Topic: [ANN] Datacoin - Censorship-Free Data Storage - page 20. (Read 66794 times)

Hi, try this 89.201.185.138

But with bytestamp digital asset, only bytestamp can read it properly right ?

Are there any tools, that anyone could read directly from blockchain downloaded onto by desktop ?

Hi, Does anyone have any nodes for testnet please? Wallet HP14
Thanks
J

The funny thing here is that if someone makes a Datacoin transaction, this is under malleability risk.

But if someone makes a ByteStamp Digital Asset transaction, it is safe. Because all the transaction is written in the data field.

So, even if ByteStamp Digital Asset  are built on top of Datacoin Blockchain, they do not suffer of malleability... 

Long-time lurker, first-time poster… Can't help but notice how AMAZING and transparent this project is… That's just my opinion, don't @ me…

Makes sense to me.

Well, I will try to reply to myself.

Datacoin has the transaction malleability issue that will allow an attacker to modify the signature and then the TXID

But if the attacker modifies the transaction, it would be marked invalid by the clients because transaction signature verification will fail.

Because Datacoin puts the data fields in the transaction that must be signed, no one can modify the data fields without invalidate the signature.


So the data field of a Datacoin transaction cannot be changed, even if it is still in the mempool.

Am I correct?

Thouths?

Thanks to everyone

Yes, it was ported from 0.15.99 ver of Bitcoin Core, but the last commit on github was only 12 days ago.

So maybe someone (gjhiggins ?) included the fix at some time, I don't know.

Anyway I would like to know if someone could change the data field of Datacoin by using the transaction malleability.

Afaik, the transaction malleability could allow a malicious miner to change the transaction ID of a transaction  before it is confirmed on the bitcoin network.

Can this also be used to change the data field of a Datacoin transaction?

I think that this thing  should be very useful to know for a ledger that is a Censorship-Free Data Storage.

Thank you

Nope it doesn't have segwit or any malleability fix, afaik.

Albeit it was ported (from Primecoin) 0.15.99 ver of Bitcoin Core, it didn't include this feature, cause veronium said, that it's impossible without turning off old clients in the network (0.8.x).

Hi all.

I would like to know: has datacoin the  malleability fix?

Thanks to everyone

Pushed new release of Datacoin's AIO with @hamburger binary - please test it, cause I didn't have time to do it properly.

https://github.com/muf18/Datacoin-AIO/releases/tag/1.2

Hi Team,

Everyone here is awesome!

That is all.

Kind Regards,
The DataSea

Denial-of-Service vulnerability

The Windows Binaries for commit 0ef6107 that fix the crash bug with duplicate inputs.


https://github.com/datacoinfiles/datacoin-core/releases/tag/v0.15.99.8

... oh and something else looks broken.

Audience participation -- let me know if you can spot the problem.

./src/datacoin-cli getblock 32b9aee10952222560e2002c9c18b2b02c212af9a70d1797879f16de9a40b662
{
  "hash": "32b9aee10952222560e2002c9c18b2b02c212af9a70d1797879f16de9a40b662",
  "confirmations": 3,
  "strippedsize": 200,
  "size": 200,
  "weight": 800,
  "height": 2621361,
  "version": 2,
  "headerhash": "ff8f4147ed0695d141ef2e296bf68c78b80cc5d03c3f3d1a75fb5eec9beb31f8",
  "versionHex": "00000002",
  "merkleroot": "ea140c0415861ee80d6dacc46fd0a06c2140304a3f53a7b4818574c9d1d972a0",
  "tx": [
    "ea140c0415861ee80d6dacc46fd0a06c2140304a3f53a7b4818574c9d1d972a0"
  ],
  "time": 1538866742,
  "mediantime": 1538862165,
  "nonce": 2141834156,
  "primechainmultiplier": "81576423539612729",
  "bits": "09c61d44",
  "difficulty": 9.773884057998657,
  "chainwork": "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000279b66557097",
  "transition": 9.133427202701569,
  "primechain": "TWN09.d3f8a7",
  "primeorigin": "9429654232345221897105363967489935233647334945680500346987758203144672430803257 911923782795320",
  "previousblockhash": "39377ecec5169f5ac48f393a32196996657ead798c594b493483cd3a4db4c3a3",
  "nextblockhash": "cd236a978736dd3b106b6ba68a6b55a09cb0b8af6b76a5f8eedc64b1f6b4ceab"
}

Best Regards,
-Chicago

Hello,

    I was able to compile on Gentoo.
    The changes to the configure statement I needed were as follows, ymmv.

    ./configure LIBS="-lgmp -lcrypto -lm -lboost_timer -lzmq -lczmq -lprotobuf"

./src/datacoin-cli getblockchaininfo
{
  "chain": "main",
  "blocks": 2621361,
  "headers": 2621361,
  "bestblockhash": "32b9aee10952222560e2002c9c18b2b02c212af9a70d1797879f16de9a40b662",
  "difficulty": 9.773884057998657,
  "mediantime": 1538862165,
  "verificationprogress": 0.9999988756929081,
  "chainwork": "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000279b66557097",
  "size_on_disk": 1926576040,
  "pruned": false,
  "softforks": [
    {
      "id": "bip34",
      "version": 2,
      "reject": {
        "status": true
      }
    },
    {
      "id": "bip66",
      "version": 3,
      "reject": {
        "status": true
      }
    },
    {
      "id": "bip65",
      "version": 4,
      "reject": {
        "status": true
      }
    }
  ],
  "bip9_softforks": {
    "csv": {
      "status": "failed",
      "startTime": 1462060800,
      "timeout": 1493596800,
      "since": 1787400
    },
    "segwit": {
      "status": "defined",
      "startTime": 999999999999,
      "timeout": 999999999999,
      "since": 0
    }
  },
  "warnings": ""
}

    This output would appear to indicate blocks mined by the 0.8 branch wallets should be rejected by these Veronium nodes.
    Additionally, it would appear the BIP 9 softfork nStartTime and nTimeout for CSV was left unmodified.
    I don't know why the nStartTime and nTimeout for SegWit were explicitly changed to effectively disable it.

    We probably have some fixing to do as described earlier by Graham (inflation bug) and also to include solidifying the network upgrade heights/hashes and such.

Best Regards,
-Chicago

I successful compile for Ubuntu using this instruction

I will have a look and see if I will able able to do a successful compile, for sanity sake I'll start with 0.15.99.03 again. I believe that I were able to do the cross compilation before - just need to remember the process that I followed before.

Tnx,

H

Yes but unfortunately, not in any helpful detail, see upthread a few posts: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.46478718

Cheers

Graham

Hi,

I am trying to cross compile the Windows wallet with the patch (0ef6107) on Ubuntu, however, I get stuck with a madpool error.

Any one that have an idea why?

Tnx,

H  

Just a quick update, 7 hours have gone by and I am now at 30 weeks left (from 35 weeks). I don't want to do any testing until this has finished so I might go quiet for a few days.
J