Re: [Bitcoin-development] New attack identified and potential solution described: Dropped-transaction spam attack against the blocksize limit

2015-06-08 Thread Btc Drak
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Raystonn . rayst...@hotmail.com wrote: No, with no blocksize limit, a spammer would would flood the network with transactions until they ran out of money. I think you are forgetting even if you remove the blocksize limit, there is still a hard message size

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: Block Size Increase Requirements

2015-06-01 Thread Btc Drak
I did wonder what the post actually meant, I recommend appending /s after sarcasm so it's clear. Lots gets lost in text. But I agree with you btw his response was not particularly tactful. On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wtog...@gmail.com wrote: By reversing Mike's language to

Re: [Bitcoin-development] CLTV opcode allocation; long-term plans?

2015-05-12 Thread Btc Drak
, Peter Todd p...@petertodd.org wrote: On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 01:54:33AM +0100, Btc Drak wrote: That said, if people have strong feelings about this, I would be willing to make OP_CLTV work as follows: nLockTime 1 OP_CLTV Where the 1 selects absolute mode, and all others

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase

2015-05-07 Thread Btc Drak
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 6:43 PM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: And I'll ask again. Do you have a *specific, credible alternative*? Because so far I'm not seeing one. I think you are rubbing against your own presupposition that people must find and alternative right now. Quite a lot here do

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase

2015-05-07 Thread Btc Drak
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 7:40 PM, Gavin Costin slashdevn...@hotmail.com wrote: Can anyone opposed to this proposal articulate in plain english the worst case scenario(s) if it goes ahead? Some people in the conversation appear to be uncomfortable, perturbed, defensive etc about the proposal ….

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase

2015-05-07 Thread Btc Drak
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: Right now there is this nice warm fuzzy notion that decisions in Bitcoin Core are made by consensus. Controversial changes are avoided. I am trying to show you that this is just marketing. Consensus is arrived when the people

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase

2015-05-07 Thread Btc Drak
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: Maybe you dislike that idea. It's so centralised. So let's say Gavin commits his patch, because his authority is equal to all other committers. Someone else rolls it back. Gavin sets up a cron job to keep committing the

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Relative CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY (was CLTV proposal)

2015-05-04 Thread Btc Drak
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Jorge Timón jti...@jtimon.cc wrote: What I was describing was an attempt to fix a similar proposal by Mark Friedenbach, but it didn't needed fixing: I was simply misunderstanding it. Mark's RCLTV is completely reorg safe, so there's no need for the 100 block

Re: [Bitcoin-development] CLTV opcode allocation; long-term plans?

2015-05-04 Thread Btc Drak
and is the most economic use of precious NOPs. The extra time required is ok and it would be good to make this change to the PR in time for the feature freeze. Drak -- One dashboard for servers and applications across

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Cartographer

2014-12-29 Thread Btc Drak
Mike, In all seriousness, are you on the payroll of the NSA or similar to repeatedly attempt to introduce privacy leaks[1] and weaknesses[2] into the ecosystem not to mention logical fallacies like ad hominem attacks; disruption[3] and FUD[4]? Why do you answer objections by hand waving and

Re: [Bitcoin-development] ACK NACK utACK Concept ACK

2014-12-16 Thread Btc Drak
Would someone also clarify the use of nit for nitpicking and how it plays in the role of consensus? It seems like it's used for minor complaints/preferences. Drak On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote: On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:47 AM, Wladimir laa...@gmail.com

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Btc Drak
This is a pretty good example about refactoring discipline as well as premature/over optimisation. We all want to see more modular code, but the first steps should just be to relocate blocks of code so everything is more logically organised in smaller files (especially for consensus critical

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Btc Drak
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:35 PM, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote: At a macro level, that cycle was repeated many times, leading to the opposite end result: a lot of tiny movement/refactor/movement/refactor producing the review and patch annoyances described. It produces a blizzard of

Re: [Bitcoin-development] bitcoind as a library

2014-11-28 Thread Btc Drak
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Oliver Egginger bitc...@olivere.de wrote: Sorry for the off-topic but while reading this I like to ask you for picocoin, see: https://github.com/jgarzik/picocoin For a research project I'm looking for a C library to operate some block chain analysis

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Increasing the OP_RETURN maximum payload size

2014-11-18 Thread Btc Drak
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Flavien Charlon flavien.char...@coinprism.com wrote: My main concern with OP_RETURN is that it seems to encourage people to use the blockchain as a convenient transport channel The number one user of the blockchain as a storage and transport mechanism is

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-19 Thread Btc Drak
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:17 AM, xor x...@freenetproject.org wrote: I joined the list when Bitcoin was already in the 10-billions of market capitalization, and it actually really surprised me how low the traffic is here given the importance of Bitcoin. So as a random stranger to the

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Btc Drak
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Adam Back a...@cypherspace.org wrote: please not google groups *, I'd vote for sourceforge or other simple open list software over google groups. Please not sourceforge. * Google lists are somehow a little proprietary or gmail lockin focused eg it makes

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reconsidering github

2014-08-23 Thread Drak
On 23 August 2014 12:38, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.com wrote: That allows using github as easy-access mechanism for people to contribute and inspect, while having a higher security standard for the actual changes done to master. I'd also like to point out the obvious: git uses the

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Abnormally Large Tor node accepting only Bitcoin traffic

2014-07-28 Thread Drak
Related to Russia's Tor bounty? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/25/russia-research-identify-users-tor On 28 Jul 2014 04:45, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:54 PM, m...@bitwatch.co m...@bitwatch.co wrote: These website list Tor nodes by bandwidth:

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Anyone still using SOCKS4?

2014-07-04 Thread Drak
*watches the tumble weed blow by* I think it's pretty safe to remove it... On 4 July 2014 08:15, Wladimir laa...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Wladimir laa...@gmail.com wrote: If no one screams fire, we plan on removing support for it in the next major release, for

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed BIP 70 extension

2014-06-24 Thread Drak
Seems like a nice idea. On 24 June 2014 14:27, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: Coinbase have started allowing merchants to set discounts for purchasing with Bitcoin. Seeing an individual discount is not very motivating as they tend to be small. Seeing them stack up over time can be more

Re: [Bitcoin-development] DNS seeds unstable

2014-05-15 Thread Drak
I am sure the failure here is probably more mundane like a a service not restarted, or not on auto restart when server is rebooted and such like. The dns seeder works pretty efficiently in my experience. Maybe we need more seeders and to include the ability for zone transfers so existing seeders

Re: [Bitcoin-development] bits: Unit of account

2014-05-03 Thread Drak
+1 On 4 May 2014 02:06, Chris Pacia ctpa...@gmail.com wrote: Absent a concerted effort to move to something else other than 'bits', I would be willing to bet the nomenclature moves in that direction anyway. 'Bits' is just a shorten word for 'millibits' (or microbits, if you will). It's easier

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Coinbase reallocation to discourage Finney attacks

2014-04-23 Thread Drak
Cut it out with the ad hominem attacks please. If you cant be civil, please go away until you learn some manners. I think the issue being discussed is do you orphan an entire block causing distress to users as well, or try to just cause distress just to the evil miner? This discussion is about

[Bitcoin-development] Jenkins pull-tester

2014-04-09 Thread Drak
I would like to set up my own bitcoin pull-tester on Jenkins. Are there any instructions or guidance written anywhere? Drak -- Put Bad Developers to Shame Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous Integration

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Why are we bleeding nodes?

2014-04-07 Thread Drak
For what it's worth, the number of nodes rose dramatically during the China bullrun (I recall 45k in China alone) and dropped as dramatically as the price after the first PBOC announcement designed to cool down bitcoin trading in China. On 7 April 2014 12:34, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote:

Re: [Bitcoin-development] python-bitcoinlib v0.1 release - a low-level Python2/3 interface to the Bitcoin protocol

2014-03-15 Thread Drak
Would it make sense to pull that stuff in and add Peter with commit access since your repo is top of the fork tree. Drak On 15 March 2014 16:47, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote: Sounds great. I'm glad to see this with a more active maintainer. Maintaining -three- client libs was a bit

Re: [Bitcoin-development] python-bitcoinlib v0.1 release - a low-level Python2/3 interface to the Bitcoin protocol

2014-03-15 Thread Drak
community contributions around the project which is really important. Drak On 15 March 2014 17:22, Peter Todd p...@petertodd.org wrote: On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 05:12:42PM +, Drak wrote: Would it make sense to pull that stuff in and add Peter with commit access since your repo is top

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

2014-03-13 Thread Drak
consensus among themselves to accept and merge a PR to that effect. That will send a message, more than anything else that can be done. My two satoshi. Drak On 13 March 2014 16:29, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Alan Reiner etothe...@gmail.com wrote

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Multisign payment protocol?

2014-03-11 Thread Drak
and make wide-spread use much more likely and possible. Drak On 11 March 2014 01:15, Gavin Andresen gavinandre...@gmail.com wrote: Multisig is orthogonal to the payment protocol (but payment protocol is needed first). There need to be protocols for: a) Establishing multisig wallets of various

[Bitcoin-development] Multisign payment protocol?

2014-03-10 Thread Drak
at coinb.in/multisig but it still lacks the kind of ease with created by the payment protocol. If there was a BIP then it would go a long way to aiding future usability of multisig wallet implementations. What are your thoughts? Drak

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Payment Protocol Hash Comments

2014-03-02 Thread Drak
Not true, PHP does support sha2 http://php.net/manual/en/mhash.constants.php http://php.net/manual/en/function.hash-algos.php#refsect1-function.hash-algos-examples On 2 Mar 2014 08:44, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: SHA-1 support is there for PHP developers. Apparently it can't do SHA-2. On

Re: [Bitcoin-development] On OP_RETURN in upcoming 0.9 release

2014-02-28 Thread Drak
if submitted? Drak -- Flow-based real-time traffic analytics software. Cisco certified tool. Monitor traffic, SLAs, QoS, Medianet, WAAS etc. with NetFlow Analyzer Customize your own dashboards, set traffic alerts and generate reports

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Extension for BIP-0070 to support recurring payments

2014-02-25 Thread Drak
): and you can drop quarterly since it's just expressed as per 3*monthly. Drak On 25 February 2014 16:29, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: Hey there, So the essence of this protocol is as follows: enum PaymentFrequencyType { WEEKLY = 1; MONTHLY = 2; QUARTERLY = 3

[Bitcoin-development] MtGox blames bitcoin

2014-02-10 Thread Drak
What is the official response from the Bitcoin Core developers about MtGox's assertion that their problems are due to a fault of bitcoin, as opposed to a fault of their own? The technical analysis preluding this mess, was that MtGox was at fault for their faulty wallet implementation. Drak

Re: [Bitcoin-development] MtGox blames bitcoin

2014-02-10 Thread Drak
there are issues, but MtGox should have worked around it. Also thanks to Gregory for also writing[2] about the matter. Drak [1] https://bitcoinfoundation.org/blog/?p=418 [2] http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/2014/02/10/mt-gox-blames-bitcoin-core-developer-greg-maxwell-responds

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Stealth Addresses

2014-01-17 Thread Drak
=stealth But everyone loves privacy. On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Drak d...@zikula.org wrote: Peter I agree with you about reusable addresses, but aren't we also trying to get away from the word address entirely? How about calling it a payment key or reusable payment key instead? using

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Stealth Addresses

2014-01-16 Thread Drak
and to an average user, addresses are already reusable so there is little to distinguish the address format. It might be better to call it a public address in common terminology. Drak -- CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Stealth Addresses

2014-01-16 Thread Drak
Peter I agree with you about reusable addresses, but aren't we also trying to get away from the word address entirely? How about calling it a payment key or reusable payment key instead? using stealth is just asking for bad press imo. On 16 January 2014 21:28, Peter Todd p...@petertodd.org

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Stealth Addresses

2014-01-14 Thread Drak
Sorry this is possibly OT, but someone posted this thread to r/bitcoin and it's gone straight to position 1. People are really enthusiastic about this feature. Drak -- CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Dedicated server for bitcoin.org, your thoughts?

2014-01-03 Thread Drak
On 3 January 2014 05:45, Troy Benjegerdes ho...@hozed.org wrote: On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 05:48:06AM -0800, Gregory Maxwell wrote: On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 5:39 AM, Drak d...@zikula.org wrote: The NSA has the ability, right now to change every download of bitcoin-qt, on the fly

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Dedicated server for bitcoin.org, your thoughts?

2013-12-31 Thread Drak
-currency client in the clear. For anyone who has not seen the video. You will be shocked by what is actually in the wild being used today. It goes way beyond anything imaginable even in science fiction. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0w36GAyZIA Drak

Re: [Bitcoin-development] DarkWallet Best Practices

2013-12-19 Thread Drak
. Regards Drak -- Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100

Re: [Bitcoin-development] [unSYSTEM] DarkWallet Best Practices

2013-12-19 Thread Drak
with `git tag -s` should probably be incorporated into the spec as a MUST. Drak -- Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application

[Bitcoin-development] Fees UI warning

2013-12-16 Thread Drak
large fee according to the going rate. Drak [1] http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1syu3h/i_lost_all_my_bitcoins_in_an_erroneous/ -- Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most

Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.8.6 release candidate 1

2013-12-09 Thread Drak
On 9 December 2013 13:52, Roy Badami r...@gnomon.org.uk wrote: On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 01:39:51PM +, Drak wrote: Someone needs to update the bitcoin.org website, it still points downloads to 0.8.5 Perhaps because 0.8.6 hasn't been released yet? Or did I miss the announcement? I

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Dedicated server for bitcoin.org, your thoughts?

2013-12-08 Thread Drak
://github.com/blog/1547-release-your-software). There are also no adverts (another privacy leak at the least) and many feel are more trustworthy than Sourceforge: it also makes sense to have the downloads where the source is developed. Regards, Drak On 8 December 2013 03:38, Odinn Cyberguerrilla

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Dedicated server for bitcoin.org, your thoughts?

2013-12-08 Thread Drak
each person can act autonomously). The only thing I can suggest would be to hand the keys to the bitcoin project lead. Otherwise, who has admin rights to the code projects (github/sourceforge/this mailing list)? Those people have proven they can be trusted so far. Drak

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Dedicated server for bitcoin.org, your thoughts?

2013-12-08 Thread Drak
On 8 December 2013 21:01, Luke-Jr l...@dashjr.org wrote: On Sunday, December 08, 2013 8:51:07 PM Drak wrote: Otherwise, who has admin rights to the code projects (github/sourceforge/this mailing list)? Those people have proven they can be trusted so far. Can someone explain how Sirius

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Floating fees and SPV clients

2013-12-03 Thread Drak
to accept. I absolutely do not trust vendors to set fees. I think it has to be based on what senders are willing to pay and what miners are willing to accept. Drak -- Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Floating fees and SPV clients

2013-12-03 Thread Drak
On 3 December 2013 11:46, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Gavin Andresen gavinandre...@gmail.comwrote: If users want to pay with a huge transaction then it seems to me the user should cover that cost. Allowing users to pay merchants with 100K transactions

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal

2013-11-19 Thread Drak
of numbers to assign any time soon. It's quite normal for standards bodies to allocate numbers when in draft status. If they don't pass, they don't pass - they are clearly labelled DRAFTs. +1 on having things in a github repository. Much better for collaboration, Drak

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal

2013-11-19 Thread Drak
On 19 November 2013 17:01, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Drak d...@zikula.org wrote: It's quite normal for standards bodies to allocate numbers when in draft status. If they don't pass, they don't pass - they are clearly labelled DRAFTs. +1

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

2013-11-15 Thread Drak
. People are very familiar with Paypal these days, and are familiar with paypal address or their paypal id so again I think valid contenders are bitcoin address or bitcoin id. Regards, Drak -- DreamFactory - Open Source REST

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

2013-11-15 Thread Drak
On 16 November 2013 01:10, Luke-Jr l...@dashjr.org wrote: On Saturday, November 16, 2013 12:41:56 AM Drak wrote: So a payment clears after one confirmation, but you might want to wait until the payment has been confirmed n times. Then at least you are not using the same word for two

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

2013-11-14 Thread Drak
... Drak -- DreamFactory - Open Source REST JSON Services for HTML5 Native Apps OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

2013-11-14 Thread Drak
On 14 November 2013 22:32, Drak d...@zikula.org wrote: On 14 November 2013 22:00, Alan Reiner etothe...@gmail.com wrote: Just keep in mind it will be a little awkward that 54.3 uBTC is the smallest unit that can be transferred [easily] and the standard fees are 500 uBTC.It's not a deal

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Possible Solution To SM Attack

2013-11-05 Thread Drak
a pretty elegant solution: if two blocks are broadcast within a certain period of eachother, chose the lower target. That's a provable fair way of randomly choosing the winning block and would seem like a pretty simply patch. Drak

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Possible Solution To SM Attack

2013-11-05 Thread Drak
add another unpredictable factor: deciding the rules of whether higher or lower wins by hashing both competing blockhashes. If the leading two hex digits are below 128 lower wins, and if above, higher wins. Drak -- November

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Possible Solution To SM Attack

2013-11-05 Thread Drak
On 5 November 2013 23:06, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Drak d...@zikula.org wrote: If I understand the issue properly, this seems like a pretty elegant solution: if two blocks are broadcast within a certain period of eachother, chose the lower