I don't have strong opinion @ block size topic.
But if there'll be a fork, PLEASE, include SIGHASH_WITHINPUTVALUE (
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=181734.0) or its alternative. All
developers of lightweight (blockchain-less) clients will adore you!
slush
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 12:12 AM
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote:
- Electrum v2 with a version number but no date
- myTREZOR with no version and no date and BIP44 key derivation. Some
seeds I believe are now being generated with 24 words instead of 12.
- MultiBit HD with no
Oh, now I got the 'soft-fork' alternative. If that means that *senders* to
Trezor need to be nice guys and use some special outputs, then it's,
obviously, no-go solution.
I understand political aspect around hard-fork. Anyway, are there any other
pending projects waiting for hard-fork? Maybe we
Hi,
is any progress or even discussion in this area?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=181734.0
I don't insist on any specific solution, but this is becoming a real issue
as hardware wallets are more widespread. I'm sitting next to TREZOR for 40
minutes already, because it streams and
, and no way to for the signer
to control that size. With this change, it's possible for the signer to
control the size of each chunk of data to guarantee it fits in, say, a QR
code (even if it means breaking it up into a couple smaller transactions).
-Alan
On 01/23/2015 09:51 AM, slush wrote
Correct, plus the most likely scenario in such attack is that the malware
even don't push such tx with excessive fees to the network, but send it
directly to attacker's pool/miner.
M.
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Alan Reiner etothe...@gmail.com wrote:
Unfortunately, one major attack
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
I think this is unreasonable. There is a straight-forward soft-fork
approach which is safe (e.g. no risk of invalidating existing
transactions). Yes, it means that you need to use newly created
addresses to get coins
AFAIK the only protection is SSL + certificate validation on client side.
However certificate revocation and updates in miners are pain in the ass,
that's why majority of pools (mine including) don't want to play with
that...
slush
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 1:45 AM, Luke Dashjr l...@dashjr.org
Although 140 BTC sounds scary, actually it was very minor issue and most of
miners aren't even aware about it.
TLS would probably make the attack harder, that's correct. However if
somebody controls ISP routers, then MITM with TLS is harder, yet possible.
slush
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 3:07 AM
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote:
Historical note: On one hand, Satoshi seemed to dislike the early
emergence of GPU mining pools quite a bit.
To my knowledge, Satoshi left the project before mining pools got a
traction.
slush
or alerting users. These
features are defined, but not widely implemented, because its definition is
vague or the feature is abused because of poor design.
Please don't over-engineer payment protocol.
Thank you for your attention.
slush
for the payment itself. Put these marketing claims to memo field
instead...
slush
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote:
It also seems like it would be subject to instant inflation, as it's
unprovable
The user knows the price that is on the website or menu, they know
on longest known blockchain).
I read such proposal about Stratum + SPV on reddit and I actually like it;
It removes major drawbacks of centralized Stratum mining, yet is gives
tools to miners to instantly switch to fallback pool when something wrong
is happening.
slush
...
slush
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Mark Friedenbach m...@monetize.io wrote:
Do you need to do full validation? There's an economic cost to mining
invalid blocks, and even if that were acceptable there's really no
reason to perform such an attack. The result would be similar to a block
Excellent points Christophe!
Although moving to 1e-6 units is fine for me and I see advantages of doing
this, I don't get that people on this mailing list are fine with calling
such unit bit. It's geeky as hell, ambiguous and confusing.
slush
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Christophe Biocca
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.comwrote:
Storing the seed is superior to storing the master node already
(whether coin specific or not), as it is smaller.
...Except that you're loosing flexibility (serialization, deserialization)
which gives you BIP32 node.
Using higher gap limit in the software is not prohibited, but then it
breaks the standard as is, in mean that importing such wallet to another
BIP64 wallet won't recover the funds properly, without proper settings of
gap limit...
Gap limit 20 is the most sane defaults for majority of users
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Luke-Jr l...@dashjr.org wrote:
Any wallet should import all the coins just fine, it just wouldn't *use*
any
account other than 0. Remember addresses are used to receive bitcoins; once
the UTXOs are in the wallet, they are no longer associated with the
address
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:54 PM, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.comwrote:
Would you consider software which scans all accounts as specified by
BIP64, but has no user interface option to distinguish them in any
way, view them independently, and has no ability to keep the coins
apart...
I believe there're plenty bitcoind instances running, but they don't have
configured port forwarding properly.There's uPNP support in bitcoind, but
it works only on simple setups.
Maybe there're some not yet considered way how to expose these *existing*
instances to Internet, to strenghten the
the bootstrap significantly improves catching the blockchain,
which may attract some more users to run bitcoind.
Not sure about C++, but simple torrent client in python is like 30 lines of
code (using libtorrent).
Marek
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:12 PM, slush sl...@centrum.cz wrote:
I believe
PM, slush sl...@centrum.cz wrote:
I agree that 'version' field of bip32 is not necessary and xpriv/xpub
should be enough for all cases; there's actually no need to use different
BIP32 roots for different altcoins.
I'm happily using one xpub for Bitcoin/Testnet/Litecoin at once, and by
having
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.comwrote:
I still don't understand the purpose of cointype. If you don't want to
risk reusing the same keys across different currencies, just don't use
the same seed or the same account? That is purely a client-side issue.
Of
tl;dr;
It is dangerous to expect that other seed than xprv does not contain
bitcoins or that xprv contains only bitcoins, because technically are
both situations possible. It is still safer to do the lookup; the magic
itself is ambiguous.
Marek
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:40 PM, slush sl
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.comwrote:
I see the cause of our disagreement now.
You actually want to share a single BIP32 tree across different
currency types, but do it in a way that guarantees that they never use
the same keys.
I would have expected
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Andreas Schildbach andr...@schildbach.dewrote:
While there is an agreement that a standard would be useful for sharing
wallets, we certainly didn't agree on every aspect of a standard. At
least not on this thread, and also not at the Berlin meeting.
We're
I'm cracking my head for many months with the idea of using TREZOR for web
auth purposes. Unfortunately I'm far from any usable solution yet.
My main comments to your BIP: Don't use bitcoin addresses directly and
don't encourage services to use this login for financial purposes. Mike
is right,
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote:
Hmmm, well TREZOR requires a web plugin. So if nobody installs plugins
then we have a problem :) But regardless, actually like I said, you don't
need a plugin.
I see the plugin as a temporary solution and we'll eliminate the
I agree that 'version' field of bip32 is not necessary and xpriv/xpub
should be enough for all cases; there's actually no need to use different
BIP32 roots for different altcoins.
I'm happily using one xpub for Bitcoin/Testnet/Litecoin at once, and by
having the cointype distinction in the bip32
, we're asking for the last comments
to current BIP39 draft.
Thanks,
slush
--
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads
and transforms it to mnemonic (which is then
shown on internal display). Generating the mnemonic outside the client-side
(computer) is one of main functionality of Trezor.
slush
--
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise
% of clients which expressed interest in bip39 :-).
slush
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Peter Todd p...@petertodd.org wrote:
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 04:05:14PM -0600, Brooks Boyd wrote:
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:42 AM, slush sl...@centrum.cz wrote:
Hi all,
during recent months we've
'),
('s', 'z'),
('u', 'v'), ('u', 'w'), ('u', 'y'),
('v', 'w'), ('v', 'y')
)
Feel free to review and comment current wordlist, but I think we're
slowly moving forward final list.
slush
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Thomas Voegtlin thoma...@gmx.de wrote:
Indeed, I want to include a version number in the seed phrase because
there are
multiple ways to define the tree structure used with BIP32. It is
certainly too early
to make final decisions on that, or to achieve a
now it is a showstopper for us.
Marek
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:11 PM, slush sl...@centrum.cz wrote:
bip39:
+ bi-directional
+ passphrase protected
+ shorter mnemonic or shorter wordlist
- predefined wordlist
ThomasV proposal:
+ any software can has its own preferred worlist
? passphrase
Hi Thomas,
can you more elaborate on that version bits? What is exact meaning of it?
I still think this is more an implementation problem. What stops Electrum
to do the same algorithm for searching branches as it is now for used
addresses?
These version bits need to be covered by the
to review and comment current wordlist, but I think we're slowly
moving forward final list.
slush
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
some fairly old wordlist solver code of mine:
https://people.xiph.org/~greg/wordlist.visual.py
it has a 52x52 letter visual
some discussions with slush about this, but I do not think it will ever
be possible to find a consensus on that topic.
Yes, that's true. It isn't possible to make everybody 100% happy. At least
I wanted to be constructive and asked you to replace the most problematic
words. No pull request from
for such algorithm (like the possibility to convert mnemonic to seed as
well as seed to mnemonic) and I think we found a good solution. I'm wildly
asking you for constructive comments, but saying it's a crap, I don't like
it won't help anything.
Thanks,
slush
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 6:02 PM
the
problem that it isn't bidirectional; it don't allow to convert back and
forth between mnemonic and seed, which was one of basic requirement for
such algorithm.
slush
--
October Webinars: Code for Performance
Free Intel
* swearword dictionary
would gain some popularity ;).
slush
--
October Webinars: Code for Performance
Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance.
Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling
I think this is a good idea; I just pushed new unit test test_similarity()
to github which finds such similar words. Right now it identifies ~90
similar pairs in current wordlist, I'll update wordlist tomorrow to pass
this test.
slush
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 1:52 AM, jan jan.mare...@gmail.com
ad RPC stops working:
* Client makes a 'getinfo' call and don't receive a response in a minute.
What is your precise RPC usage?
One process is asking getinfo every second as a fallback to possibly
misconfigured blocknotify. It also calls getblocktemplate every 30 second.
Second process is
:
https://github.com/trezor/python-ecdsa/
There's pull request waiting for python-ecdsa author aproval:
https://github.com/warner/python-ecdsa/pull/10
Aaand there's RFC 6979: tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6979
Thanks,
slush
--
How
three authors mentioned in the BIP are safe against fundamentalist
bitcoin users :-).
slush
On 9/10/13, Matthew Mitchell matthewmitch...@godofgod.co.uk wrote:
I like this, though maybe sometimes you'll get rude word combinations come
out.
Matthew
, people
are contained also in Electrum wordlist and nobody complained yet :-).
slush
On 9/11/13, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Matthew Mitchell
matthewmitch...@godofgod.co.uk wrote:
Well let's hope something like murder black people, stupid asian
person
in Trezor as well, if it counts.
I think it's a missing piece in absolute security of hardware wallets.
slush
--
Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite!
It's a free troubleshooting tool designed
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 10:22 AM, slush sl...@centrum.cz wrote:
We're planning to support payment protocol in Trezor as well, if it
counts. I think it's a missing piece in absolute security of hardware
wallets.
Yup
Agree. I quite like Mark's proposal. Yes, formally it is hard fork. But the
step 4) can come very far in the future, when the penetration of 0.8
clients will be mininimal.
slush
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Mark Friedenbach m...@monetize.io wrote:
This problem is very clearly a *bug
soon.
slush
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Jim jim...@fastmail.co.uk wrote:
Also, as BIP32 support is added to clients and codebases then the actual
variant of software to use to access your wallet will become relatively
less important. Combined with a standardised seed - passphrase
this simple. I'd be very happy
with simple payment protocol which can be implemented even on devices like
I'm working on, so device with few widely used certificates stored in the
memory will be able to display origin of the invoice and confirm its
validity.
slush
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:30 AM
mailing list.
I promised to write BIP draft for Stratum, I proposed and implemented
get_transactions method to allow Stratum jobs inspection. What more do you
want, seriously? I'm soo tired by you, Luke.
slush
P.S. I'm sorry that other developers had to read such posts. I'll try to
sit on my hands
Hello Gavin,
excuse me, but do you think it's good idea to have IRC meeting on
Valentine's evening? Some of us have girlfriends :-).
slush
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 3:49 AM, Gavin Andresen gavinandre...@gmail.comwrote:
Tomorrow, Feb 14'th at 21:00 UTC on #bitcoin-dev on Freenode IRC I'd
like
I agree Bitcoin should avoid making any bold political stands.
I agree on this. Please don't turn Bitcoin project/homepage into some
political agitation. Not everybody care about political attitude of main
project developers.
slush
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Alan Reiner etothe
really sure I'm using correct destination for
paying $1mil for a house, I can every time ask for real bitcoin addresses,
this is that secure way which we currently have.
slush
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:14 AM, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.comwrote:
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 12:58:37AM +0100, slush
for this solution.
Best,
slush
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Andy Parkins andypark...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2011 December 13 Tuesday, Amir Taaki wrote:
Maybe I wasn't clear enough in the document, but this is the intent with
the HTTPS proposal.
I don't like the idea of a hard-coded mapping
56 matches
Mail list logo
