1 2011-06-21 00:29:05 <casascius> BCBot op: log link attempted to install malware on my machine
  2 2011-06-21 00:30:25 <gmaxwell> casascius: hm?
  3 2011-06-21 00:30:54 <casascius> the window turned into one of those "Now scanning your system for viruses..." fake antivirus XP sort of thing...
  4 2011-06-21 00:34:32 <gmaxwell> casascius: I don't actually see the link in question
  5 2011-06-21 00:34:41 <gmaxwell> probably due to the netsplit.
  6 2011-06-21 00:35:14 <casascius> -BCBot- Hello casascius, thank you for joining #bitcoin-dev, this is a logged channel. The log can be seen under http://bit.ly/iPFi3X
  7 2011-06-21 00:35:43 <gmaxwell> doh
  8 2011-06-21 00:36:06 <gmaxwell> hm I wonder if it was due to an advert on the site.
  9 2011-06-21 00:37:37 <samlander> well so much for that
 10 2011-06-21 00:38:07 <samlander> i understand mark cant get the new server up until whenver he gets it up but it is frustrating that i cannot access my funds until then
 11 2011-06-21 00:45:20 <Taveren93HGK> hey guys, has anyone else encountered a memory leak with phoenix/phatk?
 12 2011-06-21 00:45:43 <Taveren93HGK> seems replicable across hardware and operating systems
 13 2011-06-21 01:01:52 <BitcoinForNewegg> how does the client verify the block chain is the real one?
 14 2011-06-21 01:01:59 <BitcoinForNewegg> what if it forked a year ago
 15 2011-06-21 01:15:16 <tcatm> BitcoinForNewegg: forking is expensive (in terms of computation power needed)
 16 2011-06-21 01:16:03 <tcatm> BitcoinForNewegg: but in the end the longest chain (with most computation power used to create it) will win
 17 2011-06-21 01:28:58 <cuddlefish> Hey, I need to buy some testnet coins
 18 2011-06-21 01:29:10 <tcatm> cuddlefish: how much?
 19 2011-06-21 01:29:25 <cuddlefish> tcatm: what's the going rate
 20 2011-06-21 01:29:47 <tcatm> 10 BTC/testcoin :)
 21 2011-06-21 01:29:52 <Sthebig> Why not just set up your own testnet?
 22 2011-06-21 01:30:01 <cuddlefish> tcatm: Oka... wait.
 23 2011-06-21 01:30:10 <tcatm> cuddlefish: no, really. how many do you need?
 24 2011-06-21 01:30:28 <cuddlefish> tcatm: It depends what the rate is
 25 2011-06-21 01:30:35 <tcatm> depends on the amount
 26 2011-06-21 01:30:40 <cuddlefish> well, crap.
 27 2011-06-21 01:30:44 <Storagewars> so when in the sweet flying fuck is mtgox going back up??!
 28 2011-06-21 01:30:47 <cuddlefish> tcatm: Perhaps 100 or so?
 29 2011-06-21 01:30:54 <tcatm> cuddlefish: address?
 30 2011-06-21 01:31:24 <cuddlefish> tcatm: One sec. I've got to set this up still
 31 2011-06-21 01:31:44 <tcatm> rate is 0, but you're free to send me some bitcoins
 32 2011-06-21 01:32:03 <cuddlefish> tcatm: ubitex is getting escrow, and I don't want live BTC on the dev server
 33 2011-06-21 01:38:19 <vonnieda> Is anyone currently working on encryption for wallet.dat in the official client? If not, I might be interested in taking it on and putting together a patch for it.
 34 2011-06-21 01:39:16 <jgarzik> vonnieda: yes, though input and code is always welcome.  http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=8728.0
 35 2011-06-21 01:39:35 <vonnieda> jgarzik: Ah, great! Thanks for the link.
 36 2011-06-21 01:40:23 <wasabi2> Do the JSON 'id' fields matter at all?
 37 2011-06-21 01:40:39 <tcatm> wasabi2: no
 38 2011-06-21 01:40:45 <wasabi2> k. figured.
 39 2011-06-21 01:41:04 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 440000 Khps, given current difficulty of 877226.66666667 , is 14 weeks, 1 day, 2 hours, 34 minutes, and 23 seconds
 40 2011-06-21 01:41:04 <McTest> ;;bc,calc 440000
 41 2011-06-21 01:41:18 <wasabi2> I was getting lots of server rejected my solution things for the hashes my new miner was submitting... but I just fed into it a json thing, with an actual solution (waited 10 minutes for one to appear)... and it looks okay.
 42 2011-06-21 01:41:34 <scott`> ;;bc,calc 1200000
 43 2011-06-21 01:41:34 <wasabi2> So I'm thinking maybe I'm submitting the data wrong.
 44 2011-06-21 01:41:36 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1200000 Khps, given current difficulty of 877226.66666667 , is 5 weeks, 1 day, 8 hours, 8 minutes, and 36 seconds
 45 2011-06-21 01:42:01 <wasabi2> ;;bc,calc 8200000
 46 2011-06-21 01:42:03 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 8200000 Khps, given current difficulty of 877226.66666667 , is 5 days, 7 hours, 37 minutes, and 50 seconds
 47 2011-06-21 01:43:54 <cuddlefish> tcatm: how long is the testnet blockchain
 48 2011-06-21 01:45:30 <tcatm> cuddlefish: I got 25373 blocks
 49 2011-06-21 01:46:00 <cuddlefish> tcatm: okay
 50 2011-06-21 01:49:06 <jgarzik> cuddlefish: http://blockexplorer.com/testnet
 51 2011-06-21 01:50:03 <cuddlefish> jgarzik: snazzy!
 52 2011-06-21 01:53:21 <cuddlefish> tcatm: and i'm caught up! we should reset the blockchain more often :D
 53 2011-06-21 01:53:39 <cuddlefish> tcatm: mrCbPtzep2y9GNzdqSgnVDeoxyS8KvQEUr
 54 2011-06-21 01:54:22 <tcatm> coins sent
 55 2011-06-21 01:54:31 <tcatm> 1H5i6nUEJpppcTZVetqkFYh5Z6jwMeoemD
 56 2011-06-21 01:55:27 <cuddlefish> excellent
 57 2011-06-21 01:55:27 <NxTitle> don't all btc addresses start with a 1?
 58 2011-06-21 01:55:35 <cuddlefish> NxTitle: that's testnet
 59 2011-06-21 01:55:49 <NxTitle> ah
 60 2011-06-21 01:56:38 <copumpkin> https://dev.metasploit.com/redmine/projects/framework/repository/revisions/12993/entry/modules/post/windows/gather/bitcoin_jacker.rb :)
 61 2011-06-21 01:57:00 <copumpkin> not really much of an exploit, eh
 62 2011-06-21 01:57:05 <copumpkin> but still cute that it's in metasplit now
 63 2011-06-21 01:57:09 <copumpkin> metasploit
 64 2011-06-21 01:57:56 <NxTitle> hallo MtGox_Adam, any updates?
 65 2011-06-21 01:59:44 <NxTitle> eh, nvm - I'll wait until the EDT morning
 66 2011-06-21 02:00:17 <MtGox_Adam> MT has visitors atm, very close to getting the claim site launched. Sorry for the delay
 67 2011-06-21 02:01:02 <NxTitle> no worries, and sounds good to hear
 68 2011-06-21 02:01:17 <tcatm> MtGox_Adam: will it be possible to see pending USD withdrawals (from last week)?
 69 2011-06-21 02:06:29 <samlander> adam: was good to put a face to the name
 70 2011-06-21 02:06:38 <samlander> where abouts in canada are you from?
 71 2011-06-21 02:06:42 <samlander> (got that eastern look to ya)
 72 2011-06-21 02:06:55 <MtGox_Adam> tcatm: I'll ask Mark when he's free.
 73 2011-06-21 02:07:55 <NxTitle> if MtGox_Adam is from Ottawa I'm having a beer with him
 74 2011-06-21 02:08:08 <NxTitle> then possibly holding him hostage :D
 75 2011-06-21 02:08:10 <samlander> copumpkin: simple answer to that... allow the user to create the wallet file where ever they want... preferably on a crypto locked usb key
 76 2011-06-21 02:08:21 <samlander> instead of hardcoding into one location
 77 2011-06-21 02:08:32 <samlander> i should get the windows source code and recompile with that addin
 78 2011-06-21 02:08:53 <copumpkin> samlander: the encryption would stop it more than the arbitrary location
 79 2011-06-21 02:08:56 <MMavipc> Anyone have a oracle username & pass I could use to fucking download Berkerly DB, when I try to create one and I click continue, nothing happens
 80 2011-06-21 02:09:08 <samlander> copumpkin: agreed, but it would make it a shit load easier to use
 81 2011-06-21 02:09:10 <copumpkin> samlander: also, if they have access to your computer like that, they can probably log keys and steal your password/key :)
 82 2011-06-21 02:09:11 <copumpkin> but yeah
 83 2011-06-21 02:09:23 <TecnoBrat> MtGox_Adam, tell me you are a BC boy :P
 84 2011-06-21 02:09:36 <samlander> copumpkin: case being the usb key would be like an actual key.. if it's not in the computer its not stealable
 85 2011-06-21 02:09:47 <tcatm> MtGox_Adam: great. thx!
 86 2011-06-21 02:09:51 <TecnoBrat> also MtGox_Adam pick a logo already, god! http://logotournament.com/contests/mt.gox
 87 2011-06-21 02:09:53 <MtGox_Adam> TecnoBrat: Man, the last place I want to associate myself with is there these days
 88 2011-06-21 02:09:55 <MtGox_Adam> haha
 89 2011-06-21 02:09:57 <TecnoBrat> (I kid, I kid)
 90 2011-06-21 02:10:15 <MtGox_Adam> Originally from Calgary, lived in Vancouver for 5 years. I like to say I'm from Van... until recently
 91 2011-06-21 02:10:17 <TecnoBrat> MtGox_Adam, PFFT
 92 2011-06-21 02:10:21 <TecnoBrat> hahaha
 93 2011-06-21 02:10:25 <NxTitle> MtGox_Adam: leader of the riots
 94 2011-06-21 02:10:27 <MMavipc> Could somneone with an oracle account please mirror http://download.oracle.com/otn/berkeley-db/db-5.2.28.zip ?
 95 2011-06-21 02:10:53 <TecnoBrat> NxTitle, the MtGox hack was actually payback .. did you see that guy lighting the cop car on fire? that was adam.
 96 2011-06-21 02:11:06 <NxTitle> XD
 97 2011-06-21 02:11:08 <MtGox_Adam> TecnoBrat: The logo's are too hard to pick. I'm thinking #59
 98 2011-06-21 02:11:32 <MtGox_Adam> I've got alibi's that say I was here :P
 99 2011-06-21 02:11:50 <NxTitle> just take em all, make it rotate the logos :P
100 2011-06-21 02:12:05 <NxTitle> ???
101 2011-06-21 02:12:08 <NxTitle> profit
102 2011-06-21 02:12:13 <TecnoBrat> there is a bunch of wookasheen ones that are good
103 2011-06-21 02:12:20 <TecnoBrat> 83
104 2011-06-21 02:12:23 <MtGox_Adam> Then we have to pay everyone the reward....
105 2011-06-21 02:12:30 <samlander> adam: call me crazy but im partial to 56
106 2011-06-21 02:12:35 <TecnoBrat> http://logotournament.com/contests/mt.gox/by/wookasheen
107 2011-06-21 02:12:40 <TecnoBrat> they are similar
108 2011-06-21 02:12:44 <TecnoBrat> but all are really nice
109 2011-06-21 02:12:57 <TecnoBrat> 113 is neat
110 2011-06-21 02:13:35 <TecnoBrat> 26 is too, I like the way the orbits make an X
111 2011-06-21 02:13:48 <MtGox_Adam> WHY IS THIS SO DIFFICULT
112 2011-06-21 02:13:52 <MtGox_Adam> :(
113 2011-06-21 02:14:05 <TecnoBrat> hahaha
114 2011-06-21 02:14:10 <tcatm> #113 reminds me more of "wireless transmission" or sound waves than an exchange
115 2011-06-21 02:14:27 <TecnoBrat> I can see that .. yea
116 2011-06-21 02:14:30 <samlander> adam: so which province u from?
117 2011-06-21 02:14:31 <MtGox_Adam> tcatm: Aye.
118 2011-06-21 02:14:53 <MtGox_Adam> From AB, heart is in BC
119 2011-06-21 02:15:14 <TecnoBrat> (I'm vancouver island born and raised)
120 2011-06-21 02:15:32 <NxTitle> nice
121 2011-06-21 02:15:43 <samlander> oh man did i have that one wrong
122 2011-06-21 02:15:45 <MtGox_Adam> Very nice, I like the Island ;)
123 2011-06-21 02:15:58 <samlander> <- born and raised in calgary
124 2011-06-21 02:16:05 <MMavipc> http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=20424.0
125 2011-06-21 02:16:10 <NxTitle> I lived in ottawa for 2 years, grew up in north bay, moved back to ottawa
126 2011-06-21 02:16:11 <NxTitle> lol
127 2011-06-21 02:16:11 <samlander> grew up in forest lawn :/
128 2011-06-21 02:16:37 <MtGox_Adam> samlander: Nice, I'm originally from the North West
129 2011-06-21 02:16:39 <NxTitle> damn harper
130 2011-06-21 02:16:45 <samlander> nah harper is fine
131 2011-06-21 02:16:48 <samlander> would you rather have obama?
132 2011-06-21 02:17:01 <MtGox_Adam> (calgary)
133 2011-06-21 02:17:02 <NxTitle> this is a good point
134 2011-06-21 02:17:07 <samlander> adam: good man
135 2011-06-21 02:17:16 <MMavipc> no one :(?
136 2011-06-21 02:17:41 <NxTitle> though I voted NDP
137 2011-06-21 02:17:51 <NxTitle> inb4 shun :P
138 2011-06-21 02:19:31 <NxTitle> MMavipc: what?
139 2011-06-21 02:20:10 <MMavipc> It wont let me create an account to download berkerly DB with
140 2011-06-21 02:20:11 <MMavipc> http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=20424.0
141 2011-06-21 02:20:21 <MMavipc> I need someone to mirror the zip for me
142 2011-06-21 02:20:25 <NxTitle> o
143 2011-06-21 02:20:41 <NxTitle> yeah I can't help
144 2011-06-21 02:20:46 <NxTitle> sry
145 2011-06-21 02:21:02 <NxTitle> also, how is this bitcoin related at all?
146 2011-06-21 02:21:11 <MMavipc> bitcoin depends on berkerly db
147 2011-06-21 02:21:17 <MMavipc> I can't compile without it
148 2011-06-21 02:21:30 <NxTitle> o
149 2011-06-21 02:21:40 <MMavipc> You should know that since you're in the dev channel lol
150 2011-06-21 02:22:03 <NxTitle> I do know, but I forot
151 2011-06-21 02:22:06 <NxTitle> forgot
152 2011-06-21 02:22:16 <NxTitle> it's late where I am :P
153 2011-06-21 02:22:30 <NxTitle> well, relatively
154 2011-06-21 02:25:54 <upb> MMavipc: tried bugmenot.com _
155 2011-06-21 02:27:07 <upb> ?
156 2011-06-21 02:28:43 <BitcoinForNewegg> anyone here know how bitcoin client works?
157 2011-06-21 02:31:09 <BitcoinForNewegg> how does it tell that a block chain is real?
158 2011-06-21 02:33:19 <tcatm> BitcoinForNewegg: it starts from the genesis block and verifies all following blocks
159 2011-06-21 02:34:26 <BitcoinForNewegg> but how does it know which branch is legit?
160 2011-06-21 02:35:03 <Jamesboo_> when is mt gox coming back u?p
161 2011-06-21 02:35:25 <tcatm> BitcoinForNewegg: the longest.
162 2011-06-21 02:35:41 <Jamesboo_> how many hours?
163 2011-06-21 02:36:25 <BitcoinForNewegg> then bitcoinhas a gaping security hole and I will break it myself and get all the money
164 2011-06-21 02:36:38 <upb> MMavipc: hey i remembered my old account from old workplace lol :)
165 2011-06-21 02:36:40 <upb> so i'll get it for u
166 2011-06-21 02:36:42 <NxTitle> BitcoinForNewegg: cool beans, good luck
167 2011-06-21 02:36:43 <Jamesboo_> Mt Gox, are they about to start trading again soon?
168 2011-06-21 02:36:44 <cacheson> BitcoinForNewegg: do it up
169 2011-06-21 02:36:45 <cacheson> BitcoinForNewegg: you're only competing with the world's more powerful supercomputer
170 2011-06-21 02:36:45 <Jamesboo_> #bitcoin-mining
171 2011-06-21 02:36:46 <BitcoinForNewegg> if all it verifys is th elength... i can just rol back to a year ago and generate one block every 10 minutes
172 2011-06-21 02:36:46 <tcatm> BitcoinForNewegg: well, the chain has to match the rules
173 2011-06-21 02:36:47 <BitcoinForNewegg> oh
174 2011-06-21 02:36:47 <NxTitle> also you do realize by breaking bitcoin, the value will probably die
175 2011-06-21 02:36:47 <tcatm> BitcoinForNewegg: and longest = sum(difficulty)
176 2011-06-21 02:36:48 <BitcoinForNewegg> not most blocks
177 2011-06-21 02:36:48 <tcatm> doesn't make a big difference
178 2011-06-21 02:36:49 <BitcoinForNewegg> the average time to generate a block is way less than 10 minutes
179 2011-06-21 02:36:49 <tcatm> no. you can't create a longer chain with valid timestamps
180 2011-06-21 02:36:50 <BitcoinForNewegg> it always will be
181 2011-06-21 02:36:50 <Jamesboo_> #bitcoin
182 2011-06-21 02:36:50 <samlander> bitcoinbulletin: sure, if you're tycho
183 2011-06-21 02:36:50 <tcatm> either your timestamps will be invalid or difficulty will be higher
184 2011-06-21 02:36:51 <BitcoinForNewegg> and I woudl ahve a few percent l;onger chain
185 2011-06-21 02:36:52 <BitcoinForNewegg> but it doesnt use that so never mind
186 2011-06-21 02:36:52 <Jamesboo_> anyone know when mt gox plans to open again?
187 2011-06-21 02:36:52 <samlander> wouldnt trying to attach to an orphan chain be invalidated automatically because the chain is shorter than the official one?
188 2011-06-21 02:36:52 <tcatm> there are few blockhashes at specific heights hardcoded into the client. that's why it wouldn't work even with max(height) only
189 2011-06-21 02:36:53 <BitcoinForNewegg> any time now (+24 hours)
190 2011-06-21 02:36:53 <samlander> heh
191 2011-06-21 02:36:53 <shockdiode> "any day now"
192 2011-06-21 02:45:48 <markio> mtgox is on bitcoincharts.com
193 2011-06-21 02:46:22 <tcatm> markio: that does not mean much :)
194 2011-06-21 02:47:04 <jrmithdobbs> markio: it's also on f-d
195 2011-06-21 02:47:18 <jrmithdobbs> which will probably slow the bringup of the "claim" site
196 2011-06-21 02:47:22 <jrmithdobbs> at least it should.
197 2011-06-21 02:47:37 <n0n0> hey, so how many people looked at the bitcoind code, is there any estimate?
198 2011-06-21 02:48:44 <gmaxwell> n0n0: at least one person.
199 2011-06-21 02:48:59 <n0n0> so there are 54 individual commiters to the code...
200 2011-06-21 02:49:07 <n0n0> ... has there been any paid audit or something similar?
201 2011-06-21 02:49:08 <lfm> estimate? I estimate I looked at it.
202 2011-06-21 02:49:20 <gmaxwell> well then 54 plus 1 at a minimum
203 2011-06-21 02:49:48 <lfm> n0n0: paid audit? who whould pay?
204 2011-06-21 02:50:36 <gmaxwell> lfm: someone with millions of dollars in bitcoin, of course.
205 2011-06-21 02:50:38 <n0n0> I don't know. I would guess people with lots of BTC?
206 2011-06-21 02:51:52 <wasabi2> Well, i'm mystified. Miner is generating and sending what looks like a perfect JSON packet, with a header structure... that matches up perfectly with what I'd think would be valid... but the pool is saying false.
207 2011-06-21 02:52:30 <lfm> wasabiprolly a byte order problem
208 2011-06-21 02:52:43 <wasabi2> Doesn't seem like it.
209 2011-06-21 02:53:04 <wasabi2> I just net grabbed the failed submission.
210 2011-06-21 02:53:52 <lfm> wasabi2 compare it to a net grab from cpuminer or something
211 2011-06-21 02:53:57 <wasabi2> I did.
212 2011-06-21 02:54:05 <wasabi2> 00000001 d915b8fd2face61c6fe22ab76cad5f46c11cebab697dbd9e0000080400000000 8fe5f19cbdd55b40db93be7ef8ae249e0b21ec6e29c833b186404de0de205cc5 4e0022ac 1a132185 007d1adf 00000080 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000080020000
213 2011-06-21 02:54:09 <wasabi2> Added some spaces in there for formatting.
214 2011-06-21 02:57:15 <wasabi2> Well, the server returned false... anyways.
215 2011-06-21 02:57:18 <wasabi2> Maybe it's counting it.
216 2011-06-21 02:58:48 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: that would be the end of bitcoin
217 2011-06-21 02:58:51 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: hhe
218 2011-06-21 02:58:54 <lfm> wasabi2:  I think you are testing for zeros at the wrong end of the hash
219 2011-06-21 03:00:42 <wasabi2> I thought so to, so I grabbed a JSON get work request, waited until the block completed (by somebody else)
220 2011-06-21 03:00:46 <lfm> wasabi2 do you know what I mean?
221 2011-06-21 03:00:48 <wasabi2> Then substituted all their values into it.
222 2011-06-21 03:00:53 <wasabi2> And ran it though my code.
223 2011-06-21 03:00:58 <wasabi2> And my code generated hte same has.
224 2011-06-21 03:01:06 <wasabi2> With the 0 in the place I expect it.
225 2011-06-21 03:01:46 <lfm> ya but when you compare it to the target you have missed a swap or you put the swap in the wrong place
226 2011-06-21 03:02:05 <wasabi2> I'm not even compariing it to the target at this point. Just checking that [7] is 0.
227 2011-06-21 03:02:21 <wasabi2> What I'm saying though is if I take a successful has, from block explorer, and stuff it into my code, it works.
228 2011-06-21 03:02:45 <lfm> wasabi2 ok I am thinking you need to test [0] in your case
229 2011-06-21 03:03:07 <wasabi2> I don't see how that can be true with what I just said.
230 2011-06-21 03:04:19 <wasabi2> Actually... I get the feeling that it's working fine, but the pool is returning false anyways.
231 2011-06-21 03:04:41 <wasabi2> I think it might be accepting them, regardless of it's return value.
232 2011-06-21 03:05:24 <wasabi2> Oh. That makes sense.
233 2011-06-21 03:05:29 <wasabi2> That what it does.
234 2011-06-21 03:12:16 <wasabi2> I'm guessing stupid crap like the order of the fields in the JSON object don't matter? Like sending id last, and param's first?
235 2011-06-21 03:16:49 <gmaxwell> http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=20427.0 < webwallets more secure than personal clients? Not so.
236 2011-06-21 03:23:24 <TecnoBrat> I don't know about you, but how does anyone trust a site like that?
237 2011-06-21 03:25:19 <Keefe> maybe more secure than most personal pc's, but not more secure than the smart guys' pc's
238 2011-06-21 03:30:54 <jrmithdobbs> MagicalTux: no snippy response to that one huh?
239 2011-06-21 03:30:56 <jrmithdobbs> thought so.
240 2011-06-21 03:31:40 <ramontayag> hey folks. need some help getting testbox-net working with my app. http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/testnet-in-a-box/ ; but before I ask questions, i wanted to know if anyone is familiar with that
241 2011-06-21 03:33:57 <upb> lol
242 2011-06-21 03:36:12 <lfm> ramontayag: yes, some people are familiar with it, what is your question?
243 2011-06-21 03:36:17 <ramontayag> upb, since you got to get it to work in windows maybe you'll indulge me. i've got the two bitcoin daemons running; i get `getinfo` on them and they both reply.
244 2011-06-21 03:37:10 <ramontayag> and this is the commandline getinfo: ./path/to/bitcoin -datadir=/path/to/1 getinfo
245 2011-06-21 03:38:25 <ramontayag> however, when my app tries to talk to it via rpcjson, I see debug.log show this:
246 2011-06-21 03:38:53 <ramontayag> accepted connection 127.0.0.1:40462 ; PROCESSMESSAGE MESSAGESTART NOT FOUND; --- then my app just hangs and gets an execution expired later on
247 2011-06-21 03:39:03 <ramontayag> so I know it connects to the daemon, but the daemon doesn't seem to reply
248 2011-06-21 03:39:26 <lfm> ramontayag: wrong account/password?
249 2011-06-21 03:39:29 <ramontayag> by `debug.log`, i mean the debug.log of the testnet-box # 1
250 2011-06-21 03:40:10 <ramontayag> lfm, when bitcoin.conf doesn't contain an rpcuser (like the default settings of testnet-box) what's the username?
251 2011-06-21 03:40:23 <upb> sorry i havent messed with the rpc interface
252 2011-06-21 03:40:32 <lfm> dunno, just put in a rcpuser
253 2011-06-21 03:41:02 <ramontayag> ok coz i tried that and it didn't seem to work, but i'll try it again to get the message in debug.log. :)
254 2011-06-21 03:42:30 <lfm> the daemon is looking for a start message it sez. what is you app waiting for?
255 2011-06-21 03:42:52 <apr> hey, anybody here running or ran pushpool?
256 2011-06-21 03:43:39 <copumpkin> briareus: not rejoining?
257 2011-06-21 03:44:40 <ramontayag> lfm, my app just asks for `get_new_address`
258 2011-06-21 03:44:57 <upb> i'm pretty sure youre talking to the bitcoin protocol port ;)
259 2011-06-21 03:45:02 <upb> not rpc
260 2011-06-21 03:45:32 <upb> ./src/main.cpp-        int nHeaderSize = vRecv.GetSerializeSize(CMessageHeader());
261 2011-06-21 03:45:36 <upb> ./src/main.cpp-        if (vRecv.end() - pstart < nHeaderSize)
262 2011-06-21 03:45:38 <upb> ./src/main.cpp-        {
263 2011-06-21 03:45:40 <upb> ./src/main.cpp-            if (vRecv.size() > nHeaderSize)
264 2011-06-21 03:45:43 <upb> ./src/main.cpp-            {
265 2011-06-21 03:45:46 <upb> ./src/main.cpp:                printf("\n\nPROCESSMESSAGE MESSAGESTART NOT FOUND\n\n");
266 2011-06-21 03:46:06 <ramontayag> lfm, i got my app to talk to bitcoind this way: /path/to/bitcoind -t -rpcuser=myuser -rpcpassword=123 -rpcport=18333
267 2011-06-21 03:46:15 <ramontayag> however, that only works when I'm connected to the internet
268 2011-06-21 03:46:21 <lfm> ah 83333 or 83334
269 2011-06-21 03:46:25 <ramontayag> i'd like to run my app (for testing purposes) even if i'm offline
270 2011-06-21 03:47:35 <ramontayag> upb, i'm not sure what you mean by 'talking to the bitcoin protocol port'?
271 2011-06-21 03:48:01 <upb> the port where the bitcoin(d) accepts connections that talk the bitcoin protocol
272 2011-06-21 03:48:05 <upb> p2p
273 2011-06-21 03:48:23 <lfm> bitoin protocol is how the bitcoind daemons talk to each other. it is a different port from the rpc port
274 2011-06-21 03:48:48 <ramontayag> ahh...
275 2011-06-21 03:49:04 <ramontayag> i get it! i see my mistake.
276 2011-06-21 03:49:23 <ramontayag> my app, in development and testing mode, tried to connect to rpcport 18333
277 2011-06-21 03:49:29 <lfm> you were trying to run em both on one port or something
278 2011-06-21 03:49:33 <ramontayag> but that's the p2p port
279 2011-06-21 03:51:40 <ramontayag> i kept thinking 'rpcport' whenever testbox-net mentioned the word 'port'
280 2011-06-21 03:53:54 <lfm> ya see in the /2/bitcoin.conf there is rpcport and then there is a different port on the connect=?
281 2011-06-21 03:55:18 <lfm> the dir=1 rpcport should be 18332 I think
282 2011-06-21 03:56:08 <ramontayag> lfm, i see. thanks. :) i'm able to connect now.
283 2011-06-21 03:56:14 <lfm> wtg
284 2011-06-21 03:58:49 <Blitzboom> MtGox_Adam: will bitcoin withdrawals be possible as soon as the sites up?
285 2011-06-21 03:59:54 <lfm> Blitzboom: you'll have to change your password first!
286 2011-06-21 04:00:02 <Blitzboom> yes, of course
287 2011-06-21 04:01:25 <Keefe> Blitzboom: yes
288 2011-06-21 04:01:40 <Keefe> they said in the interview
289 2011-06-21 04:01:41 <Koalemitos> you seriously? i guess they'll go down instant
290 2011-06-21 04:01:48 <Koalemitos> due to the activity
291 2011-06-21 04:02:03 <Blitzboom> good, this will be a proof that they havent lost substantial amounts of coins
292 2011-06-21 04:02:13 <Keefe> with my luck, they'll open the claim page just minutes after i go to sleep
293 2011-06-21 04:02:27 <Keefe> so i'll be one of the last to withdraw
294 2011-06-21 04:02:41 <Blitzboom> im not sure whether im going to withdraw
295 2011-06-21 04:02:46 <Optimo> toasty is kevin day, no shit
296 2011-06-21 04:02:48 <Blitzboom> i want to speculate a bit :D
297 2011-06-21 04:02:51 <Optimo> that's a blast from the past
298 2011-06-21 04:03:12 <Keefe> i was withdrawing btc anyway, before the crash. did some really large trades and was simply moving funds to secure storage
299 2011-06-21 04:03:32 <Keefe> i still plan to keep my usual trading amount there
300 2011-06-21 04:04:15 <Keefe> yep, so far
301 2011-06-21 04:04:17 <Optimo> I believe toasty's interpretation is acurate, however
302 2011-06-21 04:04:30 <Keefe> ?
303 2011-06-21 04:04:34 <Optimo> the resolution will require further details
304 2011-06-21 04:04:41 <jrmithdobbs> toasty needs to shut the fuck up or he's going to get weev'ed
305 2011-06-21 04:05:03 <Optimo> but he says the truth
306 2011-06-21 04:05:08 <Keefe> ya i do believe this will be more complex and take longer than they might expect
307 2011-06-21 04:05:20 <Optimo> http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=20207.0
308 2011-06-21 04:05:29 <Blitzboom> legitimate mtgox trades are a joke when you cant even enter orders because the site is overloaded
309 2011-06-21 04:05:32 <jrmithdobbs> Optimo: doesn't matter. standard of evidence for computer crimes in the US is laughable
310 2011-06-21 04:05:41 <jrmithdobbs> Optimo: he needs to shut the fuck up and get legal advice.
311 2011-06-21 04:05:44 <Keefe> fortunately i expect to be one of the first to get in, since my password is long strong and unique
312 2011-06-21 04:05:47 <Optimo> jrmithdobbs, no doubt
313 2011-06-21 04:06:02 <Optimo> but it's demanding clarification either way
314 2011-06-21 04:10:04 <n0n0> so... mtgox is down again, completely?
315 2011-06-21 04:10:23 <jrmithdobbs> n0n0: you're welcome
316 2011-06-21 04:10:45 <upb> haha
317 2011-06-21 04:11:01 <upb> nah it loads
318 2011-06-21 04:11:04 <n0n0> there has been a mention of this police report he filed against that alleged hacker, is there a proof of that, somewhere?
319 2011-06-21 04:11:20 <jrmithdobbs> n0n0: there's not even proof he's in possession of the coins
320 2011-06-21 04:11:40 <jrmithdobbs> there's nothing but misinformation and bad attempted PR coverups
321 2011-06-21 04:11:43 <Blitzboom> who, the hacker or mtgox?
322 2011-06-21 04:11:50 <jrmithdobbs> MagicalTux
323 2011-06-21 04:12:07 <n0n0> what is the best page to get an overview?
324 2011-06-21 04:12:20 <n0n0> the forum is full of strange conspiracy and flames
325 2011-06-21 04:12:23 <n0n0> i do not really trust mtgox any longer
326 2011-06-21 04:12:38 <jrmithdobbs> n0n0: https://twitter.com/#!/jrmithdobbs/status/83039516335681536
327 2011-06-21 04:12:49 <Blitzboom> i will, as soon as they allow bitcoin withdrawals
328 2011-06-21 04:13:32 <n0n0> trust em?
329 2011-06-21 04:13:55 <n0n0> well.
330 2011-06-21 04:14:20 <n0n0> i think any bitcoin exchange would be advised now to proof from time to time that they have the majority of bitcoins in their possession
331 2011-06-21 04:17:00 <gmaxwell> n0n0++
332 2011-06-21 04:18:30 <n0n0> hmm.
333 2011-06-21 04:18:47 <n0n0> that 2nd post is from you in the thread, gmaxwell. on that site they have lots of hashes.
334 2011-06-21 04:18:58 <n0n0> i tried to grep a few in the accounts.csv, without any hits
335 2011-06-21 04:19:14 <doublec> how would an exchange prove they have the coins?
336 2011-06-21 04:19:20 <jrmithdobbs> ;;bc,blocks
337 2011-06-21 04:19:21 <gribble> 132233
338 2011-06-21 04:19:51 <ramontayag> lfm, i'm able to sent some coin from box 1 to box 2. box 2 lists them as received, but they don't get confirmed. how do I enable confirmations?
339 2011-06-21 04:20:09 <n0n0> doublec, have a private key with which they can sign messages that belongs to them.
340 2011-06-21 04:20:35 <n0n0> sign some kind statement that they are who they are.
341 2011-06-21 04:20:37 <doublec> n0n0: how does that prove they have the coins?
342 2011-06-21 04:20:48 <n0n0> sign that statement with the private key that belongs to the coins, then.
343 2011-06-21 04:21:26 <doublec> that would require them to consolidate their coins into one address often
344 2011-06-21 04:21:47 <n0n0> yep. but what is the deal?
345 2011-06-21 04:22:01 <gmaxwell> doublec: they could produce a zillion signatures .. it would be a few lines changed to the existing signature rpc patch.
346 2011-06-21 04:22:06 <n0n0> they should take most coins out of the exchange anyways.
347 2011-06-21 04:22:12 <gmaxwell> "sign this message with every key in this wallet"
348 2011-06-21 04:22:14 <n0n0> which i hope mtgox did. but I still doubt it.
349 2011-06-21 04:22:45 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: or they could just dump the damned things and sign with openssl
350 2011-06-21 04:22:53 <n0n0> .. and my question to gmaxwell is still which hash has been posted where because of a sqlinjection attack. i do not see any real proof o that.
351 2011-06-21 04:23:01 <gmaxwell> Or if they used the type-2 determinstic wallets then disclosing the address key would disclose all their future addressess.
352 2011-06-21 04:23:25 <gmaxwell> n0n0: huh?
353 2011-06-21 04:23:37 <n0n0> well, i do not get it.
354 2011-06-21 04:23:49 <n0n0> that link you posted on the site. i was assuming those to be md5s of the passwords in the accounts.csv?
355 2011-06-21 04:23:52 <gmaxwell> n0n0: I"Not mentioned here is that fact that dozens of MTGOX hashed passwords were quietly disclosed on a hash cracking forum on Fri Jun 17, 2011 5:21 am
356 2011-06-21 04:23:55 <gmaxwell> (http://forum.insidepro.com/viewtopic.php?t=9124&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=75&sid=1a9e31567fe815c0eea63c40c39fb707 post by "georgeclooney")"
357 2011-06-21 04:24:09 <gmaxwell> n0n0: yes, all but 4 or 5 of them are in accounts.csv
358 2011-06-21 04:24:09 <ramontayag> hey folks, i'm using testnet-box. i can send coin from box 1 to box 2, but box 2 doesn't confirm any of them. how do I enable confirmations?
359 2011-06-21 04:24:17 <n0n0> ep.
360 2011-06-21 04:24:21 <n0n0> s/ep./yep
361 2011-06-21 04:24:29 <ramontayag> i'm asking because box 2's balance stays at 0.0
362 2011-06-21 04:24:33 <n0n0> hmm. must have hit these 5.
363 2011-06-21 04:24:46 <gmaxwell> n0n0: they include the first couple iirc.
364 2011-06-21 04:25:24 <n0n0> are there different account.csvs floating around?! can you give me an example hash from that page that is in the csv?
365 2011-06-21 04:28:31 <gmaxwell> n0n0: yea, so ... meh. phantomcircuit is the one who found this.
366 2011-06-21 04:28:43 <gmaxwell> (I guess he googled one of the hashes from the accounts.csv)
367 2011-06-21 04:31:10 <n0n0> yeah. just googled my hash. actually also found it in earlier posts about mtgox security.
368 2011-06-21 04:31:18 <n0n0> ... and in rainbow tables.
369 2011-06-21 04:31:54 <n0n0> heh.
370 2011-06-21 04:32:15 <n0n0> maybe that is an idea for a website? just got a interesting idea:
371 2011-06-21 04:33:01 <hachque> hi everyone, we're working on an architecture for a secure exchange system
372 2011-06-21 04:33:07 <n0n0> make a warning service that tells you that a hash has been published by automatically checking for hashes on google searches and then send an email as soon as something comes up.
373 2011-06-21 04:33:16 <hachque> it would be appreciated if we had a few people look over it (so far) to make sure we aren't missing anything yet
374 2011-06-21 04:33:26 <hachque> Issue: how about BTC funds stored in the pool wallet?
375 2011-06-21 04:33:31 <hachque> stupid Ctrl-C
376 2011-06-21 04:33:37 <hachque> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dHqDQM3IWFCLBkCAhJQJNijXAtzJ-S10lJnHwyZUpJY/edit?hl=en_GB&authkey=CM65pawC
377 2011-06-21 04:36:55 <n0n0> hachque, hmm. I do not get it, but I am no expert.. for the next exchange I like to have a nicely organized whitepaper as bitcoin.pdf :)
378 2011-06-21 04:37:30 <n0n0> i think separating all this stupid php scripting from the core exchange protocol would be a good start.
379 2011-06-21 04:38:12 <n0n0> and pgp signed orders
380 2011-06-21 04:41:10 <n0n0> hachque, I think you go into deep technical details too early. like that you want to use a psql db. I rather like to have a more abstract scheme first, for example a way of proving that all coins are available
381 2011-06-21 04:41:35 <n0n0> (as I said and asked MT repeatedly)
382 2011-06-21 04:42:15 <jrmithdobbs> hachque: i think your basic premise is flawed
383 2011-06-21 04:42:34 <jrmithdobbs> encryption in the database means the software accessing the database still needs the keys
384 2011-06-21 04:43:04 <jrmithdobbs> and since most leaks of database data will come through the software accessing it ....
385 2011-06-21 04:44:15 <n0n0> well.maybe i am ignorant and it is years since i last did any web development. but i see mtgox now as a webpage where there are these icky php scripts that have cover the full stack of complexity of the exchange, from the top (web UI stuff), down to the technical details of doing trades. I think there should be a clear separation and there should be clear, watertight specification of an open exchange protocol.
386 2011-06-21 04:45:44 <hachque> jrmithdobbs: the server does not store the master key
387 2011-06-21 04:46:06 <hachque> so the encrypted data is useless to the server without the master key being sent via POST over SSL by the client
388 2011-06-21 04:46:10 <hachque> and it never stored to disk
389 2011-06-21 04:46:28 <hachque> so an attacker on the server will not be able to transact any bitcoins
390 2011-06-21 04:49:10 <jrmithdobbs> hachque: csrf.
391 2011-06-21 04:49:43 <cuddlefish> http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/2919149-post8.html
392 2011-06-21 04:49:45 <cuddlefish> trolololol
393 2011-06-21 04:50:44 <hachque> jrmithdobbs: how? any other party that wants to request the coins be sent needs to know the master key
394 2011-06-21 04:51:06 <hachque> which is stored nowhere except in the user's head (and if they write it down or store it on their computer, well, nothing can be done about that)
395 2011-06-21 04:51:20 <hachque> even another site requesting the coins be transferred would need to know the master key
396 2011-06-21 04:51:27 <jrmithdobbs> hachque: i only did a cursory read
397 2011-06-21 04:51:38 <jrmithdobbs> hachque: missed that part
398 2011-06-21 04:54:33 <jrmithdobbs> hachque: i'll read more closely after sleep
399 2011-06-21 04:56:58 <ramontayag> i'm trying to send coin from client 1 to client 2 in testnet-box. how do you confirm these transactions?
400 2011-06-21 04:58:23 <BTCTrader> thats a good one cuddlefish
401 2011-06-21 05:00:03 <shockdiode> lol cuddlefish
402 2011-06-21 05:01:18 <mtrlt> ramontayag: find some blox
403 2011-06-21 05:01:21 <wumpus> ramontayag: mine on your testnet in a box
404 2011-06-21 05:04:51 <ramontayag> mtrlt, wumpus - generate coins you mean? i see thank you.
405 2011-06-21 05:05:08 <mtrlt> yes
406 2011-06-21 05:10:57 <Keefe> ramontayag: probably nobody, or very few, are mining in testnet
407 2011-06-21 05:11:26 <Keefe> the difficulty may not have adjusted low enough to compensate
408 2011-06-21 05:15:39 <wumpus> its his own testnet, so no one is mining at all
409 2011-06-21 05:23:05 <Keefe> ah
410 2011-06-21 05:23:54 <jgarzik> the average age of forum posters is apparently < 20
411 2011-06-21 05:23:57 <jgarzik> maybe < 15
412 2011-06-21 05:25:44 <SomeoneWeird> really? 0_o
413 2011-06-21 05:25:55 <wumpus> you should really remove the forum link from the official bitcoin site
414 2011-06-21 05:25:59 <wumpus> it's just a troll sesspool
415 2011-06-21 05:26:35 <wumpus> sirius better just register bitcointrollforums.com to put it
416 2011-06-21 05:29:21 <taub> jgarzik, thats the feel im getting too
417 2011-06-21 05:31:28 <ersi> Going on the forum is like gluing your hand to your face
418 2011-06-21 05:31:33 <ersi> forever a facepalm
419 2011-06-21 05:31:45 <wumpus> just like the #bitcoin channel here, btw
420 2011-06-21 05:32:13 <ersi> yeah, heh.
421 2011-06-21 05:32:29 <sipa> ersi: haha
422 2011-06-21 05:33:47 <SomeoneWeird> taub; that is true, for some, seeing as im <18; but that doesn't mean I don't know my stuff, or am a spammer.
423 2011-06-21 05:33:53 <wumpus> but really why do we link this forum at all? it's not about the beta-stage open source project called bitcoin at all, just about all kinds of bullshit around it
424 2011-06-21 05:34:44 <AlonzoTG> more like alpha. =|
425 2011-06-21 05:34:46 <sipa> for technical support it is useful
426 2011-06-21 05:35:10 <sipa> with heavy moderation
427 2011-06-21 05:35:11 <wumpus> I propose we make a new technical-support only forum
428 2011-06-21 05:35:15 <wumpus> and nuke this one
429 2011-06-21 05:35:37 <wumpus> a forum about the project, and only the project
430 2011-06-21 05:36:09 <ersi> I don't like the idea of nuking/pruning it all. In worst case scenario, make it read only or archive it.
431 2011-06-21 05:36:11 <wumpus> this current forum is not useful for technical support, only for catching viruses
432 2011-06-21 05:36:18 <ersi> It has 'historic content'
433 2011-06-21 05:36:26 <ersi> Even if there's a lot of bullshit
434 2011-06-21 05:36:44 <wumpus> that's fine, just archive it somewhere, or move it to a new domain, all good with me
435 2011-06-21 05:36:57 <Keefe> you can't catch a virus if you don't download and run stuff people post
436 2011-06-21 05:37:06 <ersi> just wanted to stick it in, so that no one just assumed "throw it away"
437 2011-06-21 05:37:11 <wumpus> Keefe: yeah you don't really need to tell me that :)
438 2011-06-21 05:37:20 <wumpus> but from the viewpoint of the end user...
439 2011-06-21 05:37:47 <Keefe> weed out the dummies :p
440 2011-06-21 05:38:27 <Keefe> if they aren't smart enough to not run unknown stuff, they don't belong using bitcoin
441 2011-06-21 05:38:49 <Keefe> eh, nvm me
442 2011-06-21 05:40:54 <wumpus> Keefe: I don't agree with that, we should simply maintain a friendly community
443 2011-06-21 05:41:59 <ersi> Indeed
444 2011-06-21 05:42:04 <wumpus> if people do dumb things, point them out, but troll them into the floor
445 2011-06-21 05:44:03 <wumpus> who controls the bitcoin.org website?
446 2011-06-21 05:44:34 <SomeoneWeird> probably Gavin
447 2011-06-21 05:44:43 <SomeoneWeird> or theymos or someone
448 2011-06-21 05:44:55 <wumpus> okay thanks
449 2011-06-21 05:45:11 <sipa> sirius and theymos
450 2011-06-21 05:45:28 <wumpus> that's the forums, but also the front page itself?
451 2011-06-21 05:52:02 <sipa> wumpus: front page is different, and includes gavin and jeff
452 2011-06-21 06:19:16 <anddam> hi
453 2011-06-21 06:20:24 <sacarlson> hachque: sounds like your looking to setup p2p escrow?
454 2011-06-21 06:20:59 <hachque> sacarlson: an exchange
455 2011-06-21 06:21:27 <sacarlson> hachque: if we had p2p escrow we wouldn't need an exchange
456 2011-06-21 06:22:07 <sacarlson> hachque: or at least it would setup the secure transaction part of your exchange
457 2011-06-21 06:23:13 <sacarlson> hachque: maybe with something like one of these bitcoin scirpts http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=8821.0
458 2011-06-21 06:24:16 <sacarlson> hachque: why not just hold deposits in the exchange  with an escrow ballance
459 2011-06-21 06:25:50 <hachque> sacarlson: yeah this is an exchange, p2p escrow there's no way to handle like trading USD -> BitCoin (trustworthily if that's a word and reliably)
460 2011-06-21 06:29:55 <sacarlson> hachque: why not the usd guy puts his usd in an escrow the bitcoin guy sends him a p2p open escrowed transaction.  they both see what they want on each side the funds are released
461 2011-06-21 06:30:27 <hachque> because that's an overly simplistic view of a very complex situation
462 2011-06-21 06:32:09 <sacarlson> hachque: you can write more complex contract scripts if needed
463 2011-06-21 06:32:51 <hachque> well we're not looking for p2p escrow
464 2011-06-21 06:33:13 <hachque> we're looking to set up an exchange in which users can not have trades place on their behalf if the exchange is compromised
465 2011-06-21 06:35:06 <K_F> typically that would be covered by introducing a clearing house
466 2011-06-21 06:36:43 <K_F> but it should also work for the escrow suggestion, as if the exchange is comprimised but not the wallet
467 2011-06-21 06:36:52 <K_F> the money will never show up on the escrow account and the transaction fail
468 2011-06-21 06:47:55 <vegard> er
469 2011-06-21 06:48:13 <vegard> I ran strings on blk0001.dat and one of the first strings are: EThe Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks
470 2011-06-21 06:48:18 <vegard> what's that supposed to mean?
471 2011-06-21 06:49:13 <vegard> one of the first strings is* I suppose
472 2011-06-21 06:51:10 <Keefe> google it. there's probably an explanation on the bitcoin forum or something
473 2011-06-21 06:51:45 <polipie> i think it was one of the main reasons why the bitcoins were created
474 2011-06-21 06:51:52 <vegard> oh, yeah. He left some clues about why he is doing this project with the inclusion of the following text in the Genesis block, "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks".
475 2011-06-21 06:52:00 <vegard> (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Satoshi_Nakamoto)
476 2011-06-21 06:54:07 <sipa> vegard: it's a proof that he didn't start working on the block chain before 2009/01/03
477 2011-06-21 06:54:57 <vegard> yeah, nice.
478 2011-06-21 06:56:51 <vegard> what's the best way to extract data from the block chain? I tried bitcointools (python) but the API seems really clunky
479 2011-06-21 06:57:48 <ramontayag> with testnet-box, how do I confirm transactions faster? i run integration tests on the webapp i'm making and would like bitcoin confirmations to be instant so that the tests don't take too long
480 2011-06-21 07:00:08 <doublec> use a fast gpu to mine?
481 2011-06-21 07:00:27 <wumpus> ramontayag: put more mining power in it, or somehow change the client to use a fixed very low difficulty
482 2011-06-21 07:03:51 <ramontayag> wumpus, i 'll need to change the difficulty then (i'll read more about this) because i can't expect all developers that work on this app to be able to mine quickly.
483 2011-06-21 07:04:33 <wumpus> ramontayag: yes that's also the most robust solution, as after a certain amount of blocks it normally readjusts the difficulty so that there will be one block per 10 minutes again
484 2011-06-21 07:05:32 <ramontayag> wumpus, i did a quick search on setting difficulty, however, i found nothing on google regarding changing it. can you point me to the right direction?
485 2011-06-21 07:06:35 <wumpus> ramontayag: i don't know where it is defined in the code either
486 2011-06-21 07:07:54 <payback> Hi all
487 2011-06-21 07:07:58 <payback> i have a small question
488 2011-06-21 07:08:23 <sipa> wumpus: have you seen the wallet class patch in mainline?
489 2011-06-21 07:08:38 <payback> i'm trying to start mining with an AMD cpu & Nvidia graphics card. For some reason it only mines with the CPU. Any1 an idea?
490 2011-06-21 07:08:43 <wumpus> sipa: not yet
491 2011-06-21 07:09:10 <sipa> wumpus: you'll probably need to do some changes to your code
492 2011-06-21 07:10:18 <ramontayag> wumpus, ah so i'll need to define in the source of the bitcoin client
493 2011-06-21 07:10:41 <ramontayag> sounds like too big a hoop to jump through just for integration testing
494 2011-06-21 07:11:00 <wumpus> sipa: ok, did a lot change?
495 2011-06-21 07:11:18 <loopyduck> I have 0 bitcoins fml 1GnghKduAFH3yr6DtYguh816xRC1Xs9UNB
496 2011-06-21 07:11:56 <sipa> wumpus: it's quite a change yes, it introduces a CWallet, and quite some code from main and db was moved there
497 2011-06-21 07:12:25 <sipa> wumpus: init.cpp now defines pwalletMain, a pointer to the "main" wallet (the one used in GUI and RPC calls)
498 2011-06-21 07:12:42 <payback> hi all, i'm having a small issue. I have an AMD cpu with an Nvidia Gefore 8800 GT graphics card. For some reason i can only mine with my CPU ?
499 2011-06-21 07:12:46 <wumpus> sipa: right, so the interface was a bit cleaned up
500 2011-06-21 07:12:50 <sipa> wumpus: but depending on how your code is built up, maybe you can have a CWallet* in a field in your gui classes, and use that
501 2011-06-21 07:12:50 <wumpus> sipa: sounds good
502 2011-06-21 07:13:08 <sipa> wumpus: and then initialize that to pwalletMain when creating it
503 2011-06-21 07:13:32 <sipa> payback: #bitcoin-mining
504 2011-06-21 07:13:58 <wumpus> sipa: yes, that's no problem, I'll just put a pointer to the wallet in the client model, I suppose it is so that it'll be possible to support multiple wallets later on?
505 2011-06-21 07:14:02 <payback> sipa, thx
506 2011-06-21 07:14:06 <sipa> wumpus: exactly
507 2011-06-21 07:14:18 <sipa> wumpus: and to separate the responsibilities
508 2011-06-21 07:14:44 <sipa> it's not 100% done correctly yet, though
509 2011-06-21 07:15:03 <wumpus> sipa: well I  guess it's a start in moving from 1 set of global state
510 2011-06-21 07:15:29 <sipa> that was the point, i plan to separate network and blockchain handling to separate components as well
511 2011-06-21 07:15:35 <wumpus> sipa: the manual mutex locking is also annoyting
512 2011-06-21 07:15:39 <sipa> indeed
513 2011-06-21 07:16:59 <wumpus> better would be to move to a (nearly) no shared state threading model.. then again, I suppose there are more pressing concerns right now like wallet security :)
514 2011-06-21 07:17:10 <sipa> uhu
515 2011-06-21 07:18:47 <sipa> in the wx code it was hard to not use a global CWallet, as it doesn't really have a separation of gui and model code
516 2011-06-21 07:21:58 <ramontayag> looking at the api, i can't seem to find a way to list all transactions of a certain address. is this possible?
517 2011-06-21 07:22:01 <wumpus> yep in my gui it will not be extremely hard to support multiple wallets
518 2011-06-21 07:23:02 <wumpus> we'll need to decide how we want to expose it to the user, though, without complicating it unneccesarily
519 2011-06-21 07:25:08 <briareus> anyone not busy enough for a moment to describe   settxfee <amount>  to me?  I googled around and read some notes, but I don't quite _get_ it.
520 2011-06-21 07:25:58 <sipa> wumpus: one thing that's lacking is events
521 2011-06-21 07:26:12 <sipa> now there is just a global repaintmainwindow or what it's called
522 2011-06-21 07:26:18 <sipa> and a vWalletUpdated
523 2011-06-21 07:27:32 <sipa> at some time there will need to be a walletlistener that can be implemented by gui's
524 2011-06-21 07:27:36 <wumpus> sipe: yes, there is very little in terms of notifications, I don't even use the global repaint event, I do use vWalletUpdated
525 2011-06-21 07:28:10 <wumpus> sipa: boost signal/slots come to mind
526 2011-06-21 07:28:30 <wumpus> sipa: though the multithreading does complicate it
527 2011-06-21 07:28:47 <wumpus> and the mutexes...
528 2011-06-21 07:28:49 <sipa> wumpus: i must admit, i am not really a C++ programmer (though a lot of experience with C, Java, Haskell, ...), so i know far from all possibilities boost gives
529 2011-06-21 07:29:25 <wumpus> sending a notification to another thread that the wallet is updated while holding the mutex will be asking for deadlocks... that's also why I didn't touch that code at all, and simply use polling at the moment
530 2011-06-21 07:30:01 <wumpus> a
531 2011-06-21 07:30:26 <wumpus> signals/slots are useful because they for writing very loosely coupled code (ie, the opposite of what we have now :p)
532 2011-06-21 07:34:50 <sacarlson> ramontayag: use a different crypto chain like weeds
533 2011-06-21 07:36:54 <CheapScotsman> miners: anyone get the "error during login, new database lookup in xxx seconds" error before?
534 2011-06-21 07:39:21 <ramontayag> sacarlson, thanks. i've never heard of that. i'll do some research
535 2011-06-21 07:41:36 <ramontayag> sacarlson, seems that it's different currency altogether?
536 2011-06-21 07:42:55 <sipa> ramontayag: define a "transaction of a certain address" ?
537 2011-06-21 07:47:14 <ramontayag> sipa, like listtransactions, but show the ones with a certain address only.
538 2011-06-21 07:51:35 <wumpus> ramontayag: there's labels for that
539 2011-06-21 07:51:46 <wumpus> ramontayag: "accounts" I mean
540 2011-06-21 07:54:18 <ramontayag> wumpus, hmm.. ok, reason i asked is because i'm building an app where every new order has its own bitcoin address. but they're all in the "" account. do you suggest i have a new account per order instead?
541 2011-06-21 07:56:04 <ramontayag> i looked into this briefly but found no command to create a new account via the api either
542 2011-06-21 07:57:16 <wumpus> ramontayag: yes
543 2011-06-21 07:57:35 <wumpus> ramontayag: an account is basically just a label associated with one or more receiving addresses
544 2011-06-21 07:57:39 <taub> developers  developers developers developers
545 2011-06-21 08:05:09 <payback> hi all again :)
546 2011-06-21 08:05:19 <ramontayag> ok i get it.. you don't create accounts, you create a new address in a certain account, and that account will be "created" too
547 2011-06-21 08:05:34 <payback> is it possible to connect 5 graphic cards with eachother?
548 2011-06-21 08:05:46 <sipa> payback: why would you want to?
549 2011-06-21 08:05:55 <sipa> if it is for mining, you don't connect them at all
550 2011-06-21 08:06:07 <payback> it is for mining
551 2011-06-21 08:06:31 <sipa> if you find a motherboard you can attach 5 gpu's to, do so
552 2011-06-21 08:06:38 <payback> i want this config : 6990x3
553 2011-06-21 08:06:52 <BlueMatt> dont know whos logs those are, but at least they work more than the old link
554 2011-06-21 08:06:53 <payback> don't understand much of it yet
555 2011-06-21 08:06:58 <cacheson> payback: try #bitcoin-mining
556 2011-06-21 08:07:08 <sipa> payback: make sure you do understand befor investing in it
557 2011-06-21 08:07:16 <payback> as so it seems ^^
558 2011-06-21 08:12:51 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, google is a wonderful thing
559 2011-06-21 08:18:55 <amiller> i'm proposing a riddle
560 2011-06-21 08:19:04 <amiller> does anyone think you can take two bitcoin private keys
561 2011-06-21 08:19:12 <amiller> compile them into a little encrypted program
562 2011-06-21 08:19:35 <amiller> so that you can execute the program (giving it a txout as input)
563 2011-06-21 08:19:49 <amiller> but the only thing it can do is output a signed bitcoin transaction trading its balance from one address to the other
564 2011-06-21 08:20:09 <amiller> looking inside the program to find the private keys is impossible, it's encrypted effectively to prevent that
565 2011-06-21 08:20:13 <cacheson> amiller: sounds like a DRM scheme
566 2011-06-21 08:20:18 <sipa> indeed
567 2011-06-21 08:20:26 <sipa> the attacker = the user
568 2011-06-21 08:20:27 <sipa> won't work
569 2011-06-21 08:20:43 <amiller> interested in why you think not
570 2011-06-21 08:20:54 <cacheson> amiller: they need the key to run it
571 2011-06-21 08:21:01 <sipa> you say it's encrypted
572 2011-06-21 08:21:04 <sipa> which key?
573 2011-06-21 08:21:10 <amiller> both private keys to address A and address B
574 2011-06-21 08:21:24 <sipa> what will you encrypt it with, so that their computer can execute it, but not see the key?
575 2011-06-21 08:21:35 <amiller> they're effectively compiled into a program which builds tx from A to B or B to A depending on the input (a txout with one or the other)
576 2011-06-21 08:21:49 <sipa> or better: what is the secret you're hiding from the user, if you give them the program itself?
577 2011-06-21 08:21:56 <sipa> which needs access to the keys
578 2011-06-21 08:22:04 <amiller> 1) i would use lattice based Homomorphic Encryption http://crypto.stanford.edu/craig/craig-thesis.pdf
579 2011-06-21 08:22:23 <amiller> well the keys are built right into the program
580 2011-06-21 08:22:24 <sipa> then they still need the private key
581 2011-06-21 08:22:31 <amiller> the point isn't that the person who runs the program is a user
582 2011-06-21 08:22:35 <amiller> but that they're peers in the network
583 2011-06-21 08:22:37 <amiller> anyone can run the program
584 2011-06-21 08:22:42 <sipa> doesn't matter what form they are in, the program will contain the private keys
585 2011-06-21 08:22:44 <iera> amiller: if you can get that done you are a hero
586 2011-06-21 08:22:45 <amiller> but all it can do is one thing
587 2011-06-21 08:23:03 <sipa> you can't "reduce" the key so you can only use it for certain transactions
588 2011-06-21 08:23:48 <amiller> there's an interesting result in cryptography that says you can http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/07/homomorphic_enc.html
589 2011-06-21 08:24:52 <amiller> most people are excited about this because it means you may be able to run programs on Amazon EC2 that no one can see
590 2011-06-21 08:24:53 <sipa> amiller: from what i understand from it, homomorphic encryption would allow you to write a program that signs a transaction without knowing the transaction
591 2011-06-21 08:25:07 <sipa> it does not allow you to sign something without knowing the private key
592 2011-06-21 08:25:18 <amiller> the private key would be hardcoded in the program
593 2011-06-21 08:25:23 <sipa> *sigh*
594 2011-06-21 08:25:24 <cacheson> amiller: a computer can't run a program without knowing the instructions and data that it contains
595 2011-06-21 08:25:38 <sipa> if the computer can execute it, the key needs to be in there
596 2011-06-21 08:25:44 <cacheson> amiller: if my computer can run your program, I can look at it with a hex editor and extract the keys
597 2011-06-21 08:25:45 <sipa> and the user can do anything his computer can
598 2011-06-21 08:26:04 <sipa> it may be there in obfuscated form
599 2011-06-21 08:26:07 <amiller> the key is entirely mixed up with the other operations
600 2011-06-21 08:26:07 <sipa> or encrypted form
601 2011-06-21 08:26:14 <amiller> cryptographically entangled with the operations
602 2011-06-21 08:26:26 <cacheson> amiller: alright, now you're just making stuff up
603 2011-06-21 08:26:28 <sipa> amiller: but the computer can execute it
604 2011-06-21 08:26:35 <sipa> amiller: and if the computer can, so can its owner
605 2011-06-21 08:27:05 <sipa> at some point you need to have the hash of your transaction, and perform some operations that result in a signature for this hash
606 2011-06-21 08:27:20 <sipa> if i intervene at this point, and replace the memory location the hash is stored it with my own
607 2011-06-21 08:27:30 <sipa> i can make that program sign anything i want
608 2011-06-21 08:29:39 <wumpus> homomorphic encryption is an interesting idea, but mostly a theoretical curiosity at the moment
609 2011-06-21 08:29:57 <amiller> what makes it theoretical
610 2011-06-21 08:30:06 <amiller> i can't tell how far away it is from being implementable
611 2011-06-21 08:30:06 <sipa> it just doesn't apply here
612 2011-06-21 08:30:10 <cacheson> amiller: did you read what you linked us to?
613 2011-06-21 08:30:55 <wumpus> amiller: the fact that it is not yet usable for anything practical, even the basest mathematical operators are extremely inefficient or not present (or would leak information)
614 2011-06-21 08:31:20 <amiller> yeah i'm relying on some optimistic views of how implementable it is
615 2011-06-21 08:31:31 <amiller> as far as i can tell there are working implementations of a general circuit compiler
616 2011-06-21 08:31:44 <amiller> and the inefficiencies mostly apply to large amounts of data
617 2011-06-21 08:31:51 <amiller> there's useful bitcoin applications that don't require that much
618 2011-06-21 08:32:17 <wumpus> feel free to implement it for bitcoin then
619 2011-06-21 08:32:56 <sipa> to use homomorphic encryption (assuming it's even possible for EC)
620 2011-06-21 08:33:12 <sipa> you could have a program which takes a hash and a transformed private key
621 2011-06-21 08:33:19 <sipa> and gives you a transformed signature
622 2011-06-21 08:33:31 <ius> 12:24 < sipa> amiller: from what i understand from it, homomorphic encryption would allow you to write a program that signs a transaction without knowing the transaction
623 2011-06-21 08:33:40 <ius> That ^^, aka. blind signing
624 2011-06-21 08:34:11 <amiller> sipa the program itself can have the private key built into it
625 2011-06-21 08:34:17 <amiller> it gets obfuscated
626 2011-06-21 08:34:19 <amiller> as ap rocess of the encryption
627 2011-06-21 08:34:25 <cacheson> amiller: obfuscation is useless
628 2011-06-21 08:34:25 <sipa> amiller: the transformed private key, yes
629 2011-06-21 08:34:26 <amiller> not obfuscated but effectively encrypted
630 2011-06-21 08:34:29 <ius> amiller: You are advocating a DRM scheme
631 2011-06-21 08:34:49 <ius> And/or security through obscurity
632 2011-06-21 08:34:52 <wumpus> the person building the code will still have to know it, though, so he could be compromised.. that's a very centralized approach
633 2011-06-21 08:35:02 <sipa> all irrelevant
634 2011-06-21 08:35:24 <sipa> you can (possibly) encrypt the private key inside the program using HE
635 2011-06-21 08:35:26 <sipa> yes
636 2011-06-21 08:35:43 <amiller> you simultaneously encrypt the private key and the instructions for signing a transaction
637 2011-06-21 08:35:51 <LightRider> afk|If you send a transaction with zero fee, and then try to doublespend with a high fee, will the high fee transaction be processed first and deny the first spend attempt from being in the block chain a day or so later?
638 2011-06-21 08:35:53 <amiller> you can't determine the private key even by tracing hte program as it runs
639 2011-06-21 08:36:38 <cacheson> amiller: you can't execute instructions that are encrypted
640 2011-06-21 08:37:06 <amiller> cacheson, that is exactly what homomorphic encryption schemes allow you to do
641 2011-06-21 08:37:10 <sipa> amiller: HE allows you to apply a program on transformed data, resulting in transformed output - without ever knowing the input and output are
642 2011-06-21 08:37:14 <sipa> amiller: agree?
643 2011-06-21 08:37:21 <cacheson> amiller: homomorphic encryption allows you to perform operations on data that you can't see, but it doesn't allow you to do operations without knowing what those operations *are*
644 2011-06-21 08:37:22 <amiller> you also don't know what the program was
645 2011-06-21 08:37:29 <amiller> sipa, they have function-privacy
646 2011-06-21 08:37:37 <sipa> amiller: just: agree or not?
647 2011-06-21 08:37:47 <amiller> agree
648 2011-06-21 08:37:58 <sipa> ok, so the transformed input here will be the private key
649 2011-06-21 08:38:05 <amiller> no
650 2011-06-21 08:38:18 <sipa> then what?
651 2011-06-21 08:38:22 <amiller> cacheson, it also disguises the operation of the program
652 2011-06-21 08:38:28 <sipa> it doesn't
653 2011-06-21 08:38:36 <sipa> the operations are clear
654 2011-06-21 08:38:40 <sipa> the data it is working on not
655 2011-06-21 08:39:08 <enquire> virtual machine is really a bad idea - just found my wallet in plain text within xxxxx.vmem file
656 2011-06-21 08:39:24 <nathan7> Of course.
657 2011-06-21 08:39:34 <nathan7> But it's in plain text on your HDD too.
658 2011-06-21 08:39:40 <nathan7> And in plain text in your RAM.
659 2011-06-21 08:40:02 <wumpus> you could use an encrypted volume in your vm, makes it a little bit more secure (though it will still be in ram in plain text obviously)
660 2011-06-21 08:40:04 <enquire> xxxxx.vmem is a file, files are on hard disk obviously )
661 2011-06-21 08:40:37 <amiller> sipa, https://users-cs.au.dk/stm/local-cache/ihop.pdf this describes 'circuit privacy'
662 2011-06-21 08:40:45 <amiller> i'll make an excerpt
663 2011-06-21 08:40:58 <enquire> that's the point - hard disk is encrypted, but memory is dumped as a file on host machine
664 2011-06-21 08:41:19 <wumpus> ok then you should make it put those files on an encrypted volume too
665 2011-06-21 08:41:59 <cacheson> wumpus: that's outside the scope of the VM itself
666 2011-06-21 08:42:15 <wumpus> yes
667 2011-06-21 08:42:35 <wumpus> for example, I use an encrypted swap partition for the same reason
668 2011-06-21 08:42:40 <nathan7> Without homomorphic encryption (look it up) you'll always have plaintext
669 2011-06-21 08:43:39 <cacheson> wumpus: that's unlocked while you're computer is running, though.  as far as I can tell, the idea behind using a VM is to have a secure OS running inside of an insecure OS
670 2011-06-21 08:43:44 <cacheson> obviously that doesn't work
671 2011-06-21 08:44:11 <enquire> it does work as long as vm is not running
672 2011-06-21 08:44:20 <nathan7> and inaccessible.
673 2011-06-21 08:44:38 <wumpus> cacheson: I don't care about that, if my computer is running you can just as well grab the keys from ram
674 2011-06-21 08:44:39 <cacheson> enquire: eh, I guess.  malware can be patient though
675 2011-06-21 08:44:53 <vegard> no, the idea behind using a VM is to have an insecure OS running inside a secure OS! :-)
676 2011-06-21 08:45:01 <enquire> my "big money" sits within a vm that i never open - at least until encrypted wallet version comes out )
677 2011-06-21 08:45:02 <wumpus> vegard: +1
678 2011-06-21 08:45:33 <wumpus> vegard: some people seem to get it the other way around
679 2011-06-21 08:46:28 <cacheson> enquire: eh, pretty much the same as running the bitcoin client from an encrypted partition, then
680 2011-06-21 08:47:04 <cacheson> if you get malware'd, there's nothing you can do
681 2011-06-21 08:47:18 <enquire> yes, but slightly more difficult for the virus to get to the wallet.dat
682 2011-06-21 08:49:12 <wumpus> for that to be of any one, you should really run the risky stuff (such as web browsing) in a VM too, obviously another one as which bitcoin is running in
683 2011-06-21 08:49:21 <wumpus> of any use*
684 2011-06-21 08:49:23 <enquire> well that's fundamental barrier for bitcoin then
685 2011-06-21 08:49:49 <enquire> even if people catch virus their funds in bank are still safe
686 2011-06-21 08:49:58 <wumpus> one the bare metal hardware run only vms, so that viruses can't get into there
687 2011-06-21 08:50:07 <enquire> not with bitcoin
688 2011-06-21 08:50:31 <vegard> if you don't trust yourself, you should use an online and insured wallet provider
689 2011-06-21 08:50:51 <jaromil> mmmm, no blowfish in btc, yet this is funny http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2011/06/20/2
690 2011-06-21 08:51:00 <wumpus> most people with a lot of coins have them isolated, on an usb stick for example, or even printed the private keys and put it into  a safe box
691 2011-06-21 08:51:27 <jaromil> jgarzik: read your comment. it is tested on mingw32 (bluematt) and osx (i did)
692 2011-06-21 08:51:29 <wumpus> banks will always be neccesary for big amounts, bitcoin is like storing gold in your house
693 2011-06-21 08:51:42 <jaromil> let me know when you plan the pull, i can review some patches someone else sent me for osx
694 2011-06-21 08:51:52 <enquire> yeap so we are back to the hated banks )
695 2011-06-21 08:51:53 <jaromil> gotta go now, bbl
696 2011-06-21 08:52:19 <cacheson> wumpus: a bank can't do anything for my bitcoin wallet that I can't do myself
697 2011-06-21 08:52:26 <wumpus> enquire: so what's your point? you no longer need banks to do payments, but for storage having heavily armored buildings is still useful
698 2011-06-21 08:53:17 <wumpus> if you store everything in your house you'll also lose it when there's a fire or other disaster
699 2011-06-21 08:53:33 <sacarlson> wumpus: can't we just break up wallets into smaller units of value and only decrypt or keep present the needed value and encrypt and store the big parts?
700 2011-06-21 08:53:35 <wumpus> no amount of crypto can protect against that :P
701 2011-06-21 08:53:38 <cacheson> wumpus: make backups, store them offsite
702 2011-06-21 08:53:44 <enquire> point is whether it is possible to make it easy to use, not dependent on banks, and secure at the same time
703 2011-06-21 08:54:00 <wumpus> cacheson: yes, for example in a safe deposit box in a BANK :)
704 2011-06-21 08:54:10 <cacheson> wumpus: or just with a couple friends
705 2011-06-21 08:54:24 <sacarlson> wumpus I thought just encrypted on a remote site would do
706 2011-06-21 08:54:39 <cacheson> wumpus: good encryption is a lot stronger than a metal box
707 2011-06-21 08:55:09 <wumpus> sacarlson: that'll do, as long as you can remember the key, as soon as you need to store the key somewhere you have the same problem again
708 2011-06-21 08:55:19 <cacheson> and yes, safe deposit boxes do get cracked open
709 2011-06-21 08:55:56 <wumpus> yes nothing is 100% secure
710 2011-06-21 08:57:22 <sacarlson> wumpus: I'm lazy I let the remote remember till I need to break it https://sites.google.com/site/remotekeyencrypt/files/remote_key_encrypt.pdf?attredirects=0&d=1
711 2011-06-21 08:59:00 <wumpus> sacarlson: but if you let the 'remote' remember, your key is stored somewhere in a database where it can be compromised
712 2011-06-21 08:59:40 <sacarlson> wumpus: the key itself is encrypted with the local key but yes nothing is perfect
713 2011-06-21 09:01:16 <sacarlson> wumpus: we assume that the theaf doesn't know what location you keep the remote key or even know how to use it if he did
714 2011-06-21 09:01:50 <enquire> if you store your encrypted wallet online, it's safe at the current level of tech, but the storage owner can keep it for 20 years and who knows what will happen by then, quantum computers and such
715 2011-06-21 09:01:50 <wumpus> ok
716 2011-06-21 09:02:03 <sacarlson> wumpus: when the system is compromised the key is auto removed from the net
717 2011-06-21 09:03:18 <wumpus> enquire: yeah who knows what will happen in 20 years
718 2011-06-21 09:04:46 <sacarlson> I see the bigger problem with all this security when someone dies and doesn't disclose the location of his encrypted files and keys how will they be recovered
719 2011-06-21 09:05:13 <enquire> public notary?
720 2011-06-21 09:05:31 <sacarlson> wumpus: I guess the siblings will have to wait 20 years for quantum computers to get what's coming to them
721 2011-06-21 09:05:49 <enquire> )
722 2011-06-21 09:09:46 <sacarlson> enquire: maybe time capsule encryption?  won't unlock until after a date or the password or key
723 2011-06-21 09:10:15 <wumpus> a dead man's switch maybe
724 2011-06-21 09:10:16 <cacheson> sacarlson: encryption algorithms can't tell time, unfortunately
725 2011-06-21 09:10:53 <vegard> there is :-D
726 2011-06-21 09:10:56 <vegard> the block chain :-D
727 2011-06-21 09:11:00 <sacarlson> cacheson: maybe it will open after proof of the XXX block chain
728 2011-06-21 09:11:07 <BlueMatt> jaromil: there is a huge difference between me testing mingw support on ubuntu, and me + jgarzik + many others testing autotools on as many different distros as possible
729 2011-06-21 09:11:36 <cacheson> sacarlson: I thought about it, but blockchains are for making things public, not keeping them secret
730 2011-06-21 09:11:49 <BlueMatt> jaromil: and I wasnt aware (nor do I think jgarzik was) that you had tested on osx, but Id still like to see 100x more people test it on osx and get some win32 people testing it
731 2011-06-21 09:11:56 <sacarlson> cacheson: you can use them for many things including time
732 2011-06-21 09:11:58 <vegard> no, the block chain is a trusted clock.
733 2011-06-21 09:12:03 <wumpus> could you build something in the block chain that'd require you to report every XX months, if not, the funds get released to some prespecified addresses
734 2011-06-21 09:12:08 <BlueMatt> jaromil: (though on second thought I should have realized that)
735 2011-06-21 09:12:33 <cacheson> vegard: and how do you turn that into a time-locked encryption scheme?
736 2011-06-21 09:12:48 <vegard> if there is a block with timestamp t, then you know that t is in the past
737 2011-06-21 09:13:00 <vegard> hm
738 2011-06-21 09:13:09 <sipa> BlueMatt: i've got a patch (email to me) for fixing some autotools osx issues
739 2011-06-21 09:13:33 <vegard> cacheson: ok, good point. I have no idea
740 2011-06-21 09:13:36 <sacarlson> cacheson: ya maybe not posible
741 2011-06-21 09:13:49 <enquire> maybe put bitcoin source code  into block chain?
742 2011-06-21 09:13:56 <sipa> ...
743 2011-06-21 09:13:59 <cacheson> the best I can think of is some sort of setup where a bunch of different net hosts each store a small fragment of your key, and send you "still alive?" messages every couple months
744 2011-06-21 09:14:01 <BlueMatt> sipa: nice, I would branch jaromil's thing and put it in git manually as he tends to never be around
745 2011-06-21 09:14:09 <BlueMatt> sipa: (if youve got the time)
746 2011-06-21 09:14:30 <sacarlson> enquire: oh ya a bitcoin script lock over number of blocks would work
747 2011-06-21 09:14:35 <sipa> pfff, can't the people maintaining the osx build do that
748 2011-06-21 09:14:52 <BlueMatt> sipa: meh, just forward it to jaromil then
749 2011-06-21 09:15:11 <sipa> BlueMatt: jaromil has the patch, according to the person who sent it to me
750 2011-06-21 09:15:13 <sipa> i just want autotools merged
751 2011-06-21 09:15:22 <sipa> so we can move forward
752 2011-06-21 09:15:41 <BlueMatt> ah, ok
753 2011-06-21 09:15:48 <cacheson> sacarlson: so how do you practically apply that to this problem?
754 2011-06-21 09:15:53 <BlueMatt> well the problem is like 10 people have tested it, so thats a ways off
755 2011-06-21 09:16:01 <BlueMatt> afaik
756 2011-06-21 09:16:06 <cacheson> I must admit that I don't know what the full capabilities of bitcoin script are
757 2011-06-21 09:16:54 <sacarlson> cacheson: the script would have to accept two different input on would unlock after time the other would also unlock before with the key
758 2011-06-21 09:17:50 <cacheson> sacarlson: but then your funds get released after a year or whatever?
759 2011-06-21 09:18:12 <sacarlson> cacheson: so when you needed your money you would unlock it and put some into your active walet then lock the uneeded big money back into the time locked transaction
760 2011-06-21 09:18:42 <cacheson> then if someone steals your wallet, they get your entire savings once the time is up