Why is bittrex still in maintenance ? wth is with these exchanges nowadays ..
Topic: ★[ANN] [NAV] NAV COIN - Community Fund Live!!! - page 335. (Read 2085654 times)
Status: 0/unconfirmed
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Yes?
How long has it been from the transaction? It seems that your transaction has not been committed into the chain.
Please do let me know which block you are in and check here if they match.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/nav/
I don't know what he is talking about. Check in the blockexplorer:
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/nav/tx.dws?5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8.htm
it has 73 confirmations.
Also it seems his whole wallet was created out of reposting the twitter tweet ... lol wtf...
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/nav/tx.dws?5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8.htm
oh boy, just woke up and saw the price of NAV :DD
Genuine 
oh boy, just woke up and saw the price of NAV :DD
Good One.
oh boy, just woke up and saw the price of NAV :DD
Status: 0/unconfirmed
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Yes?
How long has it been from the transaction? It seems that your transaction has not been committed into the chain.
Please do let me know which block you are in and check here if they match.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/nav/
I agree with you when it comes to not having giant bugs on OpenSSL since 2014 or anything like HeartBleed at all.
And I m going leave it at that I have more faith in the blockchain technology than OpenSSL. Haha. Regards to your suggestion surely I'll make a version update , just so to make everyone happy about a version upgrade.
Thank you very much for your kind suggestions and thoughts.
Warm Regards,
~SoopY~
Thanks SoopY, as I've watched NAV & many more for years, also trust+ BlockChain more than SSL. Mostly because BlockChain would be everything, like a self sustainable operating system & or the entire future of software
http://distrowatch.com/
Things One watches everyday = Latest Packages
//wish they would add this to http://cryptocoin.cc/table.php?cryptocoin=navcoin as well
Status: 0/unconfirmed
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Yes?
You sure you have new NAV after swap ? so low amount maybe its old NAV or you send it to bittrex they have still wallet maintenance so you cant send it to bittrex.
I have newest walet full synch and all working perfect. Read some last page if you dont familiar with NAV.
http://imgur.com/a/oEqka
Status: 0/unconfirmed
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Yes?
You sure you have new NAV after swap ? so low amount maybe its old NAV or you send it to bittrex they have still wallet maintenance so you cant send it to bittrex.
I have newest walet full synch and all working perfect. Read some last page if you dont familiar with NAV.
Wow price 3000 sat.....?))) This is begin?)
Status: 0/unconfirmed
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Yes?
maybe it was orphant from staking sometimes its not exactly the same amount in wallet and in blockchain but it normal on PoS coins.
Depend from your wallet if is bigger it can have little not the same number coins like 200-300 coins. In my wallet I full synchro I have different something like 200 coins but I dont care.
But if you have very small amount coins and not staking you maybe will try repair wallet.
Depend from your wallet if is bigger it can have little not the same number coins like 200-300 coins. In my wallet I full synchro I have different something like 200 coins but I dont care.
But if you have very small amount coins and not staking you maybe will try repair wallet.
Well this my first experience of the issue and i had bigger wallets than this before it reported the same exact amount fine. Anyways, I could live past it, just odd for that's all.
Status: 0/unconfirmed
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Yes?
Status: 0/unconfirmed
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Date: 31/07/2016 20:23
To: NMRKxco6eWVjWpQeDPMoVjaHPuNYbFTz1w
Debit: -7199.99 NAV
Transaction fee: -0.0011 NAV
Net amount: -7199.9911 NAV
Transaction ID: 5f859cd7d0ebff8bc81aa164da5301bc0834c2528d7b97ae222d094492e029c8-000
Thanks for the quick reply Soopy452000, as I've read the entire OpenSSL site for years now & keep up on each update. Only reason why I ask, because of testing more than 5000+ of these applications (same as Operating Systems with all their Package^s & just wondering why OpenSSL "git" passed on so many of them. It's very simple to update 1 line of code to the newest with all the bugs in the worldwide net "fixed or improved", but as said before I'm no network specialist or anything
https://www.openssl.org/news/newslog.html
07-Apr-2014
Security Advisory: Heartbeat overflow issue.
07-Apr-2014
OpenSSL 1.0.1g is now available, including bug and security fixes
//There have been many flaws in OpenSSL since 2014, just not Giant Bugs & or anything like the HeartBleed
https://www.openssl.org/news/newslog.html
07-Apr-2014
Security Advisory: Heartbeat overflow issue.
07-Apr-2014
OpenSSL 1.0.1g is now available, including bug and security fixes
//There have been many flaws in OpenSSL since 2014, just not Giant Bugs & or anything like the HeartBleed
I agree with you when it comes to not having giant bugs on OpenSSL since 2014 or anything like HeartBleed at all.
And I m going leave it at that I have more faith in the blockchain technology than OpenSSL. Haha. Regards to your suggestion surely I'll make a version update , just so to make everyone happy about a version upgrade.
Thank you very much for your kind suggestions and thoughts.
Warm Regards,
~SoopY~
Thanks for the quick reply Soopy452000, as I've read the entire OpenSSL site for years now & keep up on each update. Only reason why I ask, because of testing more than 5000+ of these applications (same as Operating Systems with all their Package^s & just wondering why OpenSSL "git" passed on so many of them. It's very simple to update 1 line of code to the newest with all the bugs in the worldwide net "fixed or improved", but as said before I'm no network specialist or anything
https://www.openssl.org/news/newslog.html
07-Apr-2014
Security Advisory: Heartbeat overflow issue.
07-Apr-2014
OpenSSL 1.0.1g is now available, including bug and security fixes
//There have been many flaws in OpenSSL since 2014, just not Giant Bugs & or anything like the HeartBleed
https://www.openssl.org/news/newslog.html
07-Apr-2014
Security Advisory: Heartbeat overflow issue.
07-Apr-2014
OpenSSL 1.0.1g is now available, including bug and security fixes
//There have been many flaws in OpenSSL since 2014, just not Giant Bugs & or anything like the HeartBleed
The new GUI updates look great, but why does the updated application still run OpenSSL 1.0.1g 7 Apr 2014 (HeartBleed) & not a more updated secure one? I'm not an SSL specialist or anything, but it was one of the first things I notice in testing the apps. Which some of the older Scrypt ones still have as well, making anyone who starts the apps risk more than they would possible understand to networks around them?
//
CVE-2014-0160 (OpenSSL advisory) 7th April 2014:
A missing bounds check in the handling of the TLS heartbeat extension can be used to reveal up to 64kB of memory to a connected client or server (a.k.a. Heartbleed). This issue did not affect versions of OpenSSL prior to 1.0.1. Reported by Neel Mehta.
Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.1g (Affected 1.0.1f, 1.0.1e, 1.0.1d, 1.0.1c, 1.0.1b, 1.0.1a, 1.0.1)
https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities.html#2014-0076
//
CVE-2014-0160 (OpenSSL advisory) 7th April 2014:
A missing bounds check in the handling of the TLS heartbeat extension can be used to reveal up to 64kB of memory to a connected client or server (a.k.a. Heartbleed). This issue did not affect versions of OpenSSL prior to 1.0.1. Reported by Neel Mehta.
Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.1g (Affected 1.0.1f, 1.0.1e, 1.0.1d, 1.0.1c, 1.0.1b, 1.0.1a, 1.0.1)
https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities.html#2014-0076
Please take a read on this.
https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20140407.txt
Code:
OpenSSL Security Advisory [07 Apr 2014]
========================================
TLS heartbeat read overrun (CVE-2014-0160)
==========================================
A missing bounds check in the handling of the TLS heartbeat extension can be
used to reveal up to 64k of memory to a connected client or server.
Only 1.0.1 and 1.0.2-beta releases of OpenSSL are affected including
1.0.1f and 1.0.2-beta1.
Thanks for Neel Mehta of Google Security for discovering this bug and to
Adam Langley and Bodo Moeller for
preparing the fix.
Affected users should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.0.1g. Users unable to immediately
upgrade can alternatively recompile OpenSSL with -DOPENSSL_NO_HEARTBEATS.
1.0.2 will be fixed in 1.0.2-beta2.
========================================
TLS heartbeat read overrun (CVE-2014-0160)
==========================================
A missing bounds check in the handling of the TLS heartbeat extension can be
used to reveal up to 64k of memory to a connected client or server.
Only 1.0.1 and 1.0.2-beta releases of OpenSSL are affected including
1.0.1f and 1.0.2-beta1.
Thanks for Neel Mehta of Google Security for discovering this bug and to
Adam Langley
preparing the fix.
Affected users should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.0.1g. Users unable to immediately
upgrade can alternatively recompile OpenSSL with -DOPENSSL_NO_HEARTBEATS.
1.0.2 will be fixed in 1.0.2-beta2.
Heartbleed was fixed on version 1.0.1g which being the same that the wallet uses, it is also important to note that there hasn't been a vulnerability that has been discovered in the current version as well as other versions thereafter that would affect the cryptographic processes of the blockchain , where the blockchain technology itself being far more secure than OpenSSL itself.
Warm Regards,
~SoopY~
The new GUI updates look great, but why does the updated application still run OpenSSL 1.0.1g 7 Apr 2014 (HeartBleed) & not a more updated secure one? I'm not an SSL specialist or anything, but it was one of the first things I notice in testing the apps. Which some of the older Scrypt ones still have as well, making anyone who starts the apps risk more than they would possible understand to networks around them?
//
CVE-2014-0160 (OpenSSL advisory) 7th April 2014:
A missing bounds check in the handling of the TLS heartbeat extension can be used to reveal up to 64kB of memory to a connected client or server (a.k.a. Heartbleed). This issue did not affect versions of OpenSSL prior to 1.0.1. Reported by Neel Mehta.
Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.1g (Affected 1.0.1f, 1.0.1e, 1.0.1d, 1.0.1c, 1.0.1b, 1.0.1a, 1.0.1)
https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities.html#2014-0076
//
CVE-2014-0160 (OpenSSL advisory) 7th April 2014:
A missing bounds check in the handling of the TLS heartbeat extension can be used to reveal up to 64kB of memory to a connected client or server (a.k.a. Heartbleed). This issue did not affect versions of OpenSSL prior to 1.0.1. Reported by Neel Mehta.
Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.1g (Affected 1.0.1f, 1.0.1e, 1.0.1d, 1.0.1c, 1.0.1b, 1.0.1a, 1.0.1)
https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities.html#2014-0076
maybe it was orphant from staking sometimes its not exactly the same amount in wallet and in blockchain but it normal on PoS coins.
Depend from your wallet if is bigger it can have little not the same number coins like 200-300 coins. In my wallet I full synchro I have different something like 200 coins but I dont care.
But if you have very small amount coins and not staking you maybe will try repair wallet.
Depend from your wallet if is bigger it can have little not the same number coins like 200-300 coins. In my wallet I full synchro I have different something like 200 coins but I dont care.
But if you have very small amount coins and not staking you maybe will try repair wallet.
Jump to: