Btchina litecoin api technologies
4 stars based on
54 reviews
I thought there was some reasonable database that didn't suffer from this backing the program? I wonder if we should hold 0. Thanks for the help as well sipa Is it just divide and multiply by ,?
Should I store the BTC values as floats? I think we need to separate malleability that is annoying because of poorly coded wallet software and malleability that fundementally makes multi-party protocols dangerous - the latter can IMO be better fixed with a new CHECKSIG type I'd just hate to see people rely on "fix malleability via whack-a-mole" and have that fail To be sure we'd need to find a proof that rerandomizing a DSA signature lets you solve discrete logs.
Or is there a better way to do this? Gox, it affects all bitcoins It is exceptionally unlikely that malleability will be fixed in the year. We've been slowly moving towards improving it, v0. I'm sure they're working on that very hard right now Worst-case, MtGox support gets flooded with people who try to scam them this way, and then after a trivial amount of scanning, they can verify that this is going on and then ban those customers. It makes some implications which are just flat out untrue.
I wish I was in a smaller room so I could bang my head against more walls at once There are support related issues why they'd want something to be externally adopted but nothing I know or in the press releases suggests a reason that their withdraws need to be held until that happens. I don't get why they make it out like it's impossible I'm guessing the answer is yes, since other exchanges are able to do so I don't see them say outright that's what they want I know they want that, I don't know if thats what they're reffering to as gating.
If so I can't figure out why. Can the bug block a transaction forever? Or just a while to fool the sending party? What is the time and computing power required to block longer then 10 minutes? I'm at least glad to see your comments. Was asking if thats what was meant by their rederal to change in protocol. Knowledge hierarchies which go through minds that don't understand bitcoin, but answer questions for scared people.
It's normal, it's going to continue happening too. Why do I keep getting emails from pulltester? Yes, your two gitian PRs I couldn't get deterministic tar even by manipulating datestamps in the origin files. Instawallet funds disappeared without a trace We believe that the changes required for addressing this issue will be positive over the long term for the whole community. It's not clear to me why this doesn't affect unconfirmed transactions in regular wallets I believe the issue actually lies on the outgoing side, but yes, I believe there is no problem with sufficiently confirmed transactions I know mtgox is bad, but there could be a possibility.
And doesn't bitcoin produce standard wallets that work perfectly well with the bitcoinds? They call bitching, and the tx is unconfirmed for N weeks. Your support staff looks and indeed txid X is unconfirmed for weeks.
Mallability is irrelevant to the safty in this case. So thats a bit interesting. The existance of mutation doesn't give anyone a way to delay payments that I'm aware of. Ok so the explenation in the press release does not really match what we saw in the blockchain? Or you track spentness on the basis of which inputs were used. You reissue using different inputs? To be safe you must reuse the same inputs, and then you don't care about mutation.
Bitcoin has some quirks which make correct usage harder than I wish it were. In the meantime, exchanges and wallet services - and any service sending coins directly to third parties - should be extremely careful with anyone claiming their transaction did not go through.
He said he took this bug with the bitcoin core developers and will only open bitcoin withdrawals once they fix this bug. I suppose you could try to listen to all transactions on the network, and see if any mutants of transactions you've seen make it into the blockchain Both mutant and original transaction are valid, it's not really possible to tell which is the "original" Software to check the blockchain for your transaction is easy enough.
Thanks for the help as well sipa. Whats the proper way to convert BTC to satoshi because a function needs intergers and back again using python? Luke-Jr, I'm getting TypeError: I think we need to separate malleability that is annoying because of poorly coded wallet software and malleability that fundementally makes multi-party protocols dangerous - the latter can IMO be better fixed with a new CHECKSIG type.
I'd just hate to see people rely on "fix malleability via whack-a-mole" and have that fail. Luke-Jr, when I convert them to decimals and divide by 1e8 I get numbers with alot of decimal places, Would I have to round down to the nearest 8th decimal place?
Luke-Jr, I was converting the divided value to decimal but when I convert the int to decimal first then divide by 1e8 I get. But now I'm getting "TypeError: If you need to encode decimals to use them in RPC there must be a already made function for bitcoin right? They're also talking about having another kind of txid so customers could look up normalized transactions. I'm a little disinclined to spend a lot of resources on that, because it doesn't solve a bunch of the other problems malleability presents, like griefers killing chains of unconfirmed txn.
Rather than something we've known long enough about that there are posts in about it and a page on bitcoin. They're saying this is a 'weakness' in the bitcoin protocol and not specifically related to MtGox, if that's true why aren't we seeing these issues on Bitstamp or any other exchange. I was surprised by the tone and approach of their announcement. I don't get why they make it out like it's impossible. I'm guessing the answer is yes, since other exchanges are able to do so.
I don't see them say outright that's what they want. IN related news, Amazon refuses to ship any packages to Florida until the state builds a dome over it to prevent rain from damaging the cardboard boxes that are left uncovered in front of people's houses I'm hearing from a lot of people who are asking things like if it's safe for them to send bitcoins now. Trying to get out of the storm I guess I said invalidating since other things depend on the hash, but really it's just changing.
The problem we have identified is not limited to MtGox, and affects all transactions where Bitcoins are being sent to a third party. It's not clear to me why this doesn't affect unconfirmed transactions in regular wallets. If an exchange uses the official bitcoind and accounts incoming BTC to user accounts only if at least 6 confirmations were seen on the network for this specific TXID - is this exchange safe or not?
I believe the issue actually lies on the outgoing side, but yes, I believe there is no problem with sufficiently confirmed transactions. Bitcoin transactions are subject to a design issue that has been largely ignored, while known to at least a part of the Bitcoin core developers and mentioned on the BitcoinTalk forums. Your site says it payed a customer in txid X. We have discussed this solution with the Bitcoin core developers and will allow Bitcoin withdrawals again once it has been approved and standardized.
NO I quoting what the guy said from the mtgox. I'm trying to technically understand this. He also states that users can say they didn't get a tx, by manipulating the bitcoinchain thing.
I suppose you could try to listen to all transactions on the network, and see if any mutants of transactions you've seen make it into the blockchain.
Both mutant and original transaction are valid, it's not really possible to tell which is the "original". So what mtgox said is wrong? Plarkplark, it's a bit more complicated than that, the guy can claim he's expecting another tx with the same amount.
