Topic: Blockchain split of 4 July 2015 - page 22. (Read 45591 times)

Right, with Electrum it depends on which version of Bitcoin Core your Stratum server is using. AFAIK by default Electrum chooses a random untrusted Stratum server from IRC, so you probably can't (ever) trust that you're getting accurate info.

I am curious about this as well.  I know the electrum servers are connected directly to bitcoin core nodes, so I imagine it would depend on whether the core version on the individual electrum server is properly updated.

Thank you!

And if I will receive btc it is the same problem? Depends everything from the version of they who send btc? If they have not the last version what happen? I must wait to have 30 confirmations? And if these 30 confirmations don't arrive what happen to btc sent?

To many questions but I wait btc from a cloud mining site and must know how to act.

Thanks.

If I use electrum will be any problem?

Thanks

So, that means you are using an external node. You now have to find out, which version the node you are connecting to uses.
If you somehow get the ip-address, you could look it up here:
https://blockchain.info/connected-nodes

you can try to send one transaction with a very small amount, to see if it is affected, but if they have the last version it should be not

Using the above version in spv mode.

I use a coinbase wallet. is this wallet affected by this problem? Thanks.

Thanks for the early warning on this.

Making use of a 'light' client and was going to send off a couple of transactions (+-14) today.

All on hold for now.

I love how the problem was essentially fixed by the time I found this thread. The tech community is so efficient

Whats going to happen with coins merge mining with Bitcoin the likes of Unobtanium ?

ELI5 is difficult .  I try for a higher age...

The developers designed a soft fork BIP66 that does not allow some malformed bitcoin transaction (that have a strange signature that may not be accepted by newer versions of openssl).  To make sure that there is only minimal forking, they had some rules accompanied with the fork.

• Miners vote for the fork by setting version 3 in the block header.
• Only when 75 % of the miners vote, the change has any effect at all
• When 95 % of the miners vote, the new client ignores all miners voting 2 and orphans them off.

The latter should have produced a few orphans for the 5 % that didn't update.  However, it looks like f2pool and antpool just voted by setting version 3 but did not implement the rules of the fork, at least not the last one.   They built a fork on top of a block from a miner that didn't update.  Since they have a lot of hashing power they managed to produce a longer fork that was alive for some time before being overtaken by the miners implementing the soft fork correctly.  The effect is that we may see transactions with 6 confirmations that are later double spend.  Also f2pool will loose a lot of blocks since they are orphaned later.

If you have a full node that is updated, you have nothing to worry.  It will just ignore the invalid forks.   If you have a SPV client, it will trust the miners to not do something stupid like this and thus it may be on the wrong side of a fork.  There is a small chance that you see a transaction with a few confirmations that doesn't make it to the 0.10.x chain.

As far as I know, bitcoinj is just a java library. The problem described here is, if the blockchain you have downloaded is valid. So, which blockchain are you using? On your PC or an external node?

What the hell does that means ?
How it's possible to make fake transaction , isn't that only possible when you do 51% attack or whatever it's name is  . I guess I'am safe since I'am using the latest version of Bitcoin core however knowing more about this would be nice .

we are doomed.  
---


If you're using Bitcoin Core 0.10.0 or newer you are fine!

The majority of hashing power is mining an invalid chain - it's not going to "win" - they're just wasting their effort.

by the way, the problem is already solved

What about Bitcoinj. I am using version 0.11-SNAPSHOT. Which fork will this follow? Any help appreciated.

How I understand it:
There is a fork, because some Chinese miners are using an old version. If you use a newer version of Bitcoin Core, it just ignores the invalid fork: No problem there.
But there doesn't seem to be any info about SPV(e.g. Smartphone) wallets.
A fork means, that when you see a transaction confirmed on the invalid chain, it doesn't mean it is confirmed on the valid chain.
But: Nobody can steal your Bitcoin, it is just about, if you can trust, if a transaction is really confirmed.

this one of the reason why bitcoin is not accepted everywhere, people feel unsecure with all that shitty fork that can happen..randomly


well i'm not getting any warning with the last version

also rc1 is not even a final a complete version

I did notice that I was waiting for over an hour for a 2 BTC transaction to get confirmed from TC that took ~5 blocks to get confirmed then all of a sudden I saw that it had 8 confirmations (this may have been 3 confirmations later, so it got confirmed on the first block of the longest chain but not the other).

I also noticed that f2pool was mining an unusually large number of 1 tx blocks (only the coinbase tx).....this is obviously speculation, but maybe they were trying to do something malicious.

IMO this is very interesting. I don't think I have been around since we have seen a reorg of this magnitude. 

The message was briefly up for 0.10.2 because 0.10 had failed to increment the protocol version and I failed to account for that. The there are two alerts which are active right now covering everything prior to 0.9 plus the specific subversion strings for 0.9.0-0.9.5.