Bitcoin is an innovative payment network and a new kind of

Reddcoin (RDD) 02/20 Progress Report - Core Wallet v3.1 Evolution & PoSV v2 - Commits & More Commits to v3.1! (Bitcoin Core 0.10, MacOS Catalina, QT Enhanced Speed and Security and more!)

Reddcoin (RDD) Core Dev Team Informal Progress Report, Feb 2020 - As any blockchain or software expert will confirm, the hardest part of making successful progress in blockchain and crypto is invisible to most users. As developers, the Reddcoin Core team relies on internal experts like John Nash, contributors offering their own code improvements to our repos (which we would love to see more of!) and especially upstream commits from experts working on open source projects like Bitcoin itself. We'd like tothank each and everyone who's hard work has contributed to this progress.
As part of Reddcoin's evolution, and in order to include required security fixes, speed improvements that are long overdue, the team has up to this point incorporated the following code commits since our last v3.0.1 public release. In attempting to solve the relatively minor font display issue with MacOS Catalina, we uncovered a complicated interweaving of updates between Reddcoin Core, QT software, MacOS SDK, Bitcoin Core and related libraries and dependencies that mandated we take a holistic approach to both solve the Catalina display problem, but in doing so, prepare a more streamlined overall build and test system, allowing the team to roll out more frequent and more secure updates in the future. And also to include some badly needed fixes in the current version of Core, which we have tentatively labeled Reddcoin Core Wallet v3.1.
Note: As indicated below, v3.1 is NOT YET AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD BY PUBLIC. We wil advise when it is.
The new v3.1 version should be ready for internal QA and build testing by the end of this week, with luck, and will be turned over to the public shortly thereafter once testing has proven no unexpected issues have been introduced. We know the delay has been a bit extended for our ReddHead MacOS Catalina stakers, and we hope to have them all aboard soon. We have moved with all possible speed while attempting to incorproate all the required work, testing, and ensuring security and safety for our ReddHeads.
Which leads us to: PoSV v2 activation and the supermajority on Mainnet at the time of this writing has reached 5625/9000 blocks or 62.5%. We have progressed quite well and without any reported user issues since release, but we need all of the community to participate! This activation, much like the funding mechanisms currently being debated by BCH and others, and employed by DASH, will mean not only a catalyst for Reddcoin but ensure it's future by providing funding for the dev team. As a personal plea from the team, please help us support the PoSV v2 activation by staking your RDD, no matter how large or small your amount of stake.
Every block and every RDD counts, and if you don't know how, we'll teach you! Live chat is fun as well as providing tech support you can trust from devs and community ReddHead members. Join us today in staking and online and collect some RDD "rain" from users and devs alike!
If you're holding Reddcoin and not staking, or you haven't upgraded your v2.x wallet to v3.0.1 (current release), we need you to help achieve consensus and activate PoSV v2! For details, see the pinned message here or our website or medium channel. Upgrade is simple and takes moments; if you're nervous or unsure, we're here to help live in Telegram or Discord, as well as other chat programs. See our website for links.
Look for more updates shortly as our long-anticipated Reddcoin Payment Gateway and Merchant Services API come online with point-of-sale support, as we announce the cross-crypto-project Aussie firefighter fundraiser program, as well as a comprehensive update to our development roadmap and more.
Work has restarted on ReddID and multiple initiatives are underway to begin educating and sharing information about ReddID, what it is, and how to use it, as we approach a releasable ReddID product. We enthusiastically encourage anyone interested in working to bring these efforts to life, whether writers, UX/UI experts, big data analysts, graphic artists, coders, front-end, back-end, AI, DevOps, the Reddcoin Core dev team is growing, and there's more opportunity and work than ever!
Bring your talents to a community and dev team that truly appreciates it, and share the Reddcoin Love!
And now, lots of commits. As v3.1 is not yet quite ready for public release, these commits have not been pushed publicly, but in the interests of sharing progress transparently, and including our ReddHead community in the process, see below for mind-numbing technical detail of work accomplished.
e5c143404 - - 2014-08-07 - Ross Nicoll - Changed LevelDB cursors to use scoped pointers to ensure destruction when going out of scope. *99a7dba2e - - 2014-08-15 - Cory Fields - tests: fix test-runner for osx. Closes ##4708 *8c667f1be - - 2014-08-15 - Cory Fields - build: add to the list of meta-depends *bcc1b2b2f - - 2014-08-15 - Cory Fields - depends: fix shasum on osx < 10.9 *54dac77d1 - - 2014-08-18 - Cory Fields - build: add option for reducing exports (v2) *6fb9611c0 - - 2014-08-16 - randy-waterhouse - build : fix CPPFLAGS for libbitcoin_cli *9958cc923 - - 2014-08-16 - randy-waterhouse - build: Add --with-utils (bitcoin-cli and bitcoin-tx, default=yes). Help string consistency tweaks. Target sanity check fix. *342aa98ea - - 2014-08-07 - Cory Fields - build: fix automake warnings about the use of INCLUDES *46db8ad51 - - 2020-02-18 - John Nash - build: add build.h to the correct target *a24de1e4c - - 2014-11-26 - Pavel Janík - Use complete path to include bitcoin-config.h. *fd8f506e5 - - 2014-08-04 - Wladimir J. van der Laan - qt: Demote ReportInvalidCertificate message to qDebug *f12aaf3b1 - - 2020-02-17 - John Nash - build: QT5 compiled with fPIC require fPIC to be enabled, fPIE is not enough *7a991b37e - - 2014-08-12 - Wladimir J. van der Laan - build: check for sys/prctl.h in the proper way *2cfa63a48 - - 2014-08-11 - Wladimir J. van der Laan - build: Add mention of --disable-wallet to bdb48 error messages *9aa580f04 - - 2014-07-23 - Cory Fields - depends: add shared dependency builder *8853d4645 - - 2014-08-08 - Philip Kaufmann - [Qt] move SubstituteFonts() above ToolTipToRichTextFilter *0c98e21db - - 2014-08-02 - Ross Nicoll - URLs containing a / after the address no longer cause parsing errors. *7baa77731 - - 2014-08-07 - ntrgn - Fixes ignored qt 4.8 codecs path on windows when configuring with --with-qt-libdir *2a3df4617 - - 2014-08-06 - Cory Fields - qt: fix unicode character display on osx when building with 10.7 sdk *71a36303d - - 2014-08-04 - Cory Fields - build: fix race in 'make deploy' for windows *077295498 - - 2014-08-04 - Cory Fields - build: Fix 'make deploy' when binaries haven't been built yet *ffdcc4d7d - - 2014-08-04 - Cory Fields - build: hook up qt translations for static osx packaging *25a7e9c90 - - 2014-08-04 - Cory Fields - build: add --with-qt-translationdir to configure for use with static qt *11cfcef37 - - 2014-08-04 - Cory Fields - build: teach macdeploy the -translations-dir argument, for use with static qt *4c4ae35b1 - - 2014-07-23 - Cory Fields - build: Find the proper xcb/pcre dependencies *942e77dd2 - - 2014-08-06 - Cory Fields - build: silence mingw fpic warning spew *e73e2b834 - - 2014-06-27 - Huang Le - Use async name resolving to improve net thread responsiveness *c88e76e8e - - 2014-07-23 - Cory Fields - build: don't let libtool insert rpath into binaries *18e14e11c - - 2014-08-05 - ntrgn - build: Fix windows configure when using --with-qt-libdir *bb92d65c4 - - 2014-07-31 - Cory Fields - test: don't let the port number exceed the legal range *62b95290a - - 2014-06-18 - Cory Fields - test: redirect comparison tool output to stdout *cefe447e9 - - 2014-07-22 - Cory Fields - gitian: remove unneeded option after last commit *9347402ca - - 2014-07-21 - Cory Fields - build: fix broken boost chrono check on some platforms *c9ed039cf - - 2014-06-03 - Cory Fields - build: fix whitespace in pkg-config variable *3bcc5ad37 - - 2014-06-03 - Cory Fields - build: allow linux and osx to build against static qt5 *01a44ba90 - - 2014-07-17 - Cory Fields - build: silence false errors during make clean *d1fbf7ba2 - - 2014-07-08 - Cory Fields - build: fix win32 static linking after libtool merge *005ae2fa4 - - 2014-07-08 - Cory Fields - build: re-add AM_LDFLAGS where it's overridden *37043076d - - 2014-07-02 - Wladimir J. van der Laan - Fix the Qt5 build after d95ba75 *f3b4bbf40 - - 2014-07-01 - Wladimir J. van der Laan - qt: Change serious messages from qDebug to qWarning *f4706f753 - - 2014-07-01 - Wladimir J. van der Laan - qt: Log messages with type>QtDebugMsg as non-debug *98e85fa1f - - 2014-06-06 - Pieter Wuille - libsecp256k1 integration *5f1f2e226 - - 2020-02-17 - John Nash - Merge branch 'switch_verification_code' into Build *1f30416c9 - - 2014-02-07 - Pieter Wuille - Also switch the (unused) verification code to low-s instead of even-s. *1c093d55e - - 2014-06-06 - Cory Fields - secp256k1: Add build-side changes for libsecp256k1 *7f3114484 - - 2014-06-06 - Cory Fields - secp256k1: add libtool as a dependency *2531f9299 - - 2020-02-17 - John Nash - Move network-time related functions to timedata.cpp/h *d003e4c57 - - 2020-02-16 - John Nash - build: fix build weirdness after 54372482. *7035f5034 - - 2020-02-16 - John Nash - Add ::OUTPUT_SIZE *2a864c4d8 - - 2014-06-09 - Cory Fields - crypto: create a separate lib for crypto functions *03a4e4c70 - - 2014-06-09 - Cory Fields - crypto: explicitly check for byte read/write functions *a78462a2a - - 2014-06-09 - Cory Fields - build: move bitcoin-config.h to its own directory *a885721c4 - - 2014-05-31 - Pieter Wuille - Extend and move all crypto tests to crypto_tests.cpp *5f308f528 - - 2014-05-03 - Pieter Wuille - Move {Read,Write}{LE,BE}{32,64} to common.h and use builtins if possible *0161cc426 - - 2014-05-01 - Pieter Wuille - Add built-in RIPEMD-160 implementation *deefc27c0 - - 2014-04-28 - Pieter Wuille - Move crypto implementations to src/crypto/ *d6a12182b - - 2014-04-28 - Pieter Wuille - Add built-in SHA-1 implementation. *c3c4f9f2e - - 2014-04-27 - Pieter Wuille - Switch miner.cpp to use sha2 instead of OpenSSL. *b6ed6def9 - - 2014-04-28 - Pieter Wuille - Remove getwork() RPC call *0a09c1c60 - - 2014-04-26 - Pieter Wuille - Switch script.cpp and hash.cpp to use sha2.cpp instead of OpenSSL. *8ed091692 - - 2014-04-20 - Pieter Wuille - Add a built-in SHA256/SHA512 implementation. *0c4c99b3f - - 2014-06-21 - Philip Kaufmann - small cleanup in src/compat .h and .cpp *ab1369745 - - 2014-06-13 - Cory Fields - sanity: hook up sanity checks *f598c67e0 - - 2014-06-13 - Cory Fields - sanity: add libc/stdlib sanity checks *b241b3e13 - - 2014-06-13 - Cory Fields - sanity: autoconf check for sys/select.h *cad980a4f - - 2019-07-03 - John Nash - build: Add a top-level forwarding target for src/ objects *f4533ee1c - - 2019-07-03 - John Nash - build: qt: split locale resources. Fixes non-deterministic distcheck *4a0e46e76 - - 2019-06-29 - John Nash - build: fix version dependency *2f61699d9 - - 2019-06-29 - John Nash - build: quit abusing AMCPPFLAGS *99b60ba49 - - 2019-06-29 - John Nash - build: avoid the use of top and abs_ dir paths *c8f673d5d - - 2019-06-29 - John Nash - build: Tidy up file generation output *5318bce57 - - 2019-06-29 - John Nash - build: nuke Makefile.include from orbit *672a25349 - - 2019-06-29 - John Nash - build: add stub makefiles for easier subdir builds *562b7c5a6 - - 2020-02-08 - John Nash - build: delete old's *066120079 - - 2020-02-08 - John Nash - build: Switch to non-recursive make
Whew! No wonder it's taken the dev team a while! :)
TL;DR: Trying to fix MacOS Catalina font display led to requiring all kinds of work to migrate and evolve the Reddcoin Core software with Apple, Bitcoin and QT components. Lots of work done, v3.1 public release soon. Also other exciting things and ReddID back under active dev effort.
submitted by TechAdept to reddCoin [link] [comments]

What Is Merged Mining?

Cryptocurrency mining is a broad subject, with many different facets. There are a number of different ways in which mining can be done, ranging from traditional dedicated hardware mining, like the ASICs, GPU mining, cloud mining or web browser mining, to name some.
However, a very interesting and less known concept is the one of merged mining. This process entails the mining of two coins that are based on the same algorithm, simultaneously. Basically, merged mining allows a miner to mine on more than one blockchain at a time. The added benefit to this is that the miner will contribute to both of the blockchain’s hashrates, hence increasing their security (lower threat of a 51% attack) and functionality.
Satoshi Nakamoto himself has written on the subject, in this Bitcointalk post from 2010 regarding Bitcoin specifically, saying:
I think it would be possible for BitDNS to be a completely separate network and separate block chain, yet share CPU power with Bitcoin. The only overlap is to make it so miners can search for proof-of-work for both networks simultaneously.
The networks wouldn’t need any coordination. Miners would subscribe to both networks in parallel. They would scan SHA such that if they get a hit, they potentially solve both at once. A solution may be for just one of the networks if one network has a lower difficulty.
I think an external miner could call getwork on both programs and combine the work. Maybe call Bitcoin, get work from it, hand it to BitDNS getwork to combine into a combined work.
Instead of fragmentation, networks share and augment each other’s total CPU power. This would solve the problem that if there are multiple networks, they are a danger to each other if the available CPU power gangs up on one. Instead, all networks in the world would share combined CPU power, increasing the total strength. It would make it easier for small networks to get started by tapping into a ready base of miners.
Perhaps the most discussed examples of merged mining are the pairs Bitcoin & Namecoin and Litecoin & Dogecoin. In a merged mining process, there always has to be a parent blockchain and an auxiliary one.
This process does not require any additional computing power from the miners, which is a big advantage.
First, a block of transactions for each chain has to be assembled. The next step is simply starting to mine. During the process there are 3 possible outcomes:
The biggest disadvantage of implementing merged mining is that within the auxiliary chain, there is implementation and development work involved and when switching, a hard fork is needed.
Overall, merged mining benefits miners, not so much investors, however it does offer other perks like increased security for the actual networks. Could be the perfect approach for new projects, in terms of protecting themselves from a 51% attack for example. It is an interesting implementation which more people should be aware of.
submitted by Gath3r_Web_Miner to Gath3r_WebMiner [link] [comments]

PBaaS- The Age of Merged Mining is Upon Us

PBaaS- The Age of Merged Mining is Upon Us

Full article found here:

Summary of article below:

Sr. Member
Activity: 364 Merit: 1997 View Profile
Re: BitDNS and Generalizing Bitcoin
December 09, 2010, 09:02:42 PM
Merited by Traxo (1)
I think it would be possible for BitDNS to be a completely separate network and separate block chain, yet share CPU power with Bitcoin. The only overlap is to make it so miners can search for proof-of-work for both networks simultaneously.
The networks wouldn't need any coordination. Miners would subscribe to both networks in parallel. They would scan SHA such that if they get a hit, they potentially solve both at once. A solution may be for just one of the networks if one network has a lower difficulty.
I think an external miner could call getwork on both programs and combine the work. Maybe call Bitcoin, get work from it, hand it to BitDNS getwork to combine into a combined work.
Instead of fragmentation, networks share and augment each other's total CPU power. This would solve the problem that if there are multiple networks, they are a danger to each other if the available CPU power gangs up on one. Instead, all networks in the world would share combined CPU power, increasing the total strength. It would make it easier for small networks to get started by tapping into a ready base of miners.
-Satoshi Nakimoto

These were the anonymously written, prophetic words of Satoshi Nakimoto, posted to bitcointalk nearly a decade ago and yet they describe a concept that today we are only truly realizing. What Satoshi describes is not only an elegant solution to many of today's cryptocurrency shortcomings but if implemented properly, could form the backbone for an entire crypto-economy of secure, scalable, and self sufficient chains, outside of the flawed one we currently have.
This new crypto-economy would need to be backed by a secure chain itself with immunity to 51% attacks and powerful cutting edge technological features supporting anonymity and protection of assets to pass on down to the interconnected chains.

One such cutting edge project is Verus Coin (
The lead Technical Developer of Verus is a former VP at Microsoft who also co-founded Microsoft’s Java and .NET platforms.
Verus has a unique, new consensus algorithm called Proof of Power, a 50% PoW/50% PoS algorithm that solves theoretical weaknesses in other PoS systems (Nothing at Stake problem for example) and is provably immune to 51% hash attacks. Verus utilizes zk-snarks tech zero-knowledge proofs and is not "forced private", allowing for both transparent and shielded (private) transactions along with private messages as well. They created their very own hardware equalizing algorithm VerusHash 2.0, that leverages the many hardware advantages intrinsic to modern CPU's architecture, enabling the most decentralizing hardware, CPUs (due to their virtually complete market penetration), to stay relevant as miners for the indefinite future. VerusHash 2.0 is specifically designed to better equalize hashrates across all mining hardware types, allowing CPUs and FPGAs to mine competitively on the same network and by favoring the latest CPUs over older types, has the additional benefit of being a defense against the centralizing potential of botnets.

Verus and the Verus Coin project are community driven, all open source ( and they are also now currently running a test net of their all new protocol, PBaaS (Public Blockchain as a Service) with merged mining of up to 15 (including Verus) fully independent, secure, scalable chains that all share the properties of the parent chain described above. Check out their Discord to give merged mining a try for yourself.

I do know that merged mining as a concept has been around for a while. There are even some implementations out there too, but not on the scale of what Verus is doing. They are creating an ecosystem fully interconnected and yet independent blockchains that scale and because of their implementation (The bottom link on Merkle Mountain Ranges (MMRs)) they will all be able to be exchanged with each other and converted automatically, like a smart exchange without the need for buyers and sellers. What they are doing is truly revolutionary in it's one click chain creation ease and the fact that it is a massive network of chains (just like each of all the coins we have now) but where people can mine up to 15 projects at a time at no additional energy costs and all the created projects are fully protected. I do understand that other projects are doing great things as well and it was not my aim to downplay that but rather to highlight what can come next and fill in the holes left from a first generation blockchain network.

A Peek at the GUI (Graphical User Interface) version of the wallet

A Peek at the CLI (Command Line Interface) version of the wallet (with GUI) courtesy of a community member.

A helpful place for lots of useful information and if you want to learn more, check out their Medium page (

A rough description of the concepts described above:

-PBaaS: or Public Blockchain as a Service is a revolutionary new take on the blockchain as a service model entirely unique to Verus that offers the tools and necessary means to build on and utilize blockchain technology for business or personal use. It is similar to using a web hosting service to build a website with, but rather than having to build one by yourself from scratch, the service provider supplies the basics and handles all the necessary tasks from general upkeep to infrastructure maintenance. Since Verus doesn't rely on a centralized authority to work, there isn't any one single point of failure in the network, so in the event of a hack, power failure, data breach or loss, Verus' system is immune while the other options aren't. Instead of relying on a centralized system, Verus elegantly does work for the public by utilizing the public to do work.

-Merge Mining: or auxiliary mining is a lesser known cryptographic concept that has been seldom discussed and even less so attempted, but can be found as far back as bitcointalk's earliest days. Unfortunately, development in this area of work has remained largely stagnant due to the numerous difficulties involved in coding it, coupled with the sheer complexity and vast scope involved in the programming work. Fortunately, the development team's years of experience and months of hard work have finally paid off, and now merge mining in it's true form is at last a reality. This means that a miner could find a block for Verus and now hypothetically also earn block rewards for several other projects at the exact same time! With literally nothing to lose, and significantly more to gain, it's a no brainer choice for miners. Now miners who mine for profit can make more with the same energy expenditure, while at the same time still have the option to speculatively mine and hold projects they really believe in or care about. Businesses and individual project creators will benefit too by being able to attach a newly formed project to the hashrate of a larger, more established one. This would provide security and reliability to new projects right away and in their earliest stages, a point where they are most vulnerable. Verus has created the foundation for which any person or business, whether small or large, can safely and easily enter into the blockchain.

A semi-visual descriptive paper on the immense benefits of utilizing Merkle mountain ranges, one of the many technologies implemented in Verus PBaaS-

Also, full disclosure for readers or mods, I am also a member of this crypto community among several others and this should not diminish the value of it's content. I wrote this post to highlight a genuine technical achievement in cryptocurrency and if not here, then where do we discuss this?
The lead developer Michael Toutonghi has spent decades in the field programming and is a former Vice President and Technical Fellow at Microsoft, recognized founder and architect of Microsoft's .Net platform, ex-Technical Fellow of Microsoft's advertising platform, ex-CTO, Parallels Corporation, and an experienced distributed computing and machine learning architect. The project he helped create employs and makes use of a diverse myriad of technologies and security features to form one of the most advanced and secure cryptocurrency to date.
What their team has managed to do (in testnet, but open to the public for testing) is truly unique in that they've already built a functional system of fully interconnected blockchains that each are also completely independent from one another and fully scalable, private, secure, and immune to 51% attacks. Public blockchain as a service is their ultimate goal of offering these near infinite, secure blockchains to project creators, mineable for near zero energy and protected from attacks. Secure voting, polling, and identity using the tech are on the not-too-distant horizon.
Even the briefest glance over any of their work and it is easy to see this is not just another bs post. I hope this complies with all the rules. If there is some other place to discuss cryptocurrency and the launch of an all new system within it, please let me know. Things keep getting removed without a word said why. I'm happy to do things the proper way.
submitted by Godballz to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

SOLO Mining setup instructions. CCminer Nevermore and QT / CLI wallet.

First, I do not solo mine myself, so I can not confirm if this setup pays. I do not have the hash to even consider trying. I can confirm ccminer gets work from the wallet and cards get hot. Enjoy!
EDIT: Setup tested on coin with lower difficulty. I got paid.
rpcuser=user rpcpassword=pass rpcbind= rpcallowip= server=1 
Replace user, pass and ips to match your setup. You can make up your own usepass. You need to use the same ones when configuring ccminer. needs to be changed to the IP of the machine running the wallet. This setup allows connections from all ips in the range 192.168.1.X
:mine ccminer.exe -a x16r -o -u user -p pass -i 21 --no-longpoll --no-getwork --no-stratum --coinbase-addr=YOUR_RVN_ADDRESS_HERE ping -n 30 goto :mine 
Replace user, pass and IP to match your setup. The IP is to the machine running the wallet and the usepass are the ones you set in the first config file. And don't forget to add your RVN-address.
If you found this useful any donation would be welcome RVN: RFmtFb9GdZHvbvBW5hYB3s9VezJxeSfnz3  
#!/bin/bash until /path/to/ccminer -a x16r -o -u user -p pass -i 21 --no-longpoll --no-getwork --no-stratum --coinbase-addr=YOUR_RVN_ADDRESS_HERE; do ping -c 30 done 
Replace user, pass and IP to match your setup. The IP is to the machine running the wallet and the usepass are the ones you set in the first config file. And don't forget to add your RVN-address.
If you found this useful any donation would be welcome RVN: RFmtFb9GdZHvbvBW5hYB3s9VezJxeSfnz3
Found errors or got suggestions? - please leave a comment or send me a message.
Useful links:
submitted by fdoving to Ravencoin [link] [comments]

Trying to salvage some coins from 2013. Core (bitcoin-qt.exe v0.8.1-beta on Windows 8.1) is taking weeks to DL the blockchain as expected but keeps crashing now. Can I upgrade to a newer version without losing what I've gotten already (about 75% complete)?

Currently there are 134305 blocks remaining. When I start it up it works pretty smoothly for a while but then slows down. I leave it running while I'm gone but the last several days when I've come back it has crashed and gives me an I/O error, and I have to hit OK then start it back up. It does appear to be further along when I start it back up but not by a whole lot. So this has really slowed my progress. It's reindexed about 75% though, and so I don't want to start over from the beginning.
The drive it is on has ~400gb of free space so that's not the issue. I have 8gb of memory, and the task manager says bitcoin is taking up about 500mb, but it's using 60-85% of my cpu at a time.
If I download a newer version of core, I can just copy/paste the old wallet.dat file, right? But wouldn't it have to start downloading the entire blockchain again from the beginning? If so, is there any quicker method?
While typing this, it crashed twice. It only runs for about 10 minutes.
The version I have doesn't have any settings I can change. I read that there's a db size limit you can change in later versions that could help. This one does have a "debug window" with a command line console but I don't really know what to do with it. Here is a list of available commands: 
addmultisigaddress <'["key","key"]'> [account]
createmultisig <'["key","key"]'>
createrawtransaction [{"txid":txid,"vout":n},...] {address:amount,...}
getaddednodeinfo [node]
getbalance [account] [minconf=1]
getblocktemplate [params]
getnewaddress [account]
getrawtransaction [verbose=0]
getreceivedbyaccount [minconf=1]
getreceivedbyaddress [minconf=1]
gettxout [includemempool=true]
getwork [data]
help [command]
importprivkey [label] [rescan=true]
listaccounts [minconf=1]
listreceivedbyaccount [minconf=1] [includeempty=false]
listreceivedbyaddress [minconf=1] [includeempty=false]
listsinceblock [blockhash] [target-confirmations]
listtransactions [account] [count=10] [from=0]
listunspent [minconf=1] [maxconf=9999999] ["address",...]
lockunspent unlock? [array-of-Objects]
move [minconf=1] [comment]
sendfrom [minconf=1] [comment] [comment-to]
sendmany {address:amount,...} [minconf=1] [comment]
sendtoaddress [comment] [comment-to]
setgenerate [genproclimit]
signrawtransaction [{"txid":txid,"vout":n,"scriptPubKey":hex,"redeemScript":hex},...] [,...] [sighashtype="ALL"]
submitblock [optional-params-obj]

submitted by closer_to_the_flame to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Making pooled mining immune to 51% attacks, selfish mining, etc. by bundling an SPV client into mining software.

This idea has been floating in my mind for a while, but I haven't seen anyone else mention it. Figured it was worth discussing.

The problem

The threat posed by pools is that they indirectly control large amounts of hashing power. Miners are mining blindly on whatever header the pool gives them, and hence can be made to attack the network at their leisure.


GetBlockTemplate was supposed to fix this problem by allowing miners to do their own transactions (and making what they're mining completely transparent). This works, but adoption is low for a few reasons:
TLDR: GBT is a great way to neuter the ability of pools to do bad things™, but it isn't widely deployed due to the resource requirements and setup effort of using it properly.
Most/All the big threats posed by a large pool boil down to:
In both cases, the fact that this is occuring is actually detectable regardless of mining protocol (getwork,stratum,GBT), because the parent block hash is part of the header the miner is hashing. So the information you need to know whether you're being used to attack the network has been available all along.

The suggestion

By bundling an SPV client into mining software, all miners can verify that they're building on top of a block that is:
  1. Known to the network (blocking selfish mining).
  2. The tip of the longest chain (blocking orphaning of other blocks/51% attacks).
If this isn't the case, they can switch to their backup pool.

Advantages of the approach:


Does this work, or am I missing something obvious?
submitted by ninja_parade to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

To arms Bitcoin community! Help us to complete this mining installation for the Zürich MoneyMuseum. We are not asking for funds. Only your expertise needed! 20$ tip if you give us the relevant clue to solve or mitigate our main problem. Nice pictures of the exhibition inside as well…

A big thank you to all people who helped us we can now mine true pps with diff1! The people in this thread which have helped most have been awarded. I want to mention also the operator of denis2342 and Luke-Jr.
Actually looking at the miner screen in the Linux terminal helped a lot ;-). The pool constantly resigned to stratum with variable difficulty. We can now mine true pps with diff1. Getwork with long polling seems to be default after disabling stratum...
We will probably post again, when there is a video of the installation in action...
Again many thanks. Learned a lot.
Edit: Thank you for all the answeres so far! We will try different things now and report back. Tip bounty will be distrubuted as soon as we found out what finally does the trick. Ths could take a few days. The offerd tip will be distributed and very likeley a few others as well.
First of all, let me tell you that the Bitcoin Exhibition at the Zürich MoneyMuseum is most likely the biggest and most diverse of it’s kind. Please read more about the museum and the exhibition below.
Help us solve the following problem we experience with our “Muscle Powered Proof of Work” installation:
Me and a friend have invested a lot of time to build an installation for the Museum. It is basically a 10GHash/s miner and RapberryPi which is powered by a hand generator (Maxon DC motor with planetary gear). Here are some pictures of the installation, although not entirely put together yet. There are still some changes planned.
Now let’s get to the core of our problem:
We are mining at the getwork diff1 pool as it is a true pps pool with getwork diff1. The visitors in the museum can power the generator for 2-3min and see directly how many Satoshis the "network" (actually pool but we don't want to confuse the visitors to much at that point) has given the museum for their work. This all works well so far but one problem remains. Sometimes the pool does not get a share from us for more than 40 seconds or even more than 60 in some cases. I have calculated that with 8.4 GHash/s we should find a share about every 0.5 seconds in average (diff1). I think when the pool gets a share it gets all the hashes as it then accounts for several Satoshis. Statistically we get per minute what we should get in theory. We would very much like to lower the time between the accepted shares by the pool, however. This would help to make the overall experience much smoother for the visitors.
Please look at this screenshot from MinePeon and answer some questions:
We see that we get a lot of diff1 hashes. However, only 11 shares/packages have been accepted. The Is there a possibility to set the miner SW so it submits to the pool as soon as a share is found? It seems to send them in packages which sometimes have 4-5 seconds in between but sometimes a much as 80 seconds. I would like to submit packages of hashes much more often. How can this be influenced?
What exactly are the Getworks (GW)?
What exactly are the Accepted ones (Acc)? This is where the TipBounty is. Help us to get a better Acc/diff1 ratio. Best would be 1:1.
What exactly are the rejected ones (Rej)?
What exactly are the discarded ones (Disc)?
What exactly are the difficulty one hashes (diff1)?
Now some of these questions seem very very basic but it is important for us to understand what these are and how we can influence these. We have a 1:1 correlation between the Acc and the pool side acknowledgement of shares/packages. So whenever the MinePeon shows one more for this value the pool value for last submitted share goes to “moments ago”.
Does the miner SW have a setting where we can set after how many diff1 hashes a package of hashes is sent to the pool? If no, do you have another idea why so few are sent? Ideally we would set it so the diff1 hashes are sent every 5 seconds or so, probably even more often.
Is stratum with fixed diff1 possible? If so, would it be better to use stratum?
Are there critical settings if we should know of? (we have tried --request-diff and --no-submit-stale)
We are using BFGMiner on MinePeon if that matters. We could switch to CGMiner if that would help. Any help is very much appreciated. The museum is doing a great job explaining Bitcoin basics. We had special focus on interactive learning and have several things to underline this.
I hope to hear back from you so we can improve our installation. Please don't hesitate to ask if you have further questions. We are both not mining experts.
Thanks for reading and AMA.
Current features of the Bitcoin exhibition at the Zürich MoneyMuseum:
Current Features:
  • Life screen with various stats/charts/parameters/transactions…
  • Printed infographics.
  • Muscle powered PoW: Hand generator with 5v and 3.5-5A output, Raspberry Pi, MinePeon, 5x Antminer U2+ plus a screen to show the hash-rate at the pool and/or in MinePeon web interface. This screen will not be hand powered. This installation will complement their coining die (go to 1:27 to see what I mean).
  • The Bitcoin mining evolution (CPU, GPU, FPGA, ASIC)
  • A few short (2-3 minutes) interviews.
  • Other wallets, Trezor, PiperWallet
  • ATM Prototype, functional
  • MoneyMuseum Bit-Cards
  • PiperWallet to use.
  • Casascius and other physical Bitcoins, Wallets (also some commemorative coins), Paper wallet like one out of the first Bitcoin (A)TM ever
  • Bitcoin Quiz
  • 12 Picture tours
    • Bitcoin for beginners
    • Bitcoin advanced
    • Debunking 13 Bitcoin myths
    • What you definitely have to know
    • The history of Bitcoin
    • Bitcoin und traditional forms of money
    • Alternatives to Bitcoin
    • Citations about Bitcoin
    • How do I open an account?
    • How do I get Bitcoin?
    • Bitcoin community and economy
    • Bitcoin as a platform
I see this as a good opportunity for Bitcoin, so let’s embrace it. I am especially excited to compare the traditional forms of money which used proof of work to the new money which also uses proof of work. I think in that context it will be much easier for the visitors to value this concept.
A lot of schools and other groups book guided tours at the museum. It is open on every Friday from December 05. On. Entry is free of charge.
Edit:Markdown, typos
submitted by SimonBelmond to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why BTCGuild is a bigger threat than you think (or: why 6 confirmations is not enough)

TL;DR: even 40% hash control is too big, and 6 confirmations is too few.
A lot of people have been worrying about the possibility of BTCGuild getting 51% of the mining power and pulling off a majority attack. Personally, I don't think it will; I believe that if it does they'll cut off getwork and drop down to 35% or however much, plus people might start leaving.
But even 35% is still a threat.
Consider the figures in Table 1 of this paper. Specifically, look at the success rates for reversing a 6-confirm transaction with 25% of the hashing power. It's about 5-8%. Do you really want to deal with BTCGuild having a 5-8% success rate at reversing a transaction? Obviously they're not going to try for tiny ones, but what if they try it on a transfer on the order of tens thousands of bitcoins? That's a couple hundred USD at today's prices; while that wouldn't hold in the resultant panic selling, it'd still be a sizeable loss.
A lot of people say 'well, BTCGuild wouldn't do that, because X and Y and Z'. I think this is an unreasonable defense. BTCGuild might not, because they're invested in BTC staying a strong currency. But someone who wants to see BTC fail would have reasons to try this. I'm not saying I think that the government or whoever is going to try to hack the BTCGuild servers and try this, but I think that given that the point of BTC is to be resilient to that sort of thing, we shouldn't be making it possible.
Another thing I see people say a lot is that people will notice. How? It's not like your miner is going to suddenly pop up a big "ACTIVATING EVIL MODE" dialog box. Plus, even when people do notice that it's been suspiciously long since BTCGuild found a block, it might just be probability. And even if it were confirmed that they're malicious, you'd have to wait for people to actually find it out and pull their mining power. There are altogether too many 'if's here.
The intermediate solution, if you're worried, is to wait for more than 10 transactions for high-value transactions. However, the transaction number required is extremely high; even with 100 transactions BTCGuild would have a roughly 0.5% chance of reversing the transfer. I'd like at least eight more zeroes in front of that number (this is supposed to be super-secure, right?), and for the transfer count to be no more than 25. According to this calculation, the success probability with nobody controlling more than 25% of the hash power and 25 confirmations is about 10-12; even with 10 confirmations it's 7 * 10-6, and with 6 it's 6 * 10-4. These are numbers I can live with, but I suspect they're still a lot higher than most people's intuition for how high the probabilities are.
submitted by MonadicTraversal to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

P2Pool Error messages within shell window (win 10 pro)

Hi all,
Newbie trying to run my own P2Pool node for VTC and within the shell window periodically I start seeing the below error msg's in 15 second blurts, then it goes back to mining normal then all the sudden I will start seeing these error messages again.
Error Message in P2Pool shell window:
Error getting work from bitcoind: Traceback (most recent call last): File "twisted\internet\defer.pyc", line 653, in _runCallbacks File "twisted\internet\defer.pyc", line 1357, in gotResult File "twisted\internet\defer.pyc", line 1299, in _inlineCallbacks File "twisted\python\failure.pyc", line 393, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator
--- --- File "p2pool\util\deferral.pyc", line 41, in f File "twisted\internet\defer.pyc", line 1299, in _inlineCallbacks File "twisted\python\failure.pyc", line 393, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator File "p2pool\bitcoin\helper.pyc", line 47, in getwork File "twisted\internet\defer.pyc", line 1299, in _inlineCallbacks File "twisted\python\failure.pyc", line 393, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator File "p2pool\util\jsonrpc.pyc", line 126, in _http_do
twisted.web.error.Error: 500 Internal Server Error
Worker VvstnCT7shwVwg1JBh3du41dGMkq6V2gC1 submitted share more than once!
Does anyone know what it means? I'm generating VTC coins, but get these messages when the coins are being mined. Please help this newbie!
submitted by stratatrader to VertcoinMining [link] [comments]

Announcing new LTC pool! stratum, getwork, sms/mail notify, and more!

Greetings fellow miners,
I've been working with Bitcoins a while now, but I got tired, so I've started with Litecoins. But none of the existing pools offered all of the services I wanted, so I decided to setup my own. Currently I'm developing the frontend to provide a better user experience. Requests for popular or usefull features can also be added on demand. The pool is quite new and the first block is not yet found, but all calculations I've done indicates that the first block will be found in one week, with only myself mining.
Currently, it's a PPLNS reward system, but I'm planning to make it possible to choose between PPLNS and PPS per pool worker. I also plan to rewrite the whole frontend in the future.
The url is:
IRC channels are available on Freenode ( and I2P (#coinpool), and I will add forum if needed.
I'll hope you join me!
Best regards,
submitted by meeh420 to litecoinmining [link] [comments]

Would this mitigate the double-spend potential of a 51% attack?

After looking at cgminer and bfgminer source code I noticed both blindly include the transactions sent over in response to their getblocktemplate RPC calls.
What if instead, the mining software sourced its transactions from random nodes across the network and included those in their blocks and always dropped the ones coming directly from the node they requested the template from? That way, any double-spending transactions wouldn't make it into the new blocks as presumably they'd only be sent in response to getblocktemplate/getwork anyway in order to be effective.
submitted by andyd00d to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Trying to start up a Vertcoin node in the UK - help with set up on Ubuntu.

I'm hoping to set up a full node in the UK - I think the vertcoind deamon is working but when I run p2pool I get this repeating message:
Error getting work from bitcoind: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/cloudadmin/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/twisted/internet/", line 653, in _runCallbacks current.result = callback(current.result, *args, **kw) File "/home/cloudadmin/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/twisted/internet/", line 1442, in gotResult _inlineCallbacks(r, g, deferred) File "/home/cloudadmin/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/twisted/internet/", line 1384, in _inlineCallbacks result = result.throwExceptionIntoGenerator(g) File "/home/cloudadmin/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/twisted/python/", line 408, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator return g.throw(self.type, self.value, self.tb) ---  --- File "/home/cloudadmin/p2pool/p2pool-vtc/p2pool/util/", line 41, in f result = yield func(*args, **kwargs) File "/home/cloudadmin/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/twisted/internet/", line 1384, in _inlineCallbacks result = result.throwExceptionIntoGenerator(g) File "/home/cloudadmin/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/twisted/python/", line 408, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator return g.throw(self.type, self.value, self.tb) File "/home/cloudadmin/p2pool/p2pool-vtc/p2pool/bitcoin/", line 53, in getwork work = yield go() File "/home/cloudadmin/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/twisted/internet/", line 1384, in _inlineCallbacks result = result.throwExceptionIntoGenerator(g) File "/home/cloudadmin/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/twisted/python/", line 408, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator return g.throw(self.type, self.value, self.tb) File "/home/cloudadmin/p2pool/p2pool-vtc/p2pool/util/", line 133, in _http_do raise Error_for_code(resp['error']['code'])(resp['error']['message'], resp['error'].get('data', None)) p2pool.util.jsonrpc.NarrowError: -10 Vertcoin is downloading blocks... 
I've set up a vertcoin.conf with user and password, wasn't sure if I had to set that somewhere in the p2pool install? Other wise I'm not sure where to go from here.
Any help appreciated,
submitted by Rebajas to vertcoin [link] [comments]

Why isn't GHash/ addressing the community? BTC Guild used mitigation efforts in the past when they breached thresholds - GHash/CEX promised the same but then failed to follow through. Why haven't they explained why or made any comment?

The community has long expressed it's concern over any pool owning more then 50% of the mining network
What's going on?
Yesterday GHash/'s mining pool breached 51% of the hashing power in the bitcoin transaction network. This is dangerous because when a pool begins to regularly be above certain hashing power thresholds, there are weaknesses in the bitcoin transaction network that can be exploited.
In a rising value currency, such weaknesses are flat out not acceptable. These security flaws become exposed when the risk of a 51% attack is exposed.
How have other pools handled this in the past?
In 2013, BTC Guild issued mitigation guidlines incase their pool began to breach certain thresholds of the mining network.
bitcointalk link
If Pool Speed is Over 40% of Network
BTC Guild will begin limiting the creation of new accounts. Additionally, the fee on PPS will be increased from 5% to 7.5% on all new miners, and will be moved to 7.5% on old miners after the difficulty changes. PPLNS will remain at the 3% + tx fees rate initially.
If Pool Speed is Over 45% of Network
BTC Guild will remove all getwork based pool servers within 24 hours. This is expected to reduce the pool by about 3.5 TH/s, or roughly 15% as of this post.
If Pool Speed is Over 45% of Network After Getwork is Removed
PPLNS fee will be raised to 4%, and new registrations will be completely closed off until speed drops back under 40%.
What is GHash/CEX's Mitigation Plan?
We don't know. They have expressed goodwill towards the community but have not given any guidelines of their plan of action.
GHash.IO does not have any intentions to execute a 51% attack, as it will do serious damage to the Bitcoin community, of which we are part of. On the contrary, our plans are to expand the bitcoin community as well as utilise the hashing power to develop a greater bitcoin economic structure. If something happened to Bitcoin as a whole it could risk our investments in physical hardware, damage those who love Bitcoin and we see no benefit from having 51% stake in mining
This was addressed a week before they breached the 50% threshold.
CryptoCoin News interview with Jeffrey Smith, Chief Info Officer
CCN: What has learned from the last time this happened [gaining large percentages of the hashing power?]
Jeffrey Smith: We understand that the Bitcoin community strongly reacts to GHash.IO’s percentage of the total hash rate. However, we would never do anything to harm the Bitcoin economy; we believe in it. We have invested all our effort, time and money into the development of the Bitcoin economy. We agree that mining should be decentralised, but you cannot blame GHash.IO for being the #1 mining pool.
CCN: What steps were put in place to ensure something like this didn’t happen again? (stop accepting miners when you guys are at 50%?)
Jeffrey Smith:
Just yesterday, they repeated the same mantra. That they are coming up with a solution very soon™.
via CEX's Twitter
We are not intending to capture the 51% of the overall #Bitcoin hashrate. Working on solutions for decentralising Bitcoin mining. Stay tuned
GHash/CEX, can you please address the community's concerns? Your actions currently are making us very worried. Not talking to us is only making us more anxious and frustrated.
There should have been clear guidelines beforehand, and constantly prolonging this is making things worse.
tl;dr?: GHash/ made promises to not breach certain thresholds in the past. They have broke these promises and not addressed the concerns of the community
submitted by ForestOfGrins to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why we can't just apply Bitcoin changes naively

One of the questions that comes up frequently is "If we're just pulling in changes from Bitcoin, where does the time go?", and as I've just spent a couple of hours hunting down something with langerhans, now's probably a good time for a breakdown.
To start with, we're looking at , so that's fairly meaty set of changes. It touches the mining protocol, which is where things get problematic, though. First of all, they're replacing the mining system in Bitcoin. Apply those same changes to Dogecoin, and it breaks. Adapt it to Scrpyt, and you're closer, but there are design differences in Scrypt (the same differences that were meant to make it ASIC resistant) that mean it can't be used the same way too.
Secondly, when the RPC "getwork" call went, it left "getworkaux" hanging, so there's a decision to be made on whether we hybridize Bitcoin's code to keep getworkaux functioning, or rip it out. In the end we've taken the decision to remove getworkaux, as everyone (in theory) should be using getauxblock instead.
Then... there's subtleties in differences between SHA2 and Scrypt. Again, Scrypt is a lot slower, and targets much higher, so the optimisations in the miner are subtly incompatible. It works well enough to pass basic testing, but in terms of performance on one specific test network is suddenly 10x slower. So we end up tweaking the values used to better match Dogecoin.
Now... we're definitely moving towards automation. There's 900-ish patches left, which at the current rate would take us through to summer. I've been working on tools to automatically determine how to apply patches from Bitcoin and automate as much of that process as possible, so all we require human intervention for is code review afterwards. Hopefully that will also let us expand the number of developers available for reviewing the code, which is the main time sink right now.
submitted by rnicoll to dogecoindev [link] [comments]

What is the plausibility (and impact) of the mining algorithm being "cracked"?

Forgive my ignorance here, but I was informed by someone with knowledge on the subject that the mining algorithm for bitcoin has been "cracked" (his word).
The individual is being purposefully vague, but implied that an update would need to be implemented by the bitcoin devs in the next few weeks when the specifics become public. He also mentioned that ASICs developed for the current algorithm would be inherently obsolete with the update.
My understanding of how mining works is that it is essentially a getwork proof of doing SHA256 hashes. The inherent security of SHA256 makes me wary of there being any truth to the claim, but - suspending that thought - if such a change was forced, the following would be some of the impacts:
Note: I'm simply asking for input on how this might work, not purporting that this is truly accurate information.
submitted by kancis to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Are we putting too much trust in pool operators?

Security in the bitcoin network is based on no single person having > 50% of the hashing power. However when mining in a pool you are not providing hashes for your own generated blocks, but providing work on behalf of the pool operator. The pool operator is the one who builds the blocks the pool members seem to only provide the hashing. I don't see any evidence that the mining clients that connect to pool actually verify the blocks the pools are creating.
The getwork RPC call definitely doesn't give enough for the miner to validate anything, the newer method getblocktemplate seems to give the individual transaction data but is this being fully used to validate what the pool operator is doing? Typically I also found that pool mining I don't even need to sync the blockchain so again seems little verification is happing locally.
My question is basically if a pool operator went rouge and started attacking the network, would this get detected immediately? Currently no pool has > 50% however the worst case would be if a few got together a did a coordinated attack, then they easily could get > 50% of the hashing power.
I imagine there is something that protects the network I am not aware of, still learning how this all works.
submitted by martinr22 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Having trouble with FPGA(Altera DE2 board) mining

I've been trying to mine with a DE2 board, and it keeps giving me this error
ERROR: Unable to getwork. Reason: key "result" not known in dictionary.
Anybody have any idea why?
I'm using The Open Source FPGA Bitcoin Miner
I have a regular DE2, not a DE2-115, and I managed to get the correct sof file to set it up (can't remember where I got it from though), so that's probably not the problem here..
I've tried using the mining_proxy, as someone suggested on the same fourm, but I can't seem to get it to work at all.. In fact, I have no idea how I was supposed to make it work; I even tried the proxy with my GPU and still couldn't get it to work.
the .bat files I used were
mining_proxy -nm -o -p 3333
cudaminer.exe -o http://localhost:8332/ -O username:pass
Maybe if I get this working correctly, it'll actually work this time?
It would be awesome if someone could help me out here, I don't know much about mining in general as I started out only yesterday.
Thank you in advance!
submitted by KimchiFlavored to dogecoin [link] [comments]

[Informational] [CC0] GBT: Freedom Mining


The getblocktemplate protocol, or GBT, is a decentralized mining protocol that was developed in 2012 by Luke-Jr as a modern successor to the dated getwork protocol. The design of GBT gives contributing pool hashers more individual control over the blocks they are contributing towards. This is seen as desirable because it distributes the network mining authority more widely, instead of simply amongst a small set of mining pool operators.
Not many pools support the protocol, but there are two pools where it can be used: Bitminer and Eligius.
The protocol uses a series of JSON requests to work through the mining process. First the hasher gets the basic block template to start work against. Then, unlike in a centralized mining pool configuration, the hasher individually goes through all the transactions they have verified to include in the block, building the transactions' merkle root signature to use for their block hash. The hash of all the transactions is then combined with the block template to create the block header to hash against. While hashing, a hasher can request that new transaction data be signaled to him so that he can recalculate the transaction merkle root.
The origin of this protocol was in improvements forrrestv made so that P2Pool could use getmemorypool over JSON-RPC to allow decentralized miners to add transactions to their blocks. Luke-Jr expanded on that work to provide a solution for his Eligius pool, and created a solution that served as a simple compromise between centralized pools and a new system like P2Pool. Luke over time has tried to promote the broad use of GTB by standardizing the concept in BIP 22 and BIP 23, and by creating open source software to make its use easier.
submitted by pb1x to writingforbitcoin [link] [comments]

Sheet of doom rolls onwards like a giant rolling thing

There's a bit of a jam around pull request #884 waiting on some changes to be added into that, however we're still getting a half-dozen or so patches done most evenings. Perhaps not helped that I've added the next 55 new commits onto the end of the sheet, but hopefully Bitcoin Core is less of a moving target from here on in.
For scale, there's preliminary release notes of Bitcoin Core 0.10 at and I know there's a LOT of stuff in the commit details (i.e. removal of getwork(), addition of toggle to disable processing of message transactions), that isn't reflected in the text above. So, this is going to take a while, but working on automating the process more as much as I can without compromising safety.
submitted by rnicoll to dogecoindev [link] [comments]

What's going on with Slush's Pool?

Is it normal to take 8 hours on a block?
Current round started at: 2013-02-26 07:46:52 UTC
Current round duration: 8:34:32
Current shares CDF: 99.84 %
Current Bitcoin block, difficulty: 223227, 3651011
Pool luck (1 day, 7 days, 30 days): 81%, 91%, 105%
Current server load (60 sec average): 279 getwork/s
Connected workers, Tor workers, Stratum: 0, 0, 11196
Total score of current round: 98772340.9291
Shares contributed in current round: 23466624
Hashrate on Stratum interface (30 min average): 2732.931 Ghash/s (81%)
Approx. cluster performance (30 min average): 3345.032 Ghash/s
submitted by FapFlop to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

UPDATE: Virus found on my mining rig

Context here
I was able to run a wireshark on the packets and traced down what and where the data was coming from. This is the TCP Stream that lead me to 50btc
Authorization: Basic anJvZHJpZ3VlejQ0MkBvdXRsb29rLmNvbTpwYXNzd29yZA== Host: Accept: */* Accept-Encoding: deflate, gzip Content-type: application/json X-Mining-Extensions: longpoll midstate rollntime submitold Content-Length: 44 User-Agent: cgminer 2.10.4 {"method": "getwork", "params": [], "id":0} HTTP/1.1 200 OK server: 50BTC X-Long-Polling: X-Blocknum: 231342 X-Roll-NTime: expire=120 Content-Length: 607 Content-Type: application/json;charset=ISO-8859-1 { "error": null, "id": 0, "result": { "data": "000000025ecbc41aa5897932445af6485e044d24faedffe58daae1ae00000212000000007655b172b85920f3f03f8290b6abc4e6fb684bc374b3a89d6097a01a518fc45e516b00331a022fbe00000000000000800000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000080020000", "hash1": "00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000008000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000010000", "midstate": "50810233b8406896d763a6a432c16bda68080ecf1740d2e5336d6292af334dad", "target": "ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff00000000" } } 
So I emailed the pool and this is the reponse to me telling them they have fraudulent miners.
Hello, *!
Thanks ofr the feedback. Suspicious accounts was blocked, if you'll find any more bots, please let us know.
Your help is much appreciated! Best regards, team
Kudos to for taking care of the issue and if you find that your GPU is being used while your PC is idle start by looking at the task manager as regular virus programs will no detect miners yet. Malware Bytes will tag cgminer and others as PUP (Potentially unwanted programs) but this is only on a full scan. Track down the offending exe and before you delete it run a wireshark and see where it is mining too.
Be safe out there.
submitted by ruffneck123 to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

what happens if getwork returns true?

Hello everyone, i'm doing a research project for school with a friend and we're creating our own bitcoin miner.
So for we're able to use getwork to get data to hash and then contact the server to get a true/false response.
Our question is: what happens when we get a true response? Do we have to use a different remote procedure call? Or does everything happen automaticly?
Thanks in advance.
submitted by alesske to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Crypto Expert Predicts Bitcoin Will Hit 100k - Robert Kiyosaki & Anthony Pompliano How Does BitCoin Work? What Is Bitcoin and How Does It Work? The OC Bitcoin Network Presents - The Bitcoin Full Node ... How do Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash work? - Bitcoin 101

The jobs that clients get from mining pools to solve are a lot easier than (and independent of) the current Bitcoin difficulty. With the GETWORK protocol you seem to always get a target of difficulty 1. Difficulty 1 means a valid share requires 32 zero-bits which is easy and fast to test for. So I chose to hardcode that difficulty. A higher Bitcoin is a distributed, worldwide, decentralized digital money. Bitcoins are issued and managed without any central authority whatsoever: there is no government, company, or bank in charge of Bitcoin. You might be interested in Bitcoin if you like cryptography, distributed peer-to-peer systems, or economics. What Is A Full Node? A full node is a program that fully validates transactions and blocks. Almost all full nodes also help the network by accepting transactions and blocks from other full nodes, validating those transactions and blocks, and then relaying them to further full nodes. I recently tried playing around with the getwork command for JSON-RPC and I'm trying to understand what I got out of it. According to the API Call List wiki entry, the "data" field should contain the block data to be hashed. The data field I got was: Which after being dissected a bit according to the protocol would yield: The simplest miner would work like this: Request a new Getwork from a given pool/bitcoind with specified credentials; For nonce=0;nonce<0xFFFFFFFF;nonce++ Set Getwork Data nonce; SHA-256 hash the Getwork Data (block header)Check if hash result is smaller than Getwork Target, if so, submit a share

[index] [25588] [20629] [17244] [14766] [25563] [15416] [10137] [16162] [17110] [15669]

Crypto Expert Predicts Bitcoin Will Hit 100k - Robert Kiyosaki & Anthony Pompliano

A short introduction to how Bitcoin Works. Want more? Check out my new in-depth course on the latest in Bitcoin, Blockchain, and a survey of the most exciting projects coming out (Ethereum, etc ... Bitcoin Magazine distribution of The OC Bitcoin Network - The Bitcoin Full Node Deep-Dive into the Raspiblitz. Follow on Twitter: Hosts: @BrainHarrington @st... In this video I will show how to get unlimited bitcoins or any coins you want for free! Just watch the video! Download- DISCLAIMER: This ... In this video, we show the process of purchasing bitcoins via a Bitcoin machine. More info in this article - bitcoin prices Live In Bitfinx, Bitstamp, karkrn and LoclBitcoin. REFRENCE : PREEV.COM

Flag Counter