 80 connections on my public node
561 2012-12-26 17:09:56 <kinlo> that's a lot, my public node never goes above 15
562 2012-12-26 17:10:00 <kinlo> I wonder why
563 2012-12-26 17:14:49 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
564 2012-12-26 17:19:40 <gmaxwell> kinlo: you may be on a /16 with many other public nodes.
565 2012-12-26 17:23:53 daybyter has joined
566 2012-12-26 17:29:37 TheSeven has joined
567 2012-12-26 17:31:37 <kinlo> mmmz, it's PI space so 256 netblock owners
568 2012-12-26 17:31:40 <kinlo> difficult to tell
569 2012-12-26 17:36:27 <sipa> PI?
570 2012-12-26 17:38:16 Hashdog has joined
571 2012-12-26 17:39:40 Hashdog has left ()
572 2012-12-26 17:40:01 StarenseN has joined
573 2012-12-26 17:43:33 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
574 2012-12-26 17:43:54 Lexa has joined
575 2012-12-26 17:44:12 <jgarzik> exmulti public node connection counts:  86, 89, 99
576 2012-12-26 17:44:20 <jgarzik> testnet node cxn ct: 19
577 2012-12-26 17:44:28 TD has joined
578 2012-12-26 17:45:53 <jgarzik> sipa: for picocoin, I was pondering (1) headers download, then (2) requesting block hashes in parallel from all peers
579 2012-12-26 17:46:21 <jgarzik> push parallel to the max :)
580 2012-12-26 17:46:26 <sipa> jgarzik: that's exactly what i'd want the reference client to do
581 2012-12-26 17:46:59 rielda has joined
582 2012-12-26 17:50:41 GMP has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
583 2012-12-26 17:50:42 zooko has quit (Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs))
584 2012-12-26 17:58:16 maaku has joined
585 2012-12-26 18:00:49 BTCOxygen has joined
586 2012-12-26 18:01:11 BurtyBB has joined
587 2012-12-26 18:02:50 a1111 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
588 2012-12-26 18:03:15 BTCOxygen has joined
589 2012-12-26 18:04:38 BurtyB has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
590 2012-12-26 18:04:55 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
591 2012-12-26 18:07:12 BTCOxygen has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
592 2012-12-26 18:07:33 BurtyBB is now known as BurtyB
593 2012-12-26 18:08:02 BTCOxygen has quit (1!~kvirc@176.44.22.118|Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
594 2012-12-26 18:12:19 BTCOxygen has joined
595 2012-12-26 18:13:27 BTCOxygen is now known as a1111
596 2012-12-26 18:14:15 JZavala has joined
597 2012-12-26 18:41:54 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
598 2012-12-26 18:42:24 darkee has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
599 2012-12-26 18:47:56 kiceek_ has joined
600 2012-12-26 18:49:43 kiceek has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
601 2012-12-26 18:54:30 ThomasV_ has joined
602 2012-12-26 19:02:49 tcatm has joined
603 2012-12-26 19:02:49 tcatm has quit (Changing host)
604 2012-12-26 19:02:49 tcatm has joined
605 2012-12-26 19:03:42 <tcatm> hey :)
606 2012-12-26 19:03:51 <sipa> hi there
607 2012-12-26 19:04:05 <tcatm> was there ever a patch for bitcoin that made it send the change back to the same address?
608 2012-12-26 19:04:28 <sipa> why would you want that?
609 2012-12-26 19:04:43 <sipa> can't be hard to write, but sounds like a bad thing
610 2012-12-26 19:04:53 <etotheipi_> tcatm: Armory has that option in "Expert" user mode :)
611 2012-12-26 19:04:56 <tcatm> there are some transactions like that in the chain
612 2012-12-26 19:05:14 <tcatm> etotheipi_: Great. When was armory first released with that option?
613 2012-12-26 19:05:14 <sipa> multibit does that, afaik
614 2012-12-26 19:05:43 <etotheipi_> tcatm: it's been there for a while, but I started advertising it a couple weeks when I added coin-control
615 2012-12-26 19:06:00 <ThomasV_> electrum has it too
616 2012-12-26 19:07:25 <tcatm> mkay, so at least 3 clients to look at :/
617 2012-12-26 19:07:31 <sipa> why?
618 2012-12-26 19:07:51 <sipa> ThomasV_: by default, or not?
619 2012-12-26 19:08:05 <ThomasV_> not by default, it's a setting
620 2012-12-26 19:08:53 <sipa> tcatm: first guess would then be multibit, as it does it by default
621 2012-12-26 19:09:10 <gmaxwell> tcatm: blockchain.info apparently does that.
622 2012-12-26 19:09:33 <tcatm> doesn't look like the client does it by default. only a few transactions are affected by the bug I might have discovered.
623 2012-12-26 19:10:01 <ThomasV_> are you trying to track a particular transaction?
624 2012-12-26 19:10:06 <tcatm> nope
625 2012-12-26 19:10:37 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
626 2012-12-26 19:11:07 <etotheipi_> tcatm:  I added the option back in July
627 2012-12-26 19:11:53 * etotheipi_ just discovered how awesome "git blame" is
628 2012-12-26 19:12:04 ThomasV_ has quit (Quit: Quitte)
629 2012-12-26 19:12:31 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: kind of a crappy option, since it harms the privacy of people other than the ones who select it. (As _I_ get deanonymized when you send me coins you've deanonymized) ... especially since it doesn't do anything useful in the context of a determinstic wallet except better resonate with the misunderstanding of the blockchain as a set of balances.
630 2012-12-26 19:13:11 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: yea, though careful— you can blame the wrong commits (as I did with asking wumpus about the exit timeout on windows this morning)
631 2012-12-26 19:13:25 <sipa> 341 non-canonical transactions on 150000
632 2012-12-26 19:13:34 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: I was only responding to requests for the feature
633 2012-12-26 19:13:45 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: that's why it only exists in Expert usermode
634 2012-12-26 19:13:51 a1111 is now known as BTCOxygen
635 2012-12-26 19:14:03 BTCOxygen is now known as a1111
636 2012-12-26 19:14:10 <sipa>       5 ERROR: Non-canonical public key: compressed nor uncompressed
637 2012-12-26 19:14:10 <sipa>      59 ERROR: Non-canonical signature: R value excessively padded
638 2012-12-26 19:14:10 <sipa>     159 ERROR: Non-canonical signature: R value negative
639 2012-12-26 19:14:10 <sipa>      43 ERROR: Non-canonical signature: S value excessively padded
640 2012-12-26 19:14:10 <sipa>      80 ERROR: Non-canonical signature: S value negative
641 2012-12-26 19:14:40 meLon has joined
642 2012-12-26 19:14:40 meLon has quit (Changing host)
643 2012-12-26 19:14:40 meLon has joined
644 2012-12-26 19:14:43 <sipa> interesting distribution
645 2012-12-26 19:14:50 <tcatm> anyone got a nice implementation of op_checksig? maybe in python?
646 2012-12-26 19:15:05 <etotheipi_> tcatm: I do
647 2012-12-26 19:15:05 <sipa> tcatm: i suppose pynode has that
648 2012-12-26 19:15:24 <etotheipi_> though it's not very isolateable without grabbing everything else in "armoryengine"
649 2012-12-26 19:16:43 <etotheipi_> it starts here:  https://github.com/etotheipi/BitcoinArmory/blob/master/armoryengine.py#L4024
650 2012-12-26 19:17:03 asherkin has left ()
651 2012-12-26 19:20:02 <tcatm> hrm. Pretty complicated. Can you help me getting armoryengine to verify a specific transaction?
652 2012-12-26 19:20:30 <etotheipi_> tcatm: there is some examples in unittest.py
653 2012-12-26 19:20:38 <etotheipi_> hold on, let me find it for you
654 2012-12-26 19:21:02 <etotheipi_> just be aware it requires not only the transaction you are verifying, but the scripts (or full tx) of the outputs you are spending
655 2012-12-26 19:21:35 twixed has joined
656 2012-12-26 19:21:39 <etotheipi_> https://github.com/etotheipi/BitcoinArmory/blob/master/unittest.py#L586
657 2012-12-26 19:23:11 <phantomcircuit> tcatm, it turns the DAG that transactions can be into a DG
658 2012-12-26 19:23:32 <etotheipi_> the inputs are:  verifyTransactionValid(fullPrevTx, txToVerify, txInputIndexToVerify)
659 2012-12-26 19:23:39 <etotheipi_> so it actually only verifies one input
660 2012-12-26 19:24:06 <tcatm> that's fine for what I want to do
661 2012-12-26 19:24:12 <etotheipi_> put it in a loop to verify each
662 2012-12-26 19:24:50 <etotheipi_> if you want to understand the process better:  check out hte "On-the-wire byte map" for OP_CHECKSIG (about half way down): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=29416.0
663 2012-12-26 19:25:36 <gmaxwell> tcatm: perhaps you're noticing transactions with negative r? IIRC blockchain.info was creating those and sending their change back to themselves.
664 2012-12-26 19:28:17 <tcatm> etotheipi_: Is there an API documentation for armoryengine anywhere?
665 2012-12-26 19:28:39 <etotheipi_> tcatm: not really... it's in the plans, but I was focused on GUI users first, developers later
666 2012-12-26 19:28:53 <etotheipi_> for now, unittest.py and extras/sample_armory_code.py is the documentation
667 2012-12-26 19:29:17 <etotheipi_> at least it's working examples of just about everything armoryengine can do
668 2012-12-26 19:29:51 <jgarzik> tcatm: pynode
669 2012-12-26 19:30:14 <jgarzik> tcatm: https://github.com/jgarzik/pynode/blob/master/bitcoin/scripteval.py#L77
670 2012-12-26 19:30:32 <etotheipi_> tcatm: my guess is that pynode is better suited for you needs
671 2012-12-26 19:30:43 <jgarzik> tcatm: the /bitcoin/ modules are reasonably independent, and may be used independently of the node.py softwares
672 2012-12-26 19:34:04 <sipa> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133402.0
673 2012-12-26 19:34:09 toffoo has joined
674 2012-12-26 19:36:34 <gmaxwell> sipa: You might want to resolve the input addresses for these transactions and post that list as links to blockchain info. Then people can see if the links show up blue for them.
675 2012-12-26 19:37:09 <sipa> good idea
676 2012-12-26 19:39:15 <etotheipi_> any idea how many might be related to Armory?  do you know that Armory has resolved all of those?  should I go ahead and try to figure out the odd-only S-values?
677 2012-12-26 19:39:43 <sipa> etotheipi_: i don't think armory is producing any non-DER ones anymore
678 2012-12-26 19:40:14 <sipa> and we don't even have code in the satoshi client to produce odd-only (or even-only; we'll have to decide soon :p) S values
679 2012-12-26 19:41:06 <etotheipi_> is it just a matter of taking whatever S value was selected, and if it's wrong, S = S^(n-1) where n is the number of elts on the EC?
680 2012-12-26 19:41:25 <etotheipi_> (mod N)
681 2012-12-26 19:41:39 <sipa> no, S = -S (mod N)
682 2012-12-26 19:41:52 <sipa> or, easier: S = N - S
683 2012-12-26 19:41:56 <etotheipi_> oh
684 2012-12-26 19:42:02 <etotheipi_> it's not even multiplicative inverse
685 2012-12-26 19:42:05 <tcatm> etotheipi_: Is there a TheBDM.getTransactionByHash()?
686 2012-12-26 19:42:19 <etotheipi_> tcatm: yes:  TheBDM.getTxByHash()
687 2012-12-26 19:42:22 <etotheipi_> you were close :)
688 2012-12-26 19:42:23 <tcatm> ah :)
689 2012-12-26 19:43:15 <sipa> gmaxwell: you have a 0.7 node with getrawtransaction running still?
690 2012-12-26 19:43:28 <gmaxwell> Yes.
691 2012-12-26 19:43:53 <gmaxwell> ah, shall I resolve those txids then?
692 2012-12-26 19:44:20 <etotheipi_> tcatm, just be aware that you have to load the blockchain before that will return anything useful:  as seen https://github.com/etotheipi/BitcoinArmory/blob/master/extras/sample_armory_code.py#L65
693 2012-12-26 19:44:25 <sipa> gmaxwell: if possible :)
694 2012-12-26 19:44:31 <sipa> gmaxwell: txids are here: http://bitcoin.sipa.be/re.txt
695 2012-12-26 19:45:29 <gmaxwell> Yea, no problem.
696 2012-12-26 19:45:55 <gmaxwell> sipa: odd txnid "a390235d83"
697 2012-12-26 19:46:06 darkee has joined
698 2012-12-26 19:46:26 <sipa> ah, yes, that's from before i patched my node to dump full txids
699 2012-12-26 19:46:30 <sipa> ignore it
700 2012-12-26 19:46:59 <gmaxwell> Do you want me to grab the addresses from the txins?
701 2012-12-26 19:47:09 <gmaxwell> or do you want the transactions?
702 2012-12-26 19:47:45 twixed has quit (Quit: Leaving)
703 2012-12-26 19:47:46 <sipa> the txin addresses is probably more useful
704 2012-12-26 19:48:19 <gmaxwell> k.
705 2012-12-26 19:48:36 <tcatm> etotheipi_: How does getTxByHash work? Doesn't seem to like integers nor hexstrings.
706 2012-12-26 19:49:23 <etotheipi_> tcatm: it's takes binary
707 2012-12-26 19:49:30 meLon has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
708 2012-12-26 19:49:31 <etotheipi_> use hex_to_binary()
709 2012-12-26 19:49:58 <etotheipi_> all hash-indexed objects need that conversion
710 2012-12-26 19:51:08 <etotheipi_> there is binary_to_hex() as well, and if the endianness is wrong, you can use binary_switchEndian()
711 2012-12-26 19:51:35 <etotheipi_> (or hex_switchEndian(), depending on what form it's in)
712 2012-12-26 19:53:59 <tcatm> Hrm. I get an Tx object but it looks empty.
713 2012-12-26 19:54:16 <tcatm> (blockchain is loaded)
714 2012-12-26 19:54:23 <etotheipi_> try switching endian and pass that in
715 2012-12-26 19:55:29 <etotheipi_> I have to admit, very early in development, I was confused about how to deal with endianness, and I never went back through and fixed it
716 2012-12-26 19:55:56 <etotheipi_> that was one of my first things to do when I start focusing on dev tools, is clean all that up
717 2012-12-26 19:56:47 <tcatm> Can't get it to work: TheBDM.getTxByHash(hex_to_binary("999e1c837c76a1b7fbb7e57baf87b309960f5ffefbf2a9b95dd890602272f644")).getNumTxIn() => 4294967295. Same with hex_switchEndian
718 2012-12-26 19:58:49 <gmaxwell> sipa: which group are those?
719 2012-12-26 19:59:03 <etotheipi_> tcatm, give me a sec...
720 2012-12-26 19:59:11 <sipa> gmaxwell: group?
721 2012-12-26 19:59:20 <sipa> gmaxwell: oh, all of them
722 2012-12-26 19:59:24 <sipa> i can separate if you like
723 2012-12-26 20:01:05 <sipa> gmaxwell: http://bitcoin.sipa.be/nc-[rs][ne].txt
724 2012-12-26 20:01:48 Eslbaer has joined
725 2012-12-26 20:06:56 <gmaxwell> sipa: for your reference: http://pastebin.com/aMa2ZjF9
726 2012-12-26 20:07:40 <gmaxwell> http://bitcoin.sipa.be/nc-rs.txt < 404
727 2012-12-26 20:08:12 <sipa> it's a shell pattern :)
728 2012-12-26 20:08:18 <gmaxwell> duur
729 2012-12-26 20:08:36 <sipa> that's dutch for "expensive", but i doubt that's what you mean...
730 2012-12-26 20:08:48 <etotheipi_> lol, sorry tcatm... I broke my whole setup just before you asked that question... give me another min
731 2012-12-26 20:12:28 <gmaxwell> haha  The message exceeds the maximum allowed length (64000 characters).
732 2012-12-26 20:14:07 freakazoid has joined
733 2012-12-26 20:14:57 <etotheipi_> tcatm:  "txHash = binary_switchEndian(hex_to_binary("999e1c837c76a1b7fbb7e57baf87b309960f5ffefbf2a9b95dd890602272f644")); tx = TheBDM.getTxByHash(txHash).pprint()"
734 2012-12-26 20:15:34 <etotheipi_> maybe you accidentally used hex_switchEndian() on binary data, or vice versa (using binary_switchEndian on hex data)
735 2012-12-26 20:17:12 <sipa> gmaxwell: your post looks kinda short
736 2012-12-26 20:17:28 <sipa> ah, the posts are yet to come perhaps
737 2012-12-26 20:17:54 malaimo has joined
738 2012-12-26 20:18:35 <gmaxwell> sipa: I redid it in order to deduplicate it, otherwise they were all hitting the maximum post length due to duplciated txin addresses.
739 2012-12-26 20:18:48 <sipa> | sort | uniq
740 2012-12-26 20:20:48 <gmaxwell> sure sure, but I had to redo the post to do that. :P
741 2012-12-26 20:21:11 <tcatm> etotheipi_: Thanks! :)
742 2012-12-26 20:22:08 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
743 2012-12-26 20:22:30 <gmaxwell> sipa: well crap, the colors on bitcoin talk don't seem to indicate visited or not!
744 2012-12-26 20:23:19 <sipa> post on an own html page, and like to that?
745 2012-12-26 20:23:34 <gmaxwell> sure, one sec.
746 2012-12-26 20:24:39 <sipa> etotheipi_: preference for even or odd S? :p
747 2012-12-26 20:24:55 <etotheipi_> sipa: hold on, let me find a coin
748 2012-12-26 20:25:15 <etotheipi_> err.... I mean: "no preference"
749 2012-12-26 20:25:18 <sipa> haha
750 2012-12-26 20:25:32 <sipa> for a second i thought you were referring to a txout when saying "coin" ...
751 2012-12-26 20:32:10 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
752 2012-12-26 20:34:42 <sipa> gmaxwell, etotheipi_: https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/7a0dac94424ab7a0a54b1a8edf59c396c89a1a70
753 2012-12-26 20:36:43 twixed has joined
754 2012-12-26 20:40:02 <gmaxwell> sipa: http://people.xiph.org/~greg/non-standard-signatures.html
755 2012-12-26 20:42:58 <sipa> gmaxwell: thank god, none were colored for me
756 2012-12-26 20:43:12 <etotheipi_> none for me
757 2012-12-26 20:45:29 <gmaxwell> one was for me, but it was my test one.
758 2012-12-26 20:49:20 <gmaxwell> sipa: I've got one
759 2012-12-26 20:49:36 <gmaxwell> TheButterZone who hangs on on IRC and on the forums has  1TBZYXjrGjXCEN1SprpF66Jzy5uN3GiLS
760 2012-12-26 20:50:07 <gmaxwell> which is one of the addresses, TuxBlackEdo had a colored link on that one. :P
761 2012-12-26 20:51:08 <gmaxwell> (thats a  Sources with (at least) a signature with an "negative R value": and  Sources with (at least) a signature with an "excessively padded S value": )
762 2012-12-26 20:55:46 libcoin has joined
763 2012-12-26 20:57:14 <gmaxwell> http://blockchain.info/address/15DjyGdFAdGrvK3XY4EyScnfz2feMRCYMs < is getting paid by deepbit, perhaps ask [tycho] to prod his user for us.
764 2012-12-26 20:58:44 daybyter has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
765 2012-12-26 20:58:56 <gmaxwell> (its an excessively padded R value source)
766 2012-12-26 20:59:27 Eslbaer has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
767 2012-12-26 21:04:16 <gmaxwell> 18ix3ikc51sKTwmfho5fjmfqe2miJBQR2c was a forums signature address of user weefan.
768 2012-12-26 21:06:17 maaku has joined
769 2012-12-26 21:07:42 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: can you grep #eligius channel logs to you see if you can tell which of your users this is: http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/userstats.php/1MMc227TR2ropsB7CaHaYGqPZNNdfs1yH
770 2012-12-26 21:08:38 <gmaxwell> 1J13NBTKiV8xrAo2dwaD4LhWs3zPobhh5S is "punningclan" on the forums. (I'm sending messages to these people)
771 2012-12-26 21:09:41 <sipa> great, thanks
772 2012-12-26 21:09:53 <wizkid057> whats this for anyways?
773 2012-12-26 21:10:37 <sipa> see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133402.0
774 2012-12-26 21:12:25 <wizkid057> hm
775 2012-12-26 21:18:42 AtashiCon has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
776 2012-12-26 21:18:53 Arnavion has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
777 2012-12-26 21:21:43 juchmis has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
778 2012-12-26 21:23:10 juchmis has joined
779 2012-12-26 21:23:45 <tcatm> Mkay, at least one client does have a serious security problem.
780 2012-12-26 21:24:27 AtashiCon has joined
781 2012-12-26 21:24:34 <etotheipi_> tcatm: how so?
782 2012-12-26 21:24:36 Arnavion has joined
783 2012-12-26 21:24:41 Dyaheon has joined
784 2012-12-26 21:24:41 Dyaheon has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
785 2012-12-26 21:25:51 * gmaxwell goes to check the entropy of R on the network.
786 2012-12-26 21:26:07 casascius has joined
787 2012-12-26 21:26:25 <tcatm> gmaxwell: that's the problem. There are some transactions with R duplicates.
788 2012-12-26 21:26:38 <tcatm> I've successfully recovered the private key from two of them.
789 2012-12-26 21:26:40 <gmaxwell> I've warned people about this many times…
790 2012-12-26 21:27:07 <sipa> same R implies same pubkey + same k (normally generated at random)
791 2012-12-26 21:27:25 <etotheipi_> oh wow
792 2012-12-26 21:27:29 <gmaxwell> tcatm: if you give me a list of txid's you think are naughty, I'll resove their previns and start googling.
793 2012-12-26 21:27:52 <etotheipi_> major snafu
794 2012-12-26 21:28:39 <gmaxwell> sorry to give it away with that guess. but it's basically the _one_ thing you must do right when constructing a signature, so it wasn't much of a guess.
795 2012-12-26 21:29:04 <tcatm> This one is pretty bad. Same R in both TxIns: 9ec4bc49e828d924af1d1029cacf709431abbde46d59554b62bc270e3b29c4b1
796 2012-12-26 21:29:08 <etotheipi_> tcatm: are these old?  or newer ones?
797 2012-12-26 21:29:21 <tcatm> Haven't looked at most of them yet.
798 2012-12-26 21:29:56 <gmaxwell> 1BFhrfTTZP3Nw4BNy4eX4KFLsn9ZeijcMm
799 2012-12-26 21:30:24 <gmaxwell> haha, I just got captchaed by google because I've been searching too many bitcoin addresses.
800 2012-12-26 21:30:37 theymos has joined
801 2012-12-26 21:32:05 <etotheipi_> how do you get that wrong?
802 2012-12-26 21:32:38 <etotheipi_> I guess, really custom ECDSA ...?  but if you're good enough to do that, I'd think you're good enough to use any kind of PRNG even a bad one
803 2012-12-26 21:32:45 <etotheipi_> or maybe you just don't read
804 2012-12-26 21:32:50 <blinky> gmaxwell: you've seen this post? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133122.0
805 2012-12-26 21:33:03 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: Lots of ways. (1) trusting some system random source to be random, (2) not actually knowing that there is a security implication ('my unit tests fail with this made random!'), typos, etc.
806 2012-12-26 21:33:37 <tcatm> I've counted 312 affected transactions so far.
807 2012-12-26 21:33:39 <gmaxwell> Using randval instead of *randval as your random.
808 2012-12-26 21:33:58 <sipa> tcatm: total value of UTXO's involved?
809 2012-12-26 21:34:08 <tcatm> UTXO?
810 2012-12-26 21:34:14 <sipa> unspent transaction outputs
811 2012-12-26 21:34:17 <andytoshi> etotheipi_, why generate your own addresses? probably for some brain-wallety idea
812 2012-12-26 21:34:35 <tcatm> sipa: I'll try to check that.
813 2012-12-26 21:35:08 <sipa> tcatm: 0.8 (git head) has a gettxout RPC to query the value if you have txid + output#
814 2012-12-26 21:35:20 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: Using randval instead of *randval as your random.  Calling seed(time) right before your invoation.
815 2012-12-26 21:35:28 <andytoshi> or is the non-randomness only in the DSA algo, not the address itself?
816 2012-12-26 21:35:30 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: heh, okay
817 2012-12-26 21:35:30 * andytoshi just woke up
818 2012-12-26 21:35:39 <sipa> andytoshi: in DSA
819 2012-12-26 21:35:54 LargoG has joined
820 2012-12-26 21:35:56 <etotheipi_> andytoshi: the random number is selected for each signature... you should pick a different one every time
821 2012-12-26 21:35:58 <sipa> that's why deterministic signatures are so nice (go Ed25519)
822 2012-12-26 21:36:07 <etotheipi_> so even signing the same thing twice should produce diff sigs
823 2012-12-26 21:36:13 <sipa> though we could add it to ECDSA as well
824 2012-12-26 21:37:08 <etotheipi_> the wiki page suggests that the PS3 developers made the same mistake
825 2012-12-26 21:37:20 <etotheipi_> and that's how the PS3 signing key was leaked
826 2012-12-26 21:37:34 <gmaxwell> 13:23 <+TheButterZone> gmaxwell: a copy of brainwallet.org saved to usb key for offline use
827 2012-12-26 21:37:45 <gmaxwell> ^ thats how the 1TBZ* addresses are getting signed.
828 2012-12-26 21:37:52 <gmaxwell> I believe brainwallet.org has been fixed.
829 2012-12-26 21:38:16 <theymos> gmaxwell: Didn't he say on the forum that the 1TBZ address was not a brainwallet.org address?
830 2012-12-26 21:38:55 <gmaxwell> theymos: I believe so, but he's telling me here that he's _signing_ with it. (sign vs create)
831 2012-12-26 21:39:07 <theymos> Oh, OK.
832 2012-12-26 21:39:15 Dyaheon has joined
833 2012-12-26 21:40:15 <gmaxwell> theymos: would be neat if there was an API where I could give bitcointalk a list of addresses and it returns a list of matching urls. :P
834 2012-12-26 21:41:49 <theymos> gmaxwell: Just searching the text of posts?
835 2012-12-26 21:41:55 <tcatm> At least one address used the same R 67 times
836 2012-12-26 21:41:57 <gmaxwell> yea. and signatures. :P
837 2012-12-26 21:42:45 <sipa> brainwallet.org is by Joric, right?
838 2012-12-26 21:42:56 <gmaxwell> yes.
839 2012-12-26 21:42:57 <gmaxwell> 13:28 <+TheButterZone> gmaxwell: october 1, 2012
840 2012-12-26 21:43:10 <theymos> gmaxwell: Wouldn't be too difficult. I'll put it on my to-do list.
841 2012-12-26 21:43:42 <gmaxwell> theymos: several times now I've gone sluthing for weird behavior and searching the forum for addresses is surprisingly productive.
842 2012-12-26 21:52:06 <tcatm> There's less than 1 BTC unspent in the affected keys.
843 2012-12-26 21:52:42 eps has quit (Disconnected by services)
844 2012-12-26 21:52:55 StarenseN has quit ()
845 2012-12-26 21:53:19 epscy has joined
846 2012-12-26 21:54:11 <gmaxwell> "hardest $10 I ever made!"
847 2012-12-26 21:58:40 <gmaxwell> tcatm: I especially like the mixture with the repeated change addresses, the address reuse makes the insecure k really obvious.
848 2012-12-26 21:59:18 <tcatm> yep
849 2012-12-26 21:59:29 <tcatm> I wonder how many weak Rs there are that aren't that obvious.
850 2012-12-26 21:59:43 <tcatm> Maybe from nodes signing lots of tx per second?
851 2012-12-26 22:00:52 <tcatm> I guess that's the first successful crypto attack on bitcoin, isn't it?
852 2012-12-26 22:01:45 <etotheipi_> I'm not sure it qualifies if there was gross errors in the crypto implementation
853 2012-12-26 22:01:55 Lolcust has quit (Quit: Nap time)
854 2012-12-26 22:02:21 <etotheipi_> I could implement ROT13 encryption in Armory somewhere and it would be responsible for a security breach... should that count against the network?
855 2012-12-26 22:04:47 Lolcust has joined
856 2012-12-26 22:06:39 Lolcust has quit (Excess Flood)
857 2012-12-26 22:06:47 Lolcust has joined
858 2012-12-26 22:08:39 BurtyB has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
859 2012-12-26 22:10:09 B0g4r7 has joined
860 2012-12-26 22:10:21 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: otoh, ECDSA is needlessly fragile.
861 2012-12-26 22:11:34 <gmaxwell> would be funny if picocoin were responsible for these txns.
862 2012-12-26 22:11:40 <etotheipi_> is it?
863 2012-12-26 22:11:52 twixed has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
864 2012-12-26 22:12:17 BurtyB has joined
865 2012-12-26 22:12:29 <gmaxwell> ECDSA fragile? Yes. Picocoin? dunno. checking.
866 2012-12-26 22:12:55 <gmaxwell> ed25519 solves this particular fragility in an official way and makes the signatures determinstic.
867 2012-12-26 22:13:12 <sipa> does ECDSa require different k overall? afaik only a different k is needed when the key is identical
868 2012-12-26 22:13:32 <etotheipi_> my point was simply that an implementation that clearly violates a known security problem should not be counted against that crypto algorithm
869 2012-12-26 22:13:37 <sipa> so there shouldn't be any non-obvious but vulnerable weak k
870 2012-12-26 22:14:03 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: if I wasn't leaving in 30 seconds, I'd like to discuss fragility
871 2012-12-26 22:15:00 BurtyBB has joined
872 2012-12-26 22:15:00 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: maybe. I could argue it either way. If it were actually hard to solve, well thats life. But I'm generally of the view that the quality of something must realistically be considered in the context of the vulnerabilities it will expose in other thins.
873 2012-12-26 22:15:55 <gmaxwell> E.g. I think people are right to say that bitcoin is "flawed" because personal computer security sucks, and users can't keep online money safe.  (although, we can answer those claims with hardware multisign tokens— we we should, rather than just sitting back and saying your-windows-pc-non-security-is-not-our-problem)
874 2012-12-26 22:16:31 <gmaxwell> So likewise, ECDSA is flawed because it requires a @#!@#! random value and it's well established that everyone gets that wrong. .. and worse, when you get it wrong the vulnerablity is largely invisible.
875 2012-12-26 22:16:47 <gmaxwell> Your k could always be 1 but you won't even possibly notice until you reuse a public key for the first time.
876 2012-12-26 22:16:51 <gmaxwell> And only then if you're looking.
877 2012-12-26 22:18:37 <sipa> i wonder if there's any reason not to use k=SHA256(privkey || message)
878 2012-12-26 22:18:37 BurtyB has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
879 2012-12-26 22:19:01 <sipa> Ed25519 uses a separate half of the secret key for its nonce generation - i wonder why
880 2012-12-26 22:19:08 <sipa> maybe just because it was available
881 2012-12-26 22:19:08 BurtyBB is now known as BurtyB
882 2012-12-26 22:19:55 <tcatm> that should be fine
883 2012-12-26 22:20:44 <andytoshi> sipa, what if the message and privkey are different lengths? would there be a way for two different messages to give the same "privkey || message"?
884 2012-12-26 22:21:11 <jrmithdobbs> not unless sha256 is broken in ways that make much more import parts fall apart
885 2012-12-26 22:21:14 <andytoshi> that would be my concern
886 2012-12-26 22:21:20 <jrmithdobbs> s/import/important/
887 2012-12-26 22:21:26 <sipa> andytoshi: since the privkey is constant length, that shouldn't be an issue
888 2012-12-26 22:21:35 <tcatm> though, entropy shouldn't be a problem. there's software like haveged that works pretty well on embedded devices.
889 2012-12-26 22:21:39 <sipa> if it was, you could use HMAC-SHA256(key=privkey, msg=message)
890 2012-12-26 22:21:53 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: ya i was going to say, might want to use hmac
891 2012-12-26 22:22:03 <sipa> Ed25519 uses SHA512 IIRC
892 2012-12-26 22:23:58 <gmaxwell> sipa: IIRC there are ways to recover the private key if K is only partially known. so I'd guess they were just being double safe?
893 2012-12-26 22:27:22 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: it uses sha512 but not like that, it hashes then manipulates the hash, it doesn't concat strings and then hash them jfyi
894 2012-12-26 22:27:56 <jrmithdobbs> ( H() in http://ed25519.cr.yp.to/python/ed25519.py )
895 2012-12-26 22:28:48 Zarutian has joined
896 2012-12-26 22:29:30 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
897 2012-12-26 22:30:14 <gmaxwell> tcatm: it's not that it's fundimentally a problem, it's that it's practically a problem... even little things like not being able to create normal unit tests, to people simply getting it wrong. "What happens if some genius kills rngd?" "All your private keys leak" (well, not on linux— but just generally that idea)
898 2012-12-26 22:32:27 one_zero has joined
899 2012-12-26 22:32:59 <sipa> well, implementing something like that in the satoshi client isn't hard - but would it gain us anything?
900 2012-12-26 22:33:26 <jrmithdobbs> eh? it's pretty hard to do well and portably
901 2012-12-26 22:33:26 <gmaxwell> I don't think so.
902 2012-12-26 22:33:28 <gmaxwell> :(
903 2012-12-26 22:33:43 <gmaxwell> jrmithdobbs: he means ed25519 like determinstic k.
904 2012-12-26 22:33:46 <jrmithdobbs> o
905 2012-12-26 22:33:55 <jrmithdobbs> i thought he meant an inbuilt rngd ;p
906 2012-12-26 22:34:04 <sipa> the advantage is not depending on your RNG for signing; the disadvantage is code review, testing, and risk of exposing other cryptographic flaws
907 2012-12-26 22:34:41 <gmaxwell> well if you don't already have a ECDSA implementation that comes with a secure prng then the risks favor the determinstic one
908 2012-12-26 22:34:42 <sipa> too bad we can't make it a network rule :D
909 2012-12-26 22:34:46 <gmaxwell> esp as you can use standard test vectors.
910 2012-12-26 22:35:05 <Luke-Jr> Merry Christmas, all!
911 2012-12-26 22:35:22 <gmaxwell> Is it tonal christmas now?
912 2012-12-26 22:35:34 <Luke-Jr> …
913 2012-12-26 22:35:38 <jrmithdobbs> yes, started f minutes ago
914 2012-12-26 22:35:38 <Luke-Jr> Christmas is Christmas
915 2012-12-26 22:36:10 <sipa> April 1st: the protocol will be changed; txins must now contain your private key, so nodes can validate you used a deterministic signature!
916 2012-12-26 22:36:24 <wizkid057> ...
917 2012-12-26 22:36:25 <gmaxwell> 'badcoin'
918 2012-12-26 22:36:47 <gmaxwell> 'an alt. chain with as many bad ideas as possible included'
919 2012-12-26 22:36:54 <jrmithdobbs> merry christmas to me, someone broken the damned ghc port in freebsd
920 2012-12-26 22:37:09 <jrmithdobbs> s/someone/someone's/
921 2012-12-26 22:37:25 <gmaxwell> actually running programs isn't very pure.
922 2012-12-26 22:37:29 Lexa has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
923 2012-12-26 22:38:22 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: web-only?
924 2012-12-26 22:38:28 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: actually, this box uses two (well, three but radiusd isn't really supposed to live there, it's temporary) whole things outside of base
925 2012-12-26 22:38:44 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: netatalk and git annex (which is haskell hence ghc)
926 2012-12-26 22:39:14 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: the rest of what it does is nfs/zfs stuff ;p
927 2012-12-26 22:39:30 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: and the merkletree algorithm is secret, so miners must use a single centralized getwork pool <.<
928 2012-12-26 22:40:01 <sipa> what about using NTP to decide transaction order, instead of this bulky blockchain thing?
929 2012-12-26 22:40:03 caemir has joined
930 2012-12-26 22:40:20 <andytoshi> Luke-Jr, it should be hosted on a filesharing site
931 2012-12-26 22:40:36 <andytoshi> dropbox
932 2012-12-26 22:40:36 <wizkid057> meagbitupload
933 2012-12-26 22:40:41 <andytoshi> haha
934 2012-12-26 22:40:42 <wizkid057> *mega
935 2012-12-26 22:40:47 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: too decentralized
936 2012-12-26 22:40:56 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: tlsdate off of https://facebook.com
937 2012-12-26 22:42:35 Lexa has joined
938 2012-12-26 22:42:58 <wizkid057> should just email the coins
939 2012-12-26 22:44:28 <wizkid057> we'll call them spamcoins
940 2012-12-26 22:44:49 <sipa> how about using proof-of-work to prevent spam?
941 2012-12-26 22:45:12 <theymos> Instead of crypto signatures, pass around scans of legal documents with handwritten signatures.
942 2012-12-26 22:47:13 <jgarzik> store it in a DHT
943 2012-12-26 22:47:13 <upb> you mean digital signatures right ?:P
944 2012-12-26 22:47:29 <wizkid057> jgarzik: thats an awesome idea :D
945 2012-12-26 22:48:31 <wizkid057> i still have this in my favorite IRC quotes: [12:15] <gmaxwell> Someday I'm going to get myself invited to some conference with the president, and while he's talking about some middle east conflict thing— I'm going to ask if they've considered using a DHT.
946 2012-12-26 22:49:34 agricocb has joined
947 2012-12-26 22:53:29 <andytoshi> the recommended client should be written in BASIC
948 2012-12-26 22:54:33 <andytoshi> and have an easy-to-pun name like 'TrucksYallCoin'
949 2012-12-26 22:58:58 ByteUnit has joined
950 2012-12-26 22:59:56 blackadder has joined
951 2012-12-26 23:04:36 <wizkid057> probably needs to be 8 chars or less for BASIC.... and we can store the code on cassette tapes
952 2012-12-26 23:05:01 blackadder has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
953 2012-12-26 23:08:05 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
954 2012-12-26 23:09:46 <andytoshi> BADCOI~1.EXE
955 2012-12-26 23:09:53 <sipa> LOL
956 2012-12-26 23:12:12 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
957 2012-12-26 23:13:43 rdponticelli has joined
958 2012-12-26 23:14:40 rdponticelli_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
959 2012-12-26 23:14:41 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
960 2012-12-26 23:14:41 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
961 2012-12-26 23:15:46 devrandom has joined
962 2012-12-26 23:23:13 <gmaxwell> hahaha
963 2012-12-26 23:24:02 <gmaxwell> 14:33 < upb> you mean digital signatures right ?:P
964 2012-12-26 23:24:55 <gmaxwell> Yea, there were these laws passed in the US to allow 'digital signatures' to be used for varrous things, but no one defined digital signature... so there are now all these official things that ask you to provide "a digital signature" on official docments (you type your name).
965 2012-12-26 23:26:44 <freewil> lol yeah
966 2012-12-26 23:27:06 <freewil> pin codes too sometimes act as a digital signature
967 2012-12-26 23:27:25 <freewil> thats how student loans work with FAFSA
968 2012-12-26 23:27:33 <gmaxwell> sipa: I got one forum message reply, but I don't think he quite understands that I'm talking about _his_ transactions, as he's offering me abstract ideas on what programs might make non-standard signatures.
969 2012-12-26 23:27:46 <sipa> ha
970 2012-12-26 23:27:47 <maaku> When I switched insurance a year ago, I was asked to "digitally sign" the document by typing my initials in a little form.
971 2012-12-26 23:27:52 <maaku> I felt very secure.
972 2012-12-26 23:29:05 <sipa> And rightfully so.
973 2012-12-26 23:31:21 ovidiusoft has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
974 2012-12-26 23:31:38 <gmaxwell> To be fair, most of this stuff exists in a framework where _everything_ is reversable. Different elements of security matter.
975 2012-12-26 23:36:49 TD has joined
976 2012-12-26 23:46:52 copumpkin has joined
977 2012-12-26 23:50:47 <gmaxwell> one of the non-canonical signer addresses is mentioned in a tweet:
978 2012-12-26 23:50:48 <gmaxwell> @NGOBuzz » 13 Sep '12, 10am
979 2012-12-26 23:50:48 <gmaxwell> Sign Up For a Free Bitcoin Wallet @ [link] https://t.co/AJKZNOs8 #tweet4btc #bitcoin #15rqWE4mYsUAHHvVewKdcJrgoSAtwrjKr2
980 2012-12-26 23:52:44 <sipa> are you on twitter? I can send a DM otherwise
981 2012-12-26 23:53:34 <andytoshi> gmaxwell, a certain fan fiction site is using "Lawrence G. Walters, Esq. (2004). BirthDateVerifierTM Version 4.0"
982 2012-12-26 23:53:39 <andytoshi> which involves a digital signature
983 2012-12-26 23:53:57 <andytoshi> "Access to this electronic record requires a simple browser program such as Internet Explorer™ or Netscape™ and a computer. You adopt the mark typed in the form below as your electronic signature."
984 2012-12-26 23:56:02 <andytoshi> http://www.birthdateverifier.com/
985 2012-12-26 23:56:53 <gmaxwell> On the plus side I've now PMed 6 more people on the forums about their weird signatures. On the minus side, google is now convinced that I'm a robot and is giving me captachas on almost every search... and I can't solve half the captchas.
986 2012-12-26 23:58:10 <andytoshi> ouch gmaxwell, i get often get those using tor
987 2012-12-26 23:58:16 <andytoshi> so i switch exit nodes, because i can't solve any of them
988 2012-12-26 23:59:29 stealth222 has joined