1 2012-02-20 00:58:08 <word> Is there some reason why running bitcoin-qt from git master would prevent .5.2 and .6.0rc from running? (db problems cause it to crash) I can fix it easy, just curious.
  2 2012-02-20 01:00:35 <sipa> which bdb version is git head compiled with?
  3 2012-02-20 01:01:35 <luke-jr> word: .5.2, yes; .6.0rc, not afaik
  4 2012-02-20 01:01:44 <word> sipa: 5.1.19
  5 2012-02-20 01:01:55 <luke-jr> word: bitcoin.org builds are bdb 4.8
  6 2012-02-20 01:02:00 <word> ah ok
  7 2012-02-20 01:02:27 <luke-jr> additionally, .6+ use compressed pubkeys, which are not supported by older versions
  8 2012-02-20 01:03:07 <word> is there a news item or something with all the nifty things .6 will have?
  9 2012-02-20 01:03:30 <sipa> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=63165.0
 10 2012-02-20 01:03:37 <word> thanks
 11 2012-02-20 01:04:48 <luke-jr> "The shorter keys are completely compatible with older versions." <-- maybe should be changed?
 12 2012-02-20 01:05:11 <sipa> luke-jr: they are, on the network, but not in the wallet
 13 2012-02-20 01:05:32 <luke-jr> right, that's less than "completely" to most people I think
 14 2012-02-20 01:05:34 <sipa> but indeed, some clarification may be needed
 15 2012-02-20 01:05:59 <luke-jr> I suspect users may assume protocol is compatible for everything by default, and apply this to the client
 16 2012-02-20 01:09:22 <word> luke-jr: you had something to do with the sign message stuff right?
 17 2012-02-20 01:09:51 <luke-jr> yes
 18 2012-02-20 01:09:56 <luke-jr> I wrote the GUI
 19 2012-02-20 01:10:01 <luke-jr> sipa wrote the basic implementation tho
 20 2012-02-20 01:10:14 <word> i was thinkin about a different way to do the gui bit
 21 2012-02-20 01:10:38 <luke-jr> if you pass FIRST_CLASS_MESSAGING=1 to qmake, you get a nicer UI ;)
 22 2012-02-20 01:10:47 <word> what does it do?
 23 2012-02-20 01:10:50 <luke-jr> but wumpus didn't like it, so it's optional and disabled by default
 24 2012-02-20 01:10:56 <luke-jr> it makes a Sign Message tab in the main window
 25 2012-02-20 01:11:07 <word> screenie?
 26 2012-02-20 01:12:39 <luke-jr> http://luke.dashjr.org/tmp/screenshots/snapshot74.png
 27 2012-02-20 01:13:37 <word> yah, tbh i think that's better than the popup
 28 2012-02-20 01:13:46 <word> i dont like popups
 29 2012-02-20 01:13:48 <luke-jr> ;)
 30 2012-02-20 01:14:06 <word> but there might be a way to do it without the popup and the tab
 31 2012-02-20 01:14:10 <word> i'd have to fiddle with it some
 32 2012-02-20 01:14:23 <luke-jr> more important IMO is the ability to sign from a specific txn instead of address
 33 2012-02-20 01:15:10 <word> to provide a receipt?
 34 2012-02-20 01:15:16 <luke-jr> yeah
 35 2012-02-20 01:16:27 <amiller> hey i have an idea, what if the proof of work scheme includes an 'retrievability challenge' of random selections of tx from bitcoin's history
 36 2012-02-20 01:16:39 <luke-jr> ?
 37 2012-02-20 01:16:59 <amiller> that would make sure that pool operators at least have to demonstrate easy access to that data, even if there's no way to force them to look at it
 38 2012-02-20 01:17:37 <sipa> amiller: they have to look at it; if they don't, they risk having their blocks ignored by others that do verify
 39 2012-02-20 01:17:44 <amiller> that risk isn't so compelling
 40 2012-02-20 01:17:57 <amiller> or another way of putting it is there are equilibria that involve not keeping all that data
 41 2012-02-20 01:17:58 <gmaxwell> sipa: mine no txn
 42 2012-02-20 01:18:05 <word> luke-jr: hmm what's the usecase? like a record that 'i paid for this'? you can go back in the blockchain and see that you paid for it can't you?
 43 2012-02-20 01:18:22 <amiller> so instead, the hash of the current block should be used to generate a random sample of transactions from history
 44 2012-02-20 01:18:38 <gmaxwell> I mentioned a suggestion while we were talking about the heights here.. require the coinbase to include a hash of the prior block's input txns .. to prove you knew how to validate them.
 45 2012-02-20 01:18:38 <luke-jr> word: to prove you were the one who paid it :P
 46 2012-02-20 01:18:44 <amiller> the next block must include a fresh hash data of those transactions
 47 2012-02-20 01:18:53 <luke-jr> word: and what you paid for
 48 2012-02-20 01:18:59 <lianj> regarding alert packet, is the signature made on "Serialized alert payload"?
 49 2012-02-20 01:19:02 <gmaxwell> amiller: I don't think it's much of an issue.
 50 2012-02-20 01:19:18 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: don't be evil :<
 51 2012-02-20 01:19:22 <gmaxwell> amiller: the subsidy will be small before the chain is big enough that anyone would think of doing something stupid like that
 52 2012-02-20 01:19:34 <sipa> luke-jr: you don't prove that you are the one who paid it, any more than the transaction itself does
 53 2012-02-20 01:19:49 <amiller> the other thing is it will be scalable
 54 2012-02-20 01:19:49 <sipa> (of course, once you add a message to connect some extra data to it, things change)
 55 2012-02-20 01:19:52 <amiller> because one thing you can do
 56 2012-02-20 01:19:56 <amiller> is keep a lottery of storage
 57 2012-02-20 01:19:58 <luke-jr> sipa: that's what the message is for
 58 2012-02-20 01:20:01 <amiller> or a bloom filter basically
 59 2012-02-20 01:20:14 <word> luke-jr: Hm, I guess. Seems like something a business would like to have to give to customers but just like receipts stores give when you buy stuff they really don't serve a functional purpose anymore, the transaction is still stored in their system under the customer's name and cc info (unless it was cash)
 60 2012-02-20 01:20:27 <amiller> basically this would allow pool operators not just to farm off their gpu power, but also their storage
 61 2012-02-20 01:20:33 <word> most times they just want you to lose the receipt so they can avoid the refund
 62 2012-02-20 01:20:52 <luke-jr> word: the purpose would be, you deliver the signature to the merchant with your order details
 63 2012-02-20 01:21:02 <amiller> every transaction from history you can remember is like a lottery ticket so you'd want to keep as many as you can
 64 2012-02-20 01:21:28 <amiller> the 'difficulty' would include the number of samples from history you need
 65 2012-02-20 01:21:39 <luke-jr> word: otherwise, the merchant doesn't have any way to ensure they ship to the right address (eg, MITM attack)
 66 2012-02-20 01:22:09 <amiller> the storage is cheap right now so miners would all have an equal footing here
 67 2012-02-20 01:23:14 <word> luke-jr: so the signature would have the mailing address and purchase items?
 68 2012-02-20 01:23:43 <amiller> right now the bitcoin proof of work only proves the network (as a whole) has a lot of gpu power and access to grid energy, the point of this alternate proof of work is that it prove that the network as a whole has a permanent and randomly accessible memory
 69 2012-02-20 01:24:03 <sipa> word: the message would, the signature signs a hash of the message
 70 2012-02-20 01:24:07 <luke-jr> word: right
 71 2012-02-20 01:24:49 <gmaxwell> amiller: weird idea. Interesting.
 72 2012-02-20 01:25:14 <luke-jr> hmm
 73 2012-02-20 01:25:19 <luke-jr> I think I maybe see a bug in next-test
 74 2012-02-20 01:25:22 <word> in practice though... say a phone app NFC scenario, this would all be done instantly right? POS sends the message, client sends coin, client sends signature of message
 75 2012-02-20 01:25:23 <luke-jr> but it is very confusing
 76 2012-02-20 01:25:34 <luke-jr> word: probably eventually
 77 2012-02-20 01:25:51 <luke-jr> anyhow, I just received two unexpected payments
 78 2012-02-20 01:25:56 <luke-jr> to addresses I have no idea about
 79 2012-02-20 01:26:00 <word> i mean signature of transaction+message*
 80 2012-02-20 01:26:30 <sipa> word: any automated payment API would probably do something like that, yes
 81 2012-02-20 01:27:50 <luke-jr> http://blockchain.info/tx-index/15829580/e2068753dfe284ee9ebe145ae2ad8182836f3236f09bdc4bbdebd7d417ff0aac
 82 2012-02-20 01:27:53 <luke-jr> any ideas wtf this is?
 83 2012-02-20 01:28:06 <word> in that context it seems pretty cool, or even in an ewallet scenario, but with the client it seems like it'd be a hassle. Although I dont know of any better way to do it.
 84 2012-02-20 01:28:37 <luke-jr> word: client could (eventually) let you provide the message in the Send Coins screen, and email address
 85 2012-02-20 01:28:41 <luke-jr> and email the msg+sig
 86 2012-02-20 01:28:53 <luke-jr> or IM or whatever
 87 2012-02-20 01:28:55 <word> email ><
 88 2012-02-20 01:29:04 <word> namecoin message ;)
 89 2012-02-20 01:29:16 <luke-jr> no such thing :P
 90 2012-02-20 01:29:45 <word> well there's no 'app for that'
 91 2012-02-20 01:29:54 <word> but it can be done-ish
 92 2012-02-20 01:41:20 <word> luke-jr: what does 'Be careful to only sign statement you agree to with full details, as phishing attacks may try to trick you into signing access to them." mean? Seems unclear
 93 2012-02-20 01:53:37 <XMPPwocky> word: er
 94 2012-02-20 01:53:44 <XMPPwocky> what's unclear
 95 2012-02-20 01:53:58 <word> i have no idea what it's saying
 96 2012-02-20 01:54:37 <XMPPwocky> word: don't sign something you don't agree to
 97 2012-02-20 01:57:24 <word> XMPPwocky: why? how would that give access to anyone?
 98 2012-02-20 01:57:37 <XMPPwocky> ...
 99 2012-02-20 01:58:09 <gmaxwell> Say there is some site you can log in to using a signmessage from an address you paid them with
100 2012-02-20 01:58:39 <gmaxwell> later crafty mchacker says "sign this junk for me"  ... and you do.. then he logs in as you because you just signed a login token while you weren't paying attention.
101 2012-02-20 01:58:58 <k9quaint> why does the hacker always gotta be irish?
102 2012-02-20 01:59:34 <gmaxwell> cause everyone loves to crap on the irish?
103 2012-02-20 01:59:46 <k9quaint> fair enough
104 2012-02-20 02:00:03 <sipa> gmaxwell: you can save yourself by claiming it's MC Hacker, instead of McHacker
105 2012-02-20 02:00:20 <word> gmaxwell: ahh, so if you sign something for someone, they can then use that signature to prove they're you..ok
106 2012-02-20 02:00:42 <gmaxwell> word: yes, thus you should be mindful of what you sign just like a paper document!
107 2012-02-20 02:00:56 <k9quaint> you could have it fit the times with Hackau Popandrobalos
108 2012-02-20 02:01:20 <word> or Whitney Houston
109 2012-02-20 02:01:22 <word> ..wait
110 2012-02-20 02:01:37 <k9quaint> no, thats crack, not hack
111 2012-02-20 02:01:42 <word> my mistake
112 2012-02-20 02:04:02 <word> What about: "Be careful to only sign statements you agree to, as phishing attacks may try to trick you into signing a message, that allows them to prove they own your public address."
113 2012-02-20 02:04:42 <sipa> not prove- falsely claim
114 2012-02-20 02:05:51 <word> hmm but that might leave room for assuming that anyone else would have a way of knowing that they don't own it
115 2012-02-20 02:07:33 <Raccoon> UI Bug: tooltip for hovering over status bar produces "Last received block was generated %n second ago."
116 2012-02-20 02:07:46 <gmaxwell> word: well they can you can tell them! :)
117 2012-02-20 02:07:56 <gmaxwell> (and presumably they can't generate many more of them)
118 2012-02-20 02:08:23 <word> "Be careful to only sign statements you agree to, as phishing attacks may try to trick you into signing a message. With that signature they could pretend they own your public address."
119 2012-02-20 02:08:48 <k9quaint> phishing attacks will, not may try to trick you
120 2012-02-20 02:09:23 <k9quaint> if they don't try to trick you, they aren't phishing :P
121 2012-02-20 02:09:31 <sipa> Why say "public" there?
122 2012-02-20 02:09:44 <sipa> It's pretending they have your private key.
123 2012-02-20 02:09:45 <word> well the current one at least needs the change 'sign statement you agree to' -> 'sign statement%s% you agree to'
124 2012-02-20 02:09:46 <Raccoon> they trick you by not trying!
125 2012-02-20 02:09:50 <luke-jr> lol
126 2012-02-20 02:09:51 <word> err messed up bolding
127 2012-02-20 02:10:13 <luke-jr> oops
128 2012-02-20 02:10:30 <luke-jr> sipa: want to fix that quick, or do I need to make a pullreq? <.<
129 2012-02-20 02:10:31 <word> sipa: the point of the signature is to prove you own the public one though right?
130 2012-02-20 02:11:30 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: gmaxwell opened issue 874 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/874>
131 2012-02-20 02:11:31 <luke-jr> "You can sign messages with your addresses to prove you own them. Be careful to only sign statements you agree to with full details, as phishing attacks may try to trick you into signing control over to them." ?
132 2012-02-20 02:11:52 <luke-jr> k9quaint: phishing attacks don't try to trick *everyone* ;)
133 2012-02-20 02:12:01 <word> the 'with full details' bit annoys me
134 2012-02-20 02:12:19 <word> idk what it means
135 2012-02-20 02:12:29 <sipa> luke-jr: where is it in the source? i can't find with grep? :$
136 2012-02-20 02:12:37 <luke-jr> "You can sign messages with your addresses to prove you own them. Be careful to only sign fully-detailed statements you agree to, as phishing attacks may try to trick you into signing control over to them." ?
137 2012-02-20 02:13:04 <luke-jr> sipa: src/qt/forms/messagepage.ui
138 2012-02-20 02:13:43 <sipa> oh... i didn't even know we had source files beyond .cpp and .h
139 2012-02-20 02:13:48 <word> why not fully-detailed statements->messages?
140 2012-02-20 02:14:12 <word> and idk if control/access is the right word. It's identity theft not property theft ya know?
141 2012-02-20 02:14:30 <word> they're stealing your name not your money
142 2012-02-20 02:14:36 <word> but that name can get them money
143 2012-02-20 02:14:44 <k9quaint> usually that is a prelude to stealing your cash
144 2012-02-20 02:15:45 <word> right, but i think telling people by signing something the person getting the signature will get 'control' will raise some red flags with people
145 2012-02-20 02:16:20 <k9quaint> I don't think ordinary americans should be allowed to sign anything
146 2012-02-20 02:16:28 <word> sipa: the .ui's are qt's xml files for gui's
147 2012-02-20 02:16:43 <luke-jr> word: you can control money with it
148 2012-02-20 02:16:54 <luke-jr> sipa: .ui open with Qt Designer
149 2012-02-20 02:17:11 <luke-jr> word: FWIW, my personal use case is controlling your mining account on Eligius pool
150 2012-02-20 02:17:30 <luke-jr> word: by signing a message, you control where namecoins earned go
151 2012-02-20 02:17:44 <luke-jr> so, if you sign something stupidly, you just lost all those
152 2012-02-20 02:18:23 <word> luke-jr: yah but to the layman i think saying identity theft is better
153 2012-02-20 02:18:38 <word> they pretend to be you and get the namecoins setn to them instead
154 2012-02-20 02:18:42 <word> because they stole your identity
155 2012-02-20 02:18:55 <word> it's easier to understand imo
156 2012-02-20 02:18:59 <sipa> luke-jr: i justed edited the file using a text editor, that's fine, i hope?
157 2012-02-20 02:19:04 <luke-jr> "You can sign messages with your addresses to prove you own them. Be careful to only sign fully-detailed statements you agree to, as phishing attacks may try to trick you into signing your identity over to them." ?
158 2012-02-20 02:19:09 <sipa> no other checked-in files that need modification or so
159 2012-02-20 02:19:11 <luke-jr> sipa: AFAIK should be OK
160 2012-02-20 02:19:24 <luke-jr> sipa: might need to rebuild to update ts files
161 2012-02-20 02:20:39 <word> luke-jr: i like it more and more,
162 2012-02-20 02:21:01 <word> just one more bit, perhaps something to explain why fully-detailed statements are advisable
163 2012-02-20 02:21:18 <word> like "Be careful to not sign anything vague, only sign fully-detailed statements you agree to"
164 2012-02-20 02:21:29 <luke-jr> "You can sign messages with your addresses to prove you own them. Be careful to only sign fully-detailed (or at least non-ambiguous) statements you agree to, as phishing attacks may try to trick you into signing your identity over to them." ?
165 2012-02-20 02:21:46 <luke-jr> "You can sign messages with your addresses to prove you own them. Be careful to only sign fully-detailed, or at least not vague, statements you agree to, as phishing attacks may try to trick you into signing your identity over to them." ?
166 2012-02-20 02:22:10 <word> i like it with the 'what not to do' part in front
167 2012-02-20 02:22:49 <luke-jr> "You can sign messages with your addresses to prove you own them. Be careful not to sign anything vague, as phishing attacks may try to trick you into signing your identity over to them. Only sign fully-detailed statements you agree to," ?
168 2012-02-20 02:23:03 <word> if you hate me for this blame Sho_ from konvi he gets pendantic over -every- string and it's rubbed off on me. ;p
169 2012-02-20 02:23:11 <word> yes! i like it
170 2012-02-20 02:23:15 <luke-jr> lol
171 2012-02-20 02:23:20 <luke-jr> sipa: "You can sign messages with your addresses to prove you own them. Be careful not to sign anything vague, as phishing attacks may try to trick you into signing your identity over to them. Only sign fully-detailed statements you agree to,"
172 2012-02-20 02:23:24 <luke-jr> err
173 2012-02-20 02:23:25 <luke-jr> sipa: "You can sign messages with your addresses to prove you own them. Be careful not to sign anything vague, as phishing attacks may try to trick you into signing your identity over to them. Only sign fully-detailed statements you agree to."
174 2012-02-20 02:23:45 <k9quaint> how about "Don't press this button."
175 2012-02-20 02:23:48 <luke-jr> lol
176 2012-02-20 02:23:50 <word> and color it red ;p
177 2012-02-20 02:24:02 <word> but then -everyone- would push it
178 2012-02-20 02:24:07 <word> it's the perfect phishing attack
179 2012-02-20 02:24:11 <k9quaint> ;)
180 2012-02-20 02:24:17 <word> color the 'sign away your identity' button red, works every time
181 2012-02-20 02:24:23 <sipa> luke-jr: meh, pullreq that
182 2012-02-20 02:24:26 <luke-jr> how about the first time you click, open a 20 page popup disclaimer that forces you to spend at least 5 minutes scrolling through it before letting you proceed
183 2012-02-20 02:24:28 <Graet> mmm RED BUTTON!!!   wooohoooo
184 2012-02-20 02:24:36 <sipa> once you're certain :)
185 2012-02-20 02:25:11 <word> luke-jr: and the pages if you flip through them as fast as someone who isn't reading them would show a flip-book of a stick figure getting losing his money or something
186 2012-02-20 02:25:28 <word> figure losing*
187 2012-02-20 02:25:31 <luke-jr> lol
188 2012-02-20 02:26:36 <XMPPwocky> luke-jr: "run bitcoin with -enable-arbitrary-signing to use this feature, after reading the README!"
189 2012-02-20 02:26:46 <luke-jr> XMPPwocky: no :<
190 2012-02-20 02:27:09 <luke-jr> actually, I did suggest that for an obscure unsafe thing once
191 2012-02-20 02:27:34 <luke-jr> IIRC -unsafefees='Yes, I understand that enabling unsafe fees may possibly cause my transactions to get permanently stuck and lost forever.'
192 2012-02-20 02:28:09 <sipa> Like growisofs had --use-the-force-luke
193 2012-02-20 02:28:42 <XMPPwocky> or, preface every message being signsd with the address you're signing it "for"
194 2012-02-20 02:28:57 <XMPPwocky> not a tx
195 2012-02-20 02:29:16 <XMPPwocky> but that + address book
196 2012-02-20 02:29:50 <luke-jr> on principle, I prepend every message with the date
197 2012-02-20 02:30:12 <sipa> You probably should.
198 2012-02-20 02:31:09 <XMPPwocky> or, a domain name
199 2012-02-20 02:31:45 <word> or you could add something crazy to it
200 2012-02-20 02:31:49 <XMPPwocky> "sign-message 1foobar mtgox.com authentication-token-goes-here"
201 2012-02-20 02:31:53 <word> that nobody would sign unless they had to
202 2012-02-20 02:31:55 <luke-jr> "2012-02-20: I authorize sending my earned namecoins to: NF97NaSXSdFGSFUR7QiBCMxnWQvBMJu6Fh" <-- example msg for Eligius
203 2012-02-20 02:32:09 <luke-jr> word: crazy = ambiguous
204 2012-02-20 02:32:13 <word> like "I am a member of the nazi party and I authorize sending my earned namecoins to ---"
205 2012-02-20 02:32:23 <word> if someone tried to phish you into signing that
206 2012-02-20 02:32:26 <luke-jr> word: Eligius will not tolerate any variation on the message ;)
207 2012-02-20 02:32:26 <word> you'd prob think twice
208 2012-02-20 02:32:34 <XMPPwocky> luke-jr: ... put it in the blockchain!
209 2012-02-20 02:32:38 <word> luke-jr: i know, i signed mine already :P
210 2012-02-20 02:36:54 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: luke-jr opened issue 875 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/875>
211 2012-02-20 02:38:13 <luke-jr> sipa: ^
212 2012-02-20 02:38:37 <word> and also: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/876
213 2012-02-20 02:39:13 <luke-jr> oh yeah
214 2012-02-20 02:39:19 <luke-jr> that's the one I thoguht it was announcing ;)
215 2012-02-20 02:42:04 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: luke-jr opened pull request 876 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/876>
216 2012-02-20 02:44:15 <word> gribble's late to the party
217 2012-02-20 02:44:28 <BlueMatt> github's fault
218 2012-02-20 02:45:22 <XDS2010> My ISP is actively blocking bitcoin communication. Is there anyway to transfer my remaining balance without syncing to the desktop wallet ?
219 2012-02-20 02:45:28 <luke-jr> XDS2010: !
220 2012-02-20 02:45:37 <luke-jr> XDS2010: what ISP? how?
221 2012-02-20 02:45:38 <BlueMatt> what isp is this?
222 2012-02-20 02:45:39 <XDS2010> luke-jr: !
223 2012-02-20 02:45:56 <XDS2010> cox
224 2012-02-20 02:46:05 <luke-jr> XDS2010: are you sure this isn't a bug?
225 2012-02-20 02:46:05 <word> i'm using cox and it works just fine..
226 2012-02-20 02:46:14 <josephcp> do you have the newest version of bitcoind?
227 2012-02-20 02:46:22 <BlueMatt> for some reason I dont think its your isp
228 2012-02-20 02:46:23 <luke-jr> XDS2010: a protocol change was just rolled out today
229 2012-02-20 02:46:27 <XDS2010> yep pretty sure, i called them and they said they dont want anything to do with bitcoin
230 2012-02-20 02:46:39 <josephcp> first line tech support are usually more wrong than right
231 2012-02-20 02:46:40 <luke-jr> doesn't mean they block it
232 2012-02-20 02:46:43 <XDS2010> luke-jr:  haven't been able to sync for weeks
233 2012-02-20 02:46:46 <word> XDS2010: i use cox....it isn't blocked
234 2012-02-20 02:46:48 <BlueMatt> blocking it gives puts them in the position of having a lot to do with bitcoin...
235 2012-02-20 02:46:49 <luke-jr> XDS2010: what's their number?
236 2012-02-20 02:46:55 <josephcp> what version of bitcoin are you using
237 2012-02-20 02:46:58 <word> luke-jr: they don't block it
238 2012-02-20 02:47:03 <luke-jr> word: regionally?
239 2012-02-20 02:47:16 <luke-jr> XDS2010: is your system clock correct?
240 2012-02-20 02:47:18 <luke-jr> and timezone
241 2012-02-20 02:47:26 <josephcp> no, us ISPs don't think like that, they don't go out of their way to block botnets even when they know about it
242 2012-02-20 02:47:27 <word> at least not on their whole network
243 2012-02-20 02:47:27 <XDS2010> luke-jr:  1 (800) 422-1234
244 2012-02-20 02:47:39 <XDS2010> josephcp:  latest version
245 2012-02-20 02:47:42 <word> XDS2010: what state and/or city do you live in?
246 2012-02-20 02:47:45 <josephcp> latest version is....
247 2012-02-20 02:47:52 <XDS2010> luke-jr:  yes my system clock is correct
248 2012-02-20 02:47:57 <luke-jr> XDS2010: that number is something called "Dex"&
249 2012-02-20 02:48:20 <XDS2010> 0.5.2
250 2012-02-20 02:48:24 <josephcp> ok
251 2012-02-20 02:48:39 <luke-jr> XDS2010: what OS?
252 2012-02-20 02:49:21 <XDS2010> we have cox at work as well, i tried there and was also not able to connect. this is when i got suspicious. I spoke to a local cox tech supervisor and he said f*** bitcoin in not so many words
253 2012-02-20 02:50:00 <josephcp> i really doubt that
254 2012-02-20 02:50:01 <XDS2010> so is there anything i can do ? changing ISP's would be more work than worth at this point
255 2012-02-20 02:50:05 <word> just because a local tech doesnt like it doesnt mean he has the authority or even capability to block it..
256 2012-02-20 02:50:09 <luke-jr> XDS2010: why are you connecting with Verizon?
257 2012-02-20 02:50:13 <BlueMatt> bitcoin works over tor...
258 2012-02-20 02:50:16 <josephcp> tech support doesn't have NOC access
259 2012-02-20 02:50:24 <XDS2010> luke-jr:  im on a wireless network right now
260 2012-02-20 02:50:33 <luke-jr> that sounds like the easiest answer then
261 2012-02-20 02:50:35 <josephcp> and tech support (even supervisors) will get some serious shit if they go off their script
262 2012-02-20 02:50:35 <luke-jr> <.<
263 2012-02-20 02:50:37 <XDS2010> (not at home)
264 2012-02-20 02:50:53 <XDS2010> josephcp:  he was pretty clear
265 2012-02-20 02:51:07 <BlueMatt> he said explicitly that they block bitcoin?
266 2012-02-20 02:51:14 <XDS2010> yep
267 2012-02-20 02:51:25 <luke-jr> XDS2010: why is that 800 number not Cox? :
268 2012-02-20 02:51:27 <luke-jr> :/
269 2012-02-20 02:51:34 <XDS2010> luke-jr:  its cox
270 2012-02-20 02:51:39 <XDS2010> 1 (800) 422-1234
271 2012-02-20 02:51:55 <word> for what region?
272 2012-02-20 02:51:57 <luke-jr> "Thank you for calling Dex One"
273 2012-02-20 02:52:02 <XDS2010> north east
274 2012-02-20 02:52:12 <XDS2010> luke-jr:  try 800-229-6542 for the midwest
275 2012-02-20 02:52:21 <luke-jr> I don't want to reach someone different
276 2012-02-20 02:52:24 <josephcp> inb4 this is a troll
277 2012-02-20 02:52:36 <XDS2010> josephcp:  who is a troll ?
278 2012-02-20 02:52:42 <XDS2010> screw you
279 2012-02-20 02:52:59 <XDS2010> this is what i know and what i was told
280 2012-02-20 02:53:15 <josephcp> phone number doesn't match your ISP
281 2012-02-20 02:53:29 <XDS2010> josephcp:  he was very clear they actively block bitcoin
282 2012-02-20 02:53:36 <luke-jr> josephcp: no, Cox's site does have the # on it
283 2012-02-20 02:53:40 <sipa> Who is Dex One?
284 2012-02-20 02:53:49 <word> dex is a phonebook company afaik
285 2012-02-20 02:54:03 <luke-jr> XDS2010: didn't you say "hey, I pay you; you provide what I pay for or else"?
286 2012-02-20 02:54:25 <XDS2010> luke-jr:  he was pretty angry when i mentioned bitcoin
287 2012-02-20 02:54:41 <word> lul
288 2012-02-20 02:54:57 <luke-jr> XDS2010: is there a sane number I can reach these idiots at?
289 2012-02-20 02:55:44 <word> XDS2010: here's how you transfer your money: you post your private key in #bitcoin and some nice folks will send it to a public key you provide asap >.>
290 2012-02-20 02:55:50 <josephcp> luke-jr: why you trying to hassle an ISP purely on hearsay
291 2012-02-20 02:55:57 <XDS2010> luke-jr:  i can pm you his personal number and name
292 2012-02-20 02:56:08 <luke-jr> josephcp: first I get to someone high up and confirm :p
293 2012-02-20 02:56:11 <luke-jr> XDS2010: sure
294 2012-02-20 02:56:12 <word> luke-jr: simple answer is best: they don't block bitcoin. I'm on bitcoin
295 2012-02-20 02:56:14 <XDS2010> he also does tech for us at work
296 2012-02-20 02:56:17 <word> i'm on cox
297 2012-02-20 02:56:21 <josephcp> luke-jr: no one else has problems on cox
298 2012-02-20 02:56:21 <luke-jr> word: Cox is big
299 2012-02-20 02:56:28 <luke-jr> josephcp: as far as we know
300 2012-02-20 02:56:39 <josephcp> if you want to know, get a city and then call cox from their whois data
301 2012-02-20 02:56:45 <josephcp> on the prompt ask for "Network Operations"
302 2012-02-20 02:56:46 <word> policies like blocking things wouldn't be region specific imo
303 2012-02-20 02:56:54 <josephcp> guaranteed get someone who knows, but you're wasting your time
304 2012-02-20 02:57:03 <luke-jr> word: you give them too much credit.
305 2012-02-20 02:57:12 <XDS2010> josephcp:  i don't think that would be possible but i can try
306 2012-02-20 02:57:18 <word> XDS2010: what state are you in?
307 2012-02-20 02:57:20 <luke-jr> word: policies like bandwidth limits are trusted to end-user-owned equipment for enforcement
308 2012-02-20 02:57:25 <luke-jr> word: RI
309 2012-02-20 02:57:25 <XDS2010> our internet access at work is cox
310 2012-02-20 02:57:33 <XDS2010> DS3 cox@work
311 2012-02-20 02:57:37 <josephcp> more likely your work is blocking it
312 2012-02-20 02:57:51 <josephcp> i sure as hell wouldn't let bitcoin on run a corporate network
313 2012-02-20 02:58:00 <word> so the tech support # is: 877-206-4210
314 2012-02-20 02:58:00 <XDS2010> josephcp:  i dont think so from what i can tell
315 2012-02-20 02:58:00 <zordilorp> :-0o0o0o0o0o
316 2012-02-20 02:58:29 <XDS2010> what is a pingable address for the desktop client ?
317 2012-02-20 02:58:36 <BlueMatt> ???
318 2012-02-20 02:58:38 <luke-jr> XDS2010: wtf?
319 2012-02-20 02:58:51 <word> XDS2010: if you're connecting from verizon why can't you access your wallet?
320 2012-02-20 02:58:52 <luke-jr> XDS2010: gonna PM me the guy's name/number?
321 2012-02-20 02:59:11 <XDS2010> luke-jr:  yea
322 2012-02-20 02:59:54 <sipa> XDS2010: what do you mean with pingable address?
323 2012-02-20 03:01:15 <XDS2010> what address does the client connect to ?
324 2012-02-20 03:01:20 <luke-jr> XDS2010: any
325 2012-02-20 03:01:27 <luke-jr> it's p2p
326 2012-02-20 03:01:30 <luke-jr> there are no servers
327 2012-02-20 03:01:32 <XDS2010> in other words its decentralized ?
328 2012-02-20 03:01:36 <word> ...
329 2012-02-20 03:01:40 <XDS2010> right that explains a lot
330 2012-02-20 03:01:46 <luke-jr> that's the *whole point* of bitcoin&
331 2012-02-20 03:01:54 <josephcp> see luke-jr don't waste some techsupport drone's time
332 2012-02-20 03:02:06 <josephcp> ;-)
333 2012-02-20 03:02:09 <word> agreed
334 2012-02-20 03:02:17 <luke-jr> josephcp: meh, better than the call they would take otherwise
335 2012-02-20 03:02:21 <XDS2010> since cox also actively blocks bittorrent connections in my city
336 2012-02-20 03:02:24 <XDS2010> that would make sense
337 2012-02-20 03:02:26 <josephcp> cox ONLY blocks port 25
338 2012-02-20 03:02:27 <josephcp> that's it
339 2012-02-20 03:02:42 <XDS2010> josephcp:  maybe in your area but in mine its different
340 2012-02-20 03:02:47 <josephcp> and ib et if you called in and asked, and went up 2 levels of techsupport they wouldn't even KNOW they blocked SMTP
341 2012-02-20 03:02:50 <gmaxwell> XDS2010: when did it stop working.
342 2012-02-20 03:02:58 <gmaxwell> ?
343 2012-02-20 03:03:15 <XDS2010> about 2 weeks ago gmaxwell
344 2012-02-20 03:03:29 <TuxBlackEdo> interesting
345 2012-02-20 03:03:31 <josephcp> this is on a corporate line though right?
346 2012-02-20 03:03:37 <gmaxwell> XDS2010: what version of bitcoin are you running?
347 2012-02-20 03:03:43 <josephcp> gmaxwell: he said 0.5.2
348 2012-02-20 03:03:44 <XDS2010> about the same time the finished "network upgrades"
349 2012-02-20 03:03:50 <XDS2010> they*
350 2012-02-20 03:03:58 <gmaxwell> josephcp: sorry, missed the beginning of this.
351 2012-02-20 03:04:09 <josephcp> corporate line => they block anything they want. i'd block bitcoind too if i ran a corporate network
352 2012-02-20 03:04:32 <XDS2010> i don't give a shit what they block i just want my money
353 2012-02-20 03:04:35 <gmaxwell> XDS2010: What does your client say when you try to run it? Just zero connections?
354 2012-02-20 03:04:42 <gmaxwell> XDS2010: no worries, your money is fine.
355 2012-02-20 03:04:42 <XDS2010> as long as i can get my money out im ok
356 2012-02-20 03:04:50 <word> i'd block any p2p on a corporate line tbh
357 2012-02-20 03:04:52 <josephcp> XDS2010: your current ISP you're chatting on should be ok
358 2012-02-20 03:04:54 <XDS2010> gmaxwell:  exactly
359 2012-02-20 03:05:00 <gmaxwell> First, if you just copy off your wallet.dat file you have your money. End of story.
360 2012-02-20 03:05:08 <word> ^
361 2012-02-20 03:05:13 <gmaxwell> word: sure people block things, but ISPs don't.
362 2012-02-20 03:05:17 <XDS2010> josephcp:  this is my next door neighbors connection im leaching off of
363 2012-02-20 03:05:18 <TuxBlackEdo> someone start a http server on port 8333 and have him connect to it
364 2012-02-20 03:05:22 <word> put it on a usb, go to an internet cafe
365 2012-02-20 03:05:28 <XDS2010> josephcp:  and yes he knows i am
366 2012-02-20 03:05:29 <gmaxwell> XDS2010: but I'd like to figure out if you're actually being blocked by your ISP or a local firewall.
367 2012-02-20 03:05:32 <luke-jr> XDS2010: so do that
368 2012-02-20 03:05:33 <josephcp> word: exactly, way too risky, the moment you let p2p on a corporate network they can mask/hide-in-the-crowd that traffic to be seriously nasty stuff
369 2012-02-20 03:05:57 <gmaxwell> TuxBlackEdo: fantastic idea. Have you done that yet?
370 2012-02-20 03:06:00 <XDS2010> is there a way to do a blind transfer or something ?
371 2012-02-20 03:06:11 <XDS2010> i have all my keys
372 2012-02-20 03:06:14 <TuxBlackEdo> XDS2010, try http://firebind.com
373 2012-02-20 03:06:24 <XDS2010> TuxBlackEdo:  whats that ?
374 2012-02-20 03:06:27 <TuxBlackEdo> test all your ports
375 2012-02-20 03:06:35 <TuxBlackEdo> its an outbound port tester
376 2012-02-20 03:06:36 <gmaxwell> TuxBlackEdo: great call.
377 2012-02-20 03:06:37 <TuxBlackEdo> you need java
378 2012-02-20 03:06:38 <word> gmaxwell: they do, but they usually dont for long because the legality of blocking certain traffic is fuzzy and it's also highly unpopular
379 2012-02-20 03:06:47 <josephcp> TuxBlackEdo: oh nice! bookmarked
380 2012-02-20 03:07:08 <gmaxwell> word: right. VZN blocked the bitcoin irc at one point because some idiot thought it was a botnet, but it was only for two days.
381 2012-02-20 03:07:15 <XDS2010> ok so right now im stuck right ?
382 2012-02-20 03:07:19 <gmaxwell> If thats whats happening here we need to get it fixed
383 2012-02-20 03:07:30 <josephcp> 0.5.2 should be able to do DNS boostrapping though
384 2012-02-20 03:07:32 <josephcp> no?
385 2012-02-20 03:07:40 <sipa> josephcp: sure
386 2012-02-20 03:07:42 <XDS2010> gmaxwell:  the techs are pretty resilient in this area
387 2012-02-20 03:07:50 <sipa> XDS2010: if the problem persists, you can always try running over tor
388 2012-02-20 03:08:03 <XDS2010> sipa:  ok how ?
389 2012-02-20 03:08:05 <word> XDS2010: techs dont have a say
390 2012-02-20 03:08:10 <josephcp> so to make this clear: do you have *home* cox internet?
391 2012-02-20 03:08:23 <XDS2010> word:  who says ?
392 2012-02-20 03:08:37 <word> XDS2010: corporate structure?
393 2012-02-20 03:08:39 <josephcp> XDS2010: tech support people (up to tier 3) have no real access to the network
394 2012-02-20 03:08:56 <word> the guy fixing your fiber connection has no say in what goes through it
395 2012-02-20 03:09:09 <josephcp> you know you're going above tier 3 home/retail tech support when they tell you to call a seperate number (because they outsource their call center staffing)
396 2012-02-20 03:09:30 <luke-jr> josephcp: know the #?
397 2012-02-20 03:09:31 <gmaxwell> Can someone find a simple http port tester that doesn't require Java that XDS can try on port 8333?
398 2012-02-20 03:09:49 <XMPPwocky> noc noc, who's there?
399 2012-02-20 03:09:53 <luke-jr> it'd be nice if we could tell people to try -addnode=x.x.x.x:someotherport <.<
400 2012-02-20 03:09:54 <josephcp> luke-jr: nope, but if you have an ip just do a whois on the ip and then call the number
401 2012-02-20 03:10:09 <josephcp> usually youll get an IVR saying "please say the party you wish to reach" and then you say "network operations"
402 2012-02-20 03:10:23 <XMPPwocky> gmaxwell: run http on 8333.
403 2012-02-20 03:11:14 <XMPPwocky> XDS2010: http://xmppwocky.net:8333
404 2012-02-20 03:11:33 <XDS2010_> as you can see this connection sucks
405 2012-02-20 03:11:36 <gmaxwell> XDS2010: go to http://www.firebind.com/8333  and xmppwocky's link above
406 2012-02-20 03:11:38 <XDS2010_> lol
407 2012-02-20 03:11:52 <XDS2010_> gmaxwell:  k ill try it
408 2012-02-20 03:11:56 <luke-jr> XMPPwocky's link is no good
409 2012-02-20 03:11:57 <sipa> XMPPwocky: i can't connect to that
410 2012-02-20 03:12:04 <gmaxwell> josephcp: you can follow mine
411 2012-02-20 03:12:45 <josephcp> oh yeah that one looks good
412 2012-02-20 03:13:03 <gmaxwell> josephcp: we'll have to remember that for the future.
413 2012-02-20 03:13:03 <XDS2010_> in the mean time like i mentioned earlier is there anyway to transfer my money without a sync ? , i have all my keys
414 2012-02-20 03:13:16 <TuxBlackEdo> here you go
415 2012-02-20 03:13:24 <gmaxwell> XDS2010_: what does http://www.firebind.com/8333 tell you?
416 2012-02-20 03:13:29 <TuxBlackEdo> http://173.231.2.82:8333 <- test my server
417 2012-02-20 03:13:30 <luke-jr> XDS2010_: you were already told how
418 2012-02-20 03:13:38 <gmaxwell> XDS2010_: copy the wallet file, go someplace where you do have a connection use it there
419 2012-02-20 03:13:39 <gribble> '<title>Directory listing for /</title>\n<h2>Directory listing for /</h2>\n<hr>\n<ul>\n<li><a href="lookslikeport8333works">lookslikeport8333works</a>\n</ul>\n<hr>\n'
420 2012-02-20 03:13:39 <TuxBlackEdo> ;;web fetch http://173.231.2.82:8333
421 2012-02-20 03:13:48 <gmaxwell> yea, TuxBlackEdo's works.
422 2012-02-20 03:13:54 <XDS2010_> luke-jr:  can i do it online tho ?
423 2012-02-20 03:13:56 <TuxBlackEdo> it should show a directory listing with "looks like port 8333 works" file in it
424 2012-02-20 03:14:03 <luke-jr> XDS2010_: sure
425 2012-02-20 03:14:05 <XDS2010_> gmaxwell:  can i do it with a e-wallet ?
426 2012-02-20 03:14:15 <XDS2010_> great!
427 2012-02-20 03:14:17 <XDS2010_> how ?
428 2012-02-20 03:14:17 <XMPPwocky> woo[s
429 2012-02-20 03:14:23 <XMPPwocky> iptables :/
430 2012-02-20 03:14:30 <XMPPwocky> >>
431 2012-02-20 03:14:33 <word> XDS2010_: send me your wallet, i'll put it in an ewallet :)
432 2012-02-20 03:14:35 <TuxBlackEdo> XDS2010_, what does http://173.231.2.82:8333 <- say when you click it?
433 2012-02-20 03:15:09 <XMPPwocky> ;;web fetch http://instawallet.org
434 2012-02-20 03:15:12 <XDS2010_> TuxBlackEdo:  no data received
435 2012-02-20 03:15:17 <gribble> The read operation timed out
436 2012-02-20 03:15:23 <TuxBlackEdo> XDS2010_, very interesting!
437 2012-02-20 03:15:30 <gmaxwell> XDS2010_: and the link I gave you?
438 2012-02-20 03:15:31 <TuxBlackEdo> looks like your outbound 8333 doesnt work
439 2012-02-20 03:15:38 <TuxBlackEdo> let me try something different
440 2012-02-20 03:15:42 <josephcp> are you using a laptop that isn't yours?
441 2012-02-20 03:15:47 <XDS2010_> how do i use instawallet ?
442 2012-02-20 03:15:48 <TuxBlackEdo> let me try to open a port on a different port
443 2012-02-20 03:15:54 <josephcp> a lot of corporate laptops block anything but port 80 and exchange
444 2012-02-20 03:16:01 <sipa> XDS2010_: what does gmaxwell's link tell you?
445 2012-02-20 03:16:02 <josephcp> 443
446 2012-02-20 03:16:18 <sipa> http://www.firebind.com/8333
447 2012-02-20 03:16:30 <XDS2010_> XMPPwocky:  ok hold on im reading that
448 2012-02-20 03:16:37 <TuxBlackEdo> sipa, he just tried connecting to my 8333 server and it didnt work
449 2012-02-20 03:16:46 <gmaxwell> TuxBlackEdo: yes, secondary verification is good
450 2012-02-20 03:17:01 <XDS2010_> XMPPwocky:  its loading but incredibly slow
451 2012-02-20 03:17:06 <XDS2010_> no offense bud
452 2012-02-20 03:17:24 <josephcp> i know for a fact that a lot of banks have that policy in place. they won't let you access weird ports. even doing ftp on commandline on a public wifi network is blocked at the OS network-stack level
453 2012-02-20 03:17:36 <XDS2010_> Sorry, the website www.instawallet.com cannot be found
454 2012-02-20 03:17:48 <TuxBlackEdo> XDS2010_, how about http://173.231.2.82:3333
455 2012-02-20 03:17:48 <XDS2010_> %^&*( connection
456 2012-02-20 03:17:50 <josephcp> so if it's not your computer where you have full control you'll have trouble
457 2012-02-20 03:18:04 <XDS2010_> lookslikeport3333works/
458 2012-02-20 03:18:08 <TuxBlackEdo> OMG!
459 2012-02-20 03:18:10 <gmaxwell> 3333 works? great.
460 2012-02-20 03:18:13 <XMPPwocky> oookkay
461 2012-02-20 03:18:16 <josephcp> interesting
462 2012-02-20 03:18:29 <TuxBlackEdo> very interesting
463 2012-02-20 03:18:35 <XDS2010_> ok so what now ?
464 2012-02-20 03:18:44 <josephcp> current theory: it's blocked on your computer
465 2012-02-20 03:18:46 <XDS2010_> is there something like instawallet ?
466 2012-02-20 03:18:54 <gmaxwell> How do you addnode in the GUI?
467 2012-02-20 03:18:54 <josephcp> because you're not on cox right now
468 2012-02-20 03:19:10 <XDS2010_> question
469 2012-02-20 03:19:23 <word> answer
470 2012-02-20 03:19:24 <XDS2010_> is there a way to download the entire block set ?
471 2012-02-20 03:19:34 <XDS2010_> or is that not possible ?
472 2012-02-20 03:19:35 <gmaxwell> XDS2010_: in any case, since we know that 3333 works for you, we can get you online.
473 2012-02-20 03:19:58 <gmaxwell> If you edit bitcoin.conf and add  a line addnode=71.191.197.79:3333  your bitcoin will be connected to the network
474 2012-02-20 03:20:15 <XDS2010_> gmaxwell: i'll give it a shot
475 2012-02-20 03:20:27 <TuxBlackEdo> gmaxwell, good idea
476 2012-02-20 03:20:37 <gmaxwell> (you'll have to restart after doing that)
477 2012-02-20 03:20:41 <TuxBlackEdo> but he will only be connected to 1 node since everyone else will be using 8333
478 2012-02-20 03:20:52 <TuxBlackEdo> restart the client (not your computer)