-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Bitcoin developers,
We would like to report a vulnerability which might lead, under some
assumptions, to a double-spending attack in a fast payment scenario.
The vulnerability has been introduced due to signature encoding
incompatibilities
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 3:23 AM, Arthur Gervais
arthur.gerv...@inf.ethz.ch wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Bitcoin developers,
We would like to report a vulnerability which might lead, under some
assumptions, to a double-spending attack in a fast payment scenario.
As of today, a full implementation of micropayment channels has been merged
onto bitcoinj's master branch (to be released in the next version). It is
designed to make it easy for users to create payment channel servers and
clients based on the design at
Hello Everybody,
Over the last few months we have been steadily adding
functionality to MultiBit including:
+ encrypted wallets
+ sign and verify message
+ stability improvements and bug fixes.
As a result of these efforts I think MultiBit is now
suitable for the entry level Bitcoin user. I
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Jim jim...@fastmail.co.uk wrote:
Hello Everybody,
Over the last few months we have been steadily adding
functionality to MultiBit including:
+ encrypted wallets
+ sign and verify message
+ stability improvements and bug fixes.
As a result of these efforts
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Jim jim...@fastmail.co.uk wrote:
Let me know if you think this is a good idea (or not!)
and if you have any questions.
Being able to promote a fast SPV desktop wallet would be great!
I went through an cycle of testing on multibit after I saw some
complaints
Hi guys,
This would be a big step forward. Anecdotally I can report that 5% of *
non-nerds* who don't abandon Bitcoin after waiting for the initial
blockchain download and *ongoing* sync on every restart, end up using
blockchain.info simply because it just works and works on their iPads
On Thursday, June 27, 2013 5:30:21 PM Jeff Garzik wrote:
* Very real possibility of an overall net reduction of full nodes on P2P
network
Even a reduction of *nodes at all*, as I've never seen a listening bitcoinj or
MultiBit node. :/
Jim, will MultiBit be adding p2p listening support?
I'm
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Luke-Jr l...@dashjr.org wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2013 5:30:21 PM Jeff Garzik wrote:
* Very real possibility of an overall net reduction of full nodes on P2P
network
Even a reduction of *nodes at all*, as I've never seen a listening bitcoinj or
MultiBit
A few replies, in order of point raised:
Jeff:
Arguments against multibit default:
* Less testing, field experience on desktop
Yes this is true - downloads of multibit have typically been around
1/7th to 1/5th of bitcoin-QT downloads. It helps of course that
the bitcoinj networking/ object model
RE: 141.101.113.245
http://whois.domaintools.com/141.101.113.245
gives it as CloudFlare - I suspect it is protecting
Mt Gox when we make our get for currency ticker info.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013, at 08:18 PM, Jim wrote:
A few replies, in order of point raised:
Jeff:
Arguments against multibit
I missed Greg's point on confirmations.
It is definitely a challenge to explain/ visualize both:
+ has the transaction propagated the network ?
and
+ it it confirmed/ buried in a block ?
when those words probably don't mean much to
the intended audience.
The transaction status icons I *think* do
On 06/27/2013 01:56 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Jim jim...@fastmail.co.uk wrote:
Let me know if you think this is a good idea (or not!)
and if you have any questions.
Being able to promote a fast SPV desktop wallet would be great!
I went through an cycle
13 matches
Mail list logo
