[ANN] NDL - The coin for Pastafarians - Flying Spaghetti Monster Cryptocurrency! - page 19.

dnp

full member

Activity: 401

Merit: 110

Quote from: number435398 on October 13, 2018, 04:21:10 PM

Quote from: dnp on October 13, 2018, 01:27:16 PM

Quote from: number435398 on October 11, 2018, 08:30:53 PM

Quote from: DaveF on October 11, 2018, 07:14:59 PM

This is actually a worry of mine. One day the node that the explorer talks to is going to walk away on another chain and not come back.
-Dave

Naw, the other alt coins aren't on the same blockchain. They merely act as a distraction; our wallets see them and consider them, but ultimately our wallets reject them because they don't conform to fundamental NDL chain

why are these other alts connecting at all? someone mispublish a port number somewhere? willful attack?

i'm thinking willful attack, i just notice that even though they identify as various differnent altcoins they all
seem to have the same startingheight

All it takes is one person's wallet to connect to one of these other coins, then those wallets tell our wallets about its other wallets etc. The current wallet is programmed to connect to all wallets with the proper pchMessage code. Since, when Noodlyappendagecoin was created, it was programmed with the same pchMessage code as Litecoin (and other alt-coins that weren't modified properly), our wallets see these as valid nodes until they realize that they aren't on the same blockchain (which can take a while). Our wallets may give each node several hours to try to provide proper blockchain info, but during that time our wallets will incorporate all that other wallets' nodes to our list of nodes. In other words, its a mess.

still seems like a willful attack using this vulneratbility.
it's very odd (suspicious) that all the 'different' altcoins have the same blockchain height (total number of blocks.)

number435398

jr. member

Activity: 260

Merit: 6

Quote from: dnp on October 13, 2018, 01:27:16 PM

Quote from: number435398 on October 11, 2018, 08:30:53 PM

Quote from: DaveF on October 11, 2018, 07:14:59 PM

This is actually a worry of mine. One day the node that the explorer talks to is going to walk away on another chain and not come back.
-Dave

Naw, the other alt coins aren't on the same blockchain. They merely act as a distraction; our wallets see them and consider them, but ultimately our wallets reject them because they don't conform to fundamental NDL chain

why are these other alts connecting at all? someone mispublish a port number somewhere? willful attack?

i'm thinking willful attack, i just notice that even though they identify as various differnent altcoins they all
seem to have the same startingheight

All it takes is one person's wallet to connect to one of these other coins, then those wallets tell our wallets about its other wallets etc. The current wallet is programmed to connect to all wallets with the proper pchMessage code. Since, when Noodlyappendagecoin was created, it was programmed with the same pchMessage code as Litecoin (and other alt-coins that weren't modified properly), our wallets see these as valid nodes until they realize that they aren't on the same blockchain (which can take a while). Our wallets may give each node several hours to try to provide proper blockchain info, but during that time our wallets will incorporate all that other wallets' nodes to our list of nodes. In other words, its a mess.

dnp

full member

Activity: 401

Merit: 110

okay, i initally tried putting ip# blocks in my firewall for the bad altcoin clients, but it seems to be vast
botnet attack, they just keep coming.

so i put the following code kludge in my daemon, if you are developing a new/test version of ndl wallet/daemon
let me know your useragent subver string and i will add it to my list.

in the meantime if you are finding these altcoin connections are just too painful for your own wallet, instead
of putting
addnode=coins.dognose.net
in your .conf file, use instead
connect=coins.dognose.net

and this will ONLY allow your wallet to connect to my daemon and ignore all other nodes
(my daemon in turn only has other clean connections)
you may put more than one connect= in your .conf and connect to those as well.

Code:

        // in main.cpp ProcessMessage()
        //
        if (!vRecv.empty()) {
            vRecv >> pfrom->strSubVer;
            pfrom->cleanSubVer = SanitizeString(pfrom->strSubVer);
                {               // coins.dognose.net 2018-10-13
                        // unfortunate side-effect of only 'allowed' clients may connect
                        // which complicates development and may encourage clients to 'lie'
                        // but at the moment the network is under attack
                        static char *allowed[] = {"/Satoshi:0.8.6.1",
                                                       "/Satoshi:0.8.5",
                                                       "/Noodlydnp:0.8.6",    // myself, coins.dognose.net :)
                                                        NULL};          // allowed prefix substrings
                        int aa, okay=0;
                        for(aa=0; allowed[aa]; aa++) {
                                if(!strncmp(pfrom->cleanSubVer.c_str(), allowed[aa], strlen(allowed[aa]))) {
                                        okay++;
                                }
                        }
                        if(!okay) {
                                printf("partner %s is not allowed SubVer, got %s -- banning\n",
                                        pfrom->addr.ToString().c_str(),
                                                pfrom->cleanSubVer.c_str());
                                pfrom->Misbehaving(100);                // immediate ban
                        }
                        else {
                                printf("partner %s is allowed SubVer, got %s -- not banning :)\n",
                                        pfrom->addr.ToString().c_str(),
                                                pfrom->cleanSubVer.c_str());
                        }
                }               // coins.dognose.net 2018-10-13
        }

dnp

full member

Activity: 401

Merit: 110

Quote from: number435398 on October 11, 2018, 08:30:53 PM

Quote from: DaveF on October 11, 2018, 07:14:59 PM

This is actually a worry of mine. One day the node that the explorer talks to is going to walk away on another chain and not come back.
-Dave

Naw, the other alt coins aren't on the same blockchain. They merely act as a distraction; our wallets see them and consider them, but ultimately our wallets reject them because they don't conform to fundamental NDL chain

why are these other alts connecting at all? someone mispublish a port number somewhere? willful attack?

i'm thinking willful attack, i just notice that even though they identify as various differnent altcoins they all
seem to have the same startingheight

number435398

jr. member

Activity: 260

Merit: 6

Quote from: DaveF on October 11, 2018, 07:14:59 PM

This is actually a worry of mine. One day the node that the explorer talks to is going to walk away on another chain and not come back.
-Dave

Naw, the other alt coins aren't on the same blockchain. They merely act as a distraction; our wallets see them and consider them, but ultimately our wallets reject them because they don't conform to fundamental NDL chain

Rossi46

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

i have 400k, if anyone is interested pm me

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6320

Crypto Swap Exchange

This is actually a worry of mine. One day the node that the explorer talks to is going to walk away on another chain and not come back.
-Dave

number435398

jr. member

Activity: 260

Merit: 6

Quote from: nxtraordinary on October 11, 2018, 02:16:47 PM

cave truth ...

n.

PS: I also had some strange inputs today, had been on a fork with different blocknumber; I closed wallet and once opened again all questioned blocks had been confirmed with rising numbers down the row (!), but shortly after that all of them where unconfirmed again while one of the eight connections had been cut and the blocknumber went to that one of our blockexplorer again.

I think what is happening is the other altcoins that our wallets are noticing are making our wallets stall a little bit, trying to consider the value of these non-NDL nodes, so the wallet then ignores new NDL blocks, while someone else's wallet has already blocked the non-NDL nodes, and is mining. Then when your wallet finally decides to block the non-NDL node, your wallet realizes that that other person's wallet's blockchain is longer than yours and decides "oh, well, so much for our blocks, I'll now update myself with the blocks from that other NDL node that wasn't distracted by the non-NDL node".

I'm getting close to ironing all this out. Everything still works with the old wallets, there just seems to be some intermittent hiccups.

nxtraordinary

jr. member

Activity: 100

Merit: 1

Pool for Future-Airdrops already at 9.000.000 NDL

Quote from: nxtraordinary on October 11, 2018, 02:16:47 PM

(...)

PS: I also had some strange inputs today, had been on a fork with different blocknumber; I closed wallet and once opened again all questioned blocks had been confirmed with rising numbers down the row (!), but shortly after that all of them where unconfirmed again while one of the eight connections had been cut and the blocknumber went to that one of our blockexplorer again.

Again I had the same problem; there seem to be forks outside, that restrict being in another part of the chain, doing it, shortly after connecting.

I made pictures of the situation in time, so at least I can trace it a bit. Should I stop mining, because "somebody" is mining outside the chain with higher difficulty?

I think it seems so.

n.

number435398

jr. member

Activity: 260

Merit: 6

Quote from: dnp on October 11, 2018, 05:42:51 AM

is this from new wallet code testing on the main network?

Code:


************************
EXCEPTION: St12out_of_range       
CInv::GetCommand() : type=1073741826 unknown type       
noodlyappendagecoin in ProcessMessages()       



************************
EXCEPTION: St12out_of_range       
CInv::GetCommand() : type=1073741826 unknown type       
noodlyappendagecoin in ProcessMessages()

I've not seen anything even remotely like that. could be from the other alt coins.

nxtraordinary

jr. member

Activity: 100

Merit: 1

Pool for Future-Airdrops already at 9.000.000 NDL

cave truth ...

n.

PS: I also had some strange inputs today, had been on a fork with different blocknumber; I closed wallet and once opened again all questioned blocks had been confirmed with rising numbers down the row (!), but shortly after that all of them where unconfirmed again while one of the eight connections had been cut and the blocknumber went to that one of our blockexplorer again.

dnp

full member

Activity: 401

Merit: 110

is this from new wallet code testing on the main network?

Code:


************************
EXCEPTION: St12out_of_range       
CInv::GetCommand() : type=1073741826 unknown type       
noodlyappendagecoin in ProcessMessages()       



************************
EXCEPTION: St12out_of_range       
CInv::GetCommand() : type=1073741826 unknown type       
noodlyappendagecoin in ProcessMessages()

number435398

jr. member

Activity: 260

Merit: 6

Quote from: Chicago on October 09, 2018, 12:18:58 AM

Did you set the Main network PUBKEY_ADDRESS in src/chainparams.cpp to 53 and the SECRET_KEY to 181?
Did you set the Test network PUBKEY_ADDRESS in src/chainparams.cpp to 117 and the SECRET_KEY to 245?

Reference from the original code.
https://github.com/His-Holy-Noodliness/noodlyappendagecoin/blob/1393e84397788417500a49349f1d41f7bc40759d/src/base58.h#L275-L278

Thought I fixed it. Turns out that's not the case. What I did was discover that if I tell the wallet to read NDL addresses properly (IE: a mining address beginning with N as is standard), then any address the wallet creates, it doesn't know the private key for. Go figure that one. Happens with the raw litecoin wallet code too. If you change the

Code:

base58Prefixes[PUBKEY_ADDRESS] = std::vector(1,47);

It causes the same problem.

andy16

newbie

Activity: 68

Merit: 0

interesting Grin

number435398

jr. member

Activity: 260

Merit: 6

LOL. And don't forget:

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/nuclear-pasta-neutron-stars-may-be-strongest-material-universe

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6320

Crypto Swap Exchange

Needed to be posted:

number435398

jr. member

Activity: 260

Merit: 6

Quote from: Chicago on October 09, 2018, 12:18:58 AM

Did you set the Main network PUBKEY_ADDRESS in src/chainparams.cpp to 53 and the SECRET_KEY to 181?
Did you set the Test network PUBKEY_ADDRESS in src/chainparams.cpp to 117 and the SECRET_KEY to 245?

Reference from the original code.
https://github.com/His-Holy-Noodliness/noodlyappendagecoin/blob/1393e84397788417500a49349f1d41f7bc40759d/src/base58.h#L275-L278

Yes, but that should not impact actual private key creation, that should only impact what format its in.

Code:

base58Prefixes[PUBKEY_ADDRESS] = std::vector(1,53);
base58Prefixes[SCRIPT_ADDRESS] = std::vector(1,5);
base58Prefixes[SCRIPT_ADDRESS2] = std::vector(1,53);
base58Prefixes[SECRET_KEY] = std::vector(1,41);

And, yes, I translated them properly. (1,41) is necessary to produce the private key code that begins with a 7

Chicago

sr. member

Activity: 592

Merit: 259

Did you set the Main network PUBKEY_ADDRESS in src/chainparams.cpp to 53 and the SECRET_KEY to 181?
Did you set the Test network PUBKEY_ADDRESS in src/chainparams.cpp to 117 and the SECRET_KEY to 245?

Reference from the original code.
https://github.com/His-Holy-Noodliness/noodlyappendagecoin/blob/1393e84397788417500a49349f1d41f7bc40759d/src/base58.h#L275-L278

number435398

jr. member

Activity: 260

Merit: 6

Okay, turns out the transactions aren't showing up because when I create a "new" address for the wallet, it creates an address, but doesn't record the private key....can't even dumpprivkey the private key on it. I don't know what's going on with that as I didn't change anything like that from the litecoin code. Anyone have any ideas?

number435398

jr. member

Activity: 260

Merit: 6

Still working on the wallet. Current problem; transactions aren't showing up (both coinbase and regular). They show on the explorer, but not the wallet. Once I get that worked out, it may be ready for release.

Topic: [ANN] NDL - The coin for Pastafarians - Flying Spaghetti Monster Cryptocurrency! - page 19. (Read 125333 times)