Topic: [BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed Since 2014 - page 16. (Read 1210779 times)
August 08, 2018, 04:18:25 PM
Hello zoidberg and other developers. Ive been a long time holder of bbr and have become disenchanted. It seems like there is no progress being made, and bbr still isnt on a big exchange. This coin should be crushing Monero and others, but it feels stagnant. Is there a plan for marketing, or at least getting on a big exchange to trade more easily and increase volume?
August 05, 2018, 02:53:28 AM
@crypto_zoidberg : can i mine BBR directly to exchange?
I guess, it is possible on bbr.bgmine.me and boolberry.miner.rocks pools since there is PaymentID option but haven't tested it yet. August 04, 2018, 07:25:40 PM
it did show the correct public address, and it refresh the wallet scanning the whole blockchain
but it show 0 available coins
Hi, mitzi101. Thank you for reporting the issue!but it show 0 available coins
I confirm that atm restoring a wallet from a seed phrase will limit the blockchain scan window and as a consequence may end up with showing zero balance.
All your coins are safe, so don't worry. They just don't show up due to the bug.
This one will be fixed asap, I guess.
I opened an issue on GitHub so you can track the status: https://github.com/cryptozoidberg/boolberry/issues/78
thank you
i ended editing the wallet2.cpp and disabling this optimization
should maybe add a check if --restore-seed is used and make it check all the blocks
my coins are ok right now
August 04, 2018, 05:58:38 PM
it did show the correct public address, and it refresh the wallet scanning the whole blockchain
but it show 0 available coins
Hi, mitzi101. Thank you for reporting the issue!but it show 0 available coins
I confirm that atm restoring a wallet from a seed phrase will limit the blockchain scan window and as a consequence may end up with showing zero balance.
All your coins are safe, so don't worry. They just don't show up due to the bug.
This one will be fixed asap, I guess.
I opened an issue on GitHub so you can track the status: https://github.com/cryptozoidberg/boolberry/issues/78
August 03, 2018, 10:58:23 PM
I have a problem with wallet
I compiled the wallet from github, and tried to use my 24 words backup seed. ran with a new wallet file. like:
it did show the correct public address, and it refresh the wallet scanning the whole blockchain
but it show 0 available coins
lucky i found old wallet file, and with the old wallet file my coins are recovered.
i then tried to move the coins to a new wallet (with a new 24 seed). then i tested again to recover using the new 24 seed words... and again no funds.
how to fix this problem ? looks like i can't use my 24 seed as a proper backup. but must have the wallet file ??
I compiled the wallet from github, and tried to use my 24 words backup seed. ran with a new wallet file. like:
Code:
./simplewallet --restore-wallet mywallet --restore-seed "my 24 words"
it did show the correct public address, and it refresh the wallet scanning the whole blockchain
but it show 0 available coins
lucky i found old wallet file, and with the old wallet file my coins are recovered.
i then tried to move the coins to a new wallet (with a new 24 seed). then i tested again to recover using the new 24 seed words... and again no funds.
how to fix this problem ? looks like i can't use my 24 seed as a proper backup. but must have the wallet file ??
I know where is the problem. i found in log file messages like "Skipped block by timestamp". coming from wallet/wallet2.cpp file. so it don't scan blocks which are 1+ day older than wallet file ?
this can be very problematic for users who don't have a basic program/debug skills
it made me panic a little when i though i lost my precious bbr... or will never be able to use proper backups
August 03, 2018, 10:23:48 PM
I have a problem with wallet
I compiled the wallet from github, and tried to use my 24 words backup seed. ran with a new wallet file. like:
it did show the correct public address, and it refresh the wallet scanning the whole blockchain
but it show 0 available coins
lucky i found old wallet file, and with the old wallet file my coins are recovered.
i then tried to move the coins to a new wallet (with a new 24 seed). then i tested again to recover using the new 24 seed words... and again no funds.
how to fix this problem ? looks like i can't use my 24 seed as a proper backup. but must have the wallet file ??
I compiled the wallet from github, and tried to use my 24 words backup seed. ran with a new wallet file. like:
Code:
./simplewallet --restore-wallet mywallet --restore-seed "my 24 words"
it did show the correct public address, and it refresh the wallet scanning the whole blockchain
but it show 0 available coins
lucky i found old wallet file, and with the old wallet file my coins are recovered.
i then tried to move the coins to a new wallet (with a new 24 seed). then i tested again to recover using the new 24 seed words... and again no funds.
how to fix this problem ? looks like i can't use my 24 seed as a proper backup. but must have the wallet file ??
Hello, fellow miners!
Features:
- email notifications of workers down
- stats and hashrate chart per worker
- PPLNS reward scheme for rounds shorter than hour, window is 60 minutes, PROP for longer rounds
- payment id/integrated address/subaddress supported
- adjustable payment threshold
- every port supports secure SSL/TLS connection as well as insecure one
- port 80 available for firewalled miners
- static diff supported, see static diff calculator
- multiple daemons, to prevent downtime in case of daemon stuck
- height checks, to prevent mining on forked chain
- sample configs and sample hashartes for wildkeccak (boolberry)
PPLNS Fee: 0.9%
Location: EU
Welcome & Lucky Mining!
Very nice features! New pool started:
boolberry.miner.rocks
boolberry.miner.rocks
Features:
- email notifications of workers down
- stats and hashrate chart per worker
- PPLNS reward scheme for rounds shorter than hour, window is 60 minutes, PROP for longer rounds
- payment id/integrated address/subaddress supported
- adjustable payment threshold
- every port supports secure SSL/TLS connection as well as insecure one
- port 80 available for firewalled miners
- static diff supported, see static diff calculator
- multiple daemons, to prevent downtime in case of daemon stuck
- height checks, to prevent mining on forked chain
- sample configs and sample hashartes for wildkeccak (boolberry)
PPLNS Fee: 0.9%
Location: EU
Welcome & Lucky Mining!
Hello, fellow miners!
Features:
- email notifications of workers down
- stats and hashrate chart per worker
- PPLNS reward scheme for rounds shorter than hour, window is 60 minutes, PROP for longer rounds
- payment id/integrated address/subaddress supported
- adjustable payment threshold
- every port supports secure SSL/TLS connection as well as insecure one
- port 80 available for firewalled miners
- static diff supported, see static diff calculator
- multiple daemons, to prevent downtime in case of daemon stuck
- height checks, to prevent mining on forked chain
- sample configs and sample hashartes for wildkeccak (boolberry)
PPLNS Fee: 0.9%
Location: EU
Welcome & Lucky Mining!
New pool started:
boolberry.miner.rocks
boolberry.miner.rocks
Features:
- email notifications of workers down
- stats and hashrate chart per worker
- PPLNS reward scheme for rounds shorter than hour, window is 60 minutes, PROP for longer rounds
- payment id/integrated address/subaddress supported
- adjustable payment threshold
- every port supports secure SSL/TLS connection as well as insecure one
- port 80 available for firewalled miners
- static diff supported, see static diff calculator
- multiple daemons, to prevent downtime in case of daemon stuck
- height checks, to prevent mining on forked chain
- sample configs and sample hashartes for wildkeccak (boolberry)
PPLNS Fee: 0.9%
Location: EU
Welcome & Lucky Mining!
Wow, a ton of work has been done here in the past few months! Glad to see a team formed and zoidberg back. Hoping this coin will now realize its potential in the CryptoNote sphere 
.
Excited to see the team's plans for next phase. Any teasers?
.Excited to see the team's plans for next phase. Any teasers?
You have seen the brisk pace of development progress in the past 3 months. For those of you who were around in 2014, or at a minimum have read the thread, this progress and pace is nothing new. Zoidberg has always been synonymous with innovation in CryptoNote, and he epitomizes hard work.
Boolberry’s cryptomiso.com ranking for the past 3 months is 102nd of all projects, yet market cap is 375ish. Some notables between 85th and 100th were Monero, Zcash, among other Billion +/- $ projects.
https://www.cryptomiso.com/months_3.html
Zoidberg is a crypto unicorn.
Teaser: Zoidberg wasn’t not working the past 3 years... (intentional double negative)
Wow, a ton of work has been done here in the past few months! Glad to see a team formed and zoidberg back. Hoping this coin will now realize its potential in the CryptoNote sphere .
Excited to see the team's plans for next phase. Any teasers?
.Excited to see the team's plans for next phase. Any teasers?
@crypto_zoidberg : can i mine BBR directly to exchange?
I guess not, you need payment ID attached to a transaction to send it to exchange.
@crypto_zoidberg : can i mine BBR directly to exchange?
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQWMtE64TPe1xY54SVt2IkA
I have the 3D files for the BBR logo if anyone's in interested.
I have the 3D files for the BBR logo if anyone's in interested.
I'd like to clarify that Boolberry is not affected by recently discovered "Monero double counting bug" [1] [2] [3].
The bug was discovered in wallet's incoming tx handler [1]: incoming coins were counted as many times per transaction as tx pub keys were put to the extra (in most cases it should be one). It seems the bug was introduced with the implementation of sub addresses.
Unlike Monero, Boolberry wallet gets tx pub key only once per transaction.
Moreover, for a BBR tx it is explicitly prohibited to have duplicate TX_EXTRA_TAG_PUBKEY entry in its extra.
I consider this bug to be very Monero-specific, so only Monero forks may be affected.
[1] https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/3985
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/8wl12t/is_this_an_exploit_that_was_fixed_or_what_exactly/
[3] https://medium.com/@graftnetwork/graft-wallets-are-safe-and-not-affected-by-double-counting-bug-5d81d2d44cb8
The bug was discovered in wallet's incoming tx handler [1]: incoming coins were counted as many times per transaction as tx pub keys were put to the extra (in most cases it should be one). It seems the bug was introduced with the implementation of sub addresses.
Unlike Monero, Boolberry wallet gets tx pub key only once per transaction.
Moreover, for a BBR tx it is explicitly prohibited to have duplicate TX_EXTRA_TAG_PUBKEY entry in its extra.
I consider this bug to be very Monero-specific, so only Monero forks may be affected.
[1] https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/3985
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/8wl12t/is_this_an_exploit_that_was_fixed_or_what_exactly/
[3] https://medium.com/@graftnetwork/graft-wallets-are-safe-and-not-affected-by-double-counting-bug-5d81d2d44cb8
Thank you sowle for this clarification. (Just to avoid confusion - sowle and wnntaler are the same person, BBR core-dev).
We just had a call with BTC-Alpha they will re-enable deposits. They have put it on hold because they didn't know if BBR was by affected by Monero's double counting bug.
Zoidberg
BTC-Alpha still can't deposits
Finally, they enabled it!
Zoidberg
I'd like to clarify that Boolberry is not affected by recently discovered "Monero double counting bug" [1] [2] [3].
The bug was discovered in wallet's incoming tx handler [1]: incoming coins were counted as many times per transaction as tx pub keys were put to the extra (in most cases it should be one). It seems the bug was introduced with the implementation of sub addresses.
Unlike Monero, Boolberry wallet gets tx pub key only once per transaction.
Moreover, for a BBR tx it is explicitly prohibited to have duplicate TX_EXTRA_TAG_PUBKEY entry in its extra.
I consider this bug to be very Monero-specific, so only Monero forks may be affected.
[1] https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/3985
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/8wl12t/is_this_an_exploit_that_was_fixed_or_what_exactly/
[3] https://medium.com/@graftnetwork/graft-wallets-are-safe-and-not-affected-by-double-counting-bug-5d81d2d44cb8
The bug was discovered in wallet's incoming tx handler [1]: incoming coins were counted as many times per transaction as tx pub keys were put to the extra (in most cases it should be one). It seems the bug was introduced with the implementation of sub addresses.
Unlike Monero, Boolberry wallet gets tx pub key only once per transaction.
Moreover, for a BBR tx it is explicitly prohibited to have duplicate TX_EXTRA_TAG_PUBKEY entry in its extra.
I consider this bug to be very Monero-specific, so only Monero forks may be affected.
[1] https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/3985
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/8wl12t/is_this_an_exploit_that_was_fixed_or_what_exactly/
[3] https://medium.com/@graftnetwork/graft-wallets-are-safe-and-not-affected-by-double-counting-bug-5d81d2d44cb8
Thank you sowle for this clarification. (Just to avoid confusion - sowle and wnntaler are the same person, BBR core-dev).
We just had a call with BTC-Alpha they will re-enable deposits. They have put it on hold because they didn't know if BBR was by affected by Monero's double counting bug.
Zoidberg
BTC-Alpha still can't deposits
I'd like to clarify that Boolberry is not affected by recently discovered "Monero double counting bug" [1] [2] [3].
The bug was discovered in wallet's incoming tx handler [1]: incoming coins were counted as many times per transaction as tx pub keys were put to the extra (in most cases it should be one). It seems the bug was introduced with the implementation of sub addresses.
Unlike Monero, Boolberry wallet gets tx pub key only once per transaction.
Moreover, for a BBR tx it is explicitly prohibited to have duplicate TX_EXTRA_TAG_PUBKEY entry in its extra.
I consider this bug to be very Monero-specific, so only Monero forks may be affected.
[1] https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/3985
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/8wl12t/is_this_an_exploit_that_was_fixed_or_what_exactly/
[3] https://medium.com/@graftnetwork/graft-wallets-are-safe-and-not-affected-by-double-counting-bug-5d81d2d44cb8
The bug was discovered in wallet's incoming tx handler [1]: incoming coins were counted as many times per transaction as tx pub keys were put to the extra (in most cases it should be one). It seems the bug was introduced with the implementation of sub addresses.
Unlike Monero, Boolberry wallet gets tx pub key only once per transaction.
Moreover, for a BBR tx it is explicitly prohibited to have duplicate TX_EXTRA_TAG_PUBKEY entry in its extra.
I consider this bug to be very Monero-specific, so only Monero forks may be affected.
[1] https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/3985
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/8wl12t/is_this_an_exploit_that_was_fixed_or_what_exactly/
[3] https://medium.com/@graftnetwork/graft-wallets-are-safe-and-not-affected-by-double-counting-bug-5d81d2d44cb8
Thank you sowle for this clarification. (Just to avoid confusion - sowle and wnntaler are the same person, BBR core-dev).
We just had a call with BTC-Alpha they will re-enable deposits. They have put it on hold because they didn't know if BBR was by affected by Monero's double counting bug.
Zoidberg
I'd like to clarify that Boolberry is not affected by recently discovered "Monero double counting bug" [1] [2] [3].
The bug was discovered in wallet's incoming tx handler [1]: incoming coins were counted as many times per transaction as tx pub keys were put to the extra (in most cases it should be one). It seems the bug was introduced with the implementation of sub addresses.
Unlike Monero, Boolberry wallet gets tx pub key only once per transaction.
Moreover, for a BBR tx it is explicitly prohibited to have duplicate TX_EXTRA_TAG_PUBKEY entry in its extra.
I consider this bug to be very Monero-specific, so only Monero forks may be affected.
[1] https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/3985
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/8wl12t/is_this_an_exploit_that_was_fixed_or_what_exactly/
[3] https://medium.com/@graftnetwork/graft-wallets-are-safe-and-not-affected-by-double-counting-bug-5d81d2d44cb8
The bug was discovered in wallet's incoming tx handler [1]: incoming coins were counted as many times per transaction as tx pub keys were put to the extra (in most cases it should be one). It seems the bug was introduced with the implementation of sub addresses.
Unlike Monero, Boolberry wallet gets tx pub key only once per transaction.
Moreover, for a BBR tx it is explicitly prohibited to have duplicate TX_EXTRA_TAG_PUBKEY entry in its extra.
I consider this bug to be very Monero-specific, so only Monero forks may be affected.
[1] https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/3985
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/8wl12t/is_this_an_exploit_that_was_fixed_or_what_exactly/
[3] https://medium.com/@graftnetwork/graft-wallets-are-safe-and-not-affected-by-double-counting-bug-5d81d2d44cb8
.. What the fuck is your damage? ...
You have a question to me? I'm rather sure you believe to have an answer to it.
It's not necessary to prove you are a hater this quick. Finished.
Next time you commit any code, think about how you're potentially fucking up a blockchain, and also consider the fact that you have no clue what you're doing, and that you admitted this to us back in 2014. Now that you've fucked your code-base, may I offer a suggestion to perhaps consider starting over and forking Verge? I heard Verge is more secure than Monero.
...
While it may be generally considered bad advice to suggest people listen to you, there is one exception-- your statement from almost 4 years ago quoted above. Hopefully people will heed those words "straight from the pony's mouth" about yourself and your Monero team.
Well Ive never heard about that statement nor anything else that may have come out of his mouth inbetween fake pumps, maybe because these very intricated moments of speech are hardly accessible / require more digging into his reddit / bitcointalk account post history. If u repeat that enough times to put that bullshit on public exhibition as though fluffyponys posts would be indexed by google search, even then no one would give a fuck because 1) within monero community, statement made 4 years back is not enough to cause mutations of a sentiment 2) because they dropped a neat collection of banknotes into monero ages ago. And verge is funded by nobody.
Jump to: