Topic: Blockchain.info vs. Biteasy API (Read 1507 times)
Blockchain.info listunspent is a very worthless api call. If they don't tell you the correct index then you can't spend the output or you could spend the wrong coins!! It can actually cause someone to lose money.
I replied to you on Github but I will paste here as well in case someone else is wondering.
1. We use big endian format for displaying transaction hashes. `bitcoind` displays them in the same way and I believe Blockchain.info does the same thing. I do not why the show the specific transaction reversed. Maybe a bug on their side?
2. The `tx_index` which blockchain.info uses I assume is their internal MySQL ids. Our transaction_index is the position of the output within the outputs array.
3. Their `script` is the hex encoded string value and ours is converted to a readable string which contains the OP codes as well but we will probably provide the hex encoded string value in the future if a lot of API users request it. The value we provide is basically intended for displaying (like on our Testnet pages).
Blockchain.info does things their way and we are doing things our way
Let us know if you have more questions and my apologies for the small delay but it has been crazy here, we will be adding more coins to the site and we are in the middle of changing our infrastructure a bit.
2. The `tx_index` which blockchain.info uses I assume is their internal MySQL ids. Our transaction_index is the position of the output within the outputs array.
3. Their `script` is the hex encoded string value and ours is converted to a readable string which contains the OP codes as well but we will probably provide the hex encoded string value in the future if a lot of API users request it. The value we provide is basically intended for displaying (like on our Testnet pages).
Blockchain.info does things their way and we are doing things our way
Let us know if you have more questions and my apologies for the small delay but it has been crazy here, we will be adding more coins to the site and we are in the middle of changing our infrastructure a bit.
I am trying to redeem a multisig transaction using the bitcore.io library (signing client side in the browser). I need the unspent outputs to to do so. Both Blockchain.info and Biteasy.com have an unspent outputs endpoint:
BLOCKCHAIN.INFO: https://blockchain.info/unspent?active=3CmmhMciChAx4FtGxHtYppoPBLpRLcBy1H
BITEASY: https://api.biteasy.com/blockchain/v1/addresses/3CmmhMciChAx4FtGxHtYppoPBLpRLcBy1H/unspent-outputs
I understand there are small differences between the 2 APIs but... they seem to differ heavily.
Do they simply use different ways to present the same data or is the data different between the two?
BLOCKCHAIN.INFO: https://blockchain.info/unspent?active=3CmmhMciChAx4FtGxHtYppoPBLpRLcBy1H
Code:
"tx_hash": "db29f6a52fa09bf852cefd514fdd71027894f2b19f6fc752cb5e001dc323079e",
"tx_index": 54805310,
"tx_output_n": 0,
"script": "a914798f9646eb0c7efdd33eaf019a35fc6e37bffb4287",
"value": 100000,
"value_hex": "0186a0",
"confirmations": 1369
"tx_index": 54805310,
"tx_output_n": 0,
"script": "a914798f9646eb0c7efdd33eaf019a35fc6e37bffb4287",
"value": 100000,
"value_hex": "0186a0",
"confirmations": 1369
BITEASY: https://api.biteasy.com/blockchain/v1/addresses/3CmmhMciChAx4FtGxHtYppoPBLpRLcBy1H/unspent-outputs
Code:
"transaction_hash": "9e0723c31d005ecb52c76f9fb1f294780271dd4f51fdce52f89ba02fa5f629db",
"script_pub_key": "HASH160 [798f9646eb0c7efdd33eaf019a35fc6e37bffb42] EQUAL",
"to_address": "3CmmhMciChAx4FtGxHtYppoPBLpRLcBy1H",
"value": 100000,
"transaction_index": 0,
"is_spent": 0,
"script_sent_type": "PAY_TO_HASH"
"script_pub_key": "HASH160 [798f9646eb0c7efdd33eaf019a35fc6e37bffb42] EQUAL",
"to_address": "3CmmhMciChAx4FtGxHtYppoPBLpRLcBy1H",
"value": 100000,
"transaction_index": 0,
"is_spent": 0,
"script_sent_type": "PAY_TO_HASH"
I understand there are small differences between the 2 APIs but... they seem to differ heavily.
- The tx_hash (db29...) and transaction_hash (9e07...) are not the same?!
- The tx_index (5480...) and transaction_index (0) are not even close (guess the transaction_index from Biteasy matches with the tx_output_n (0) from Blockchain but if so, what is the tx_index (0))?
- The script (a914...) and script_pub_key (HASH...) are in a different format (guess you can encode one in the other)?
Do they simply use different ways to present the same data or is the data different between the two?
I don't know much about it, but the first difference (tx_hash) is due to they are in big-endian and little-endian.
If you go to blockchain.info and want to find that transaction, searching with "db29f6a52fa09bf852cefd514fdd71027894f2b19f6fc752cb5e001dc323079e" will give you nothing, and you need to use "9e0723c31d005ecb52c76f9fb1f294780271dd4f51fdce52f89ba02fa5f629db" lol.
I am trying to redeem a multisig transaction using the bitcore.io library (signing client side in the browser). I need the unspent outputs to to do so. Both Blockchain.info and Biteasy.com have an unspent outputs endpoint:
BLOCKCHAIN.INFO: https://blockchain.info/unspent?active=3CmmhMciChAx4FtGxHtYppoPBLpRLcBy1H
BITEASY: https://api.biteasy.com/blockchain/v1/addresses/3CmmhMciChAx4FtGxHtYppoPBLpRLcBy1H/unspent-outputs
I understand there are small differences between the 2 APIs but... they seem to differ heavily.
Do they simply use different ways to present the same data or is the data different between the two?
BLOCKCHAIN.INFO: https://blockchain.info/unspent?active=3CmmhMciChAx4FtGxHtYppoPBLpRLcBy1H
Code:
"tx_hash": "db29f6a52fa09bf852cefd514fdd71027894f2b19f6fc752cb5e001dc323079e",
"tx_index": 54805310,
"tx_output_n": 0,
"script": "a914798f9646eb0c7efdd33eaf019a35fc6e37bffb4287",
"value": 100000,
"value_hex": "0186a0",
"confirmations": 1369
"tx_index": 54805310,
"tx_output_n": 0,
"script": "a914798f9646eb0c7efdd33eaf019a35fc6e37bffb4287",
"value": 100000,
"value_hex": "0186a0",
"confirmations": 1369
BITEASY: https://api.biteasy.com/blockchain/v1/addresses/3CmmhMciChAx4FtGxHtYppoPBLpRLcBy1H/unspent-outputs
Code:
"transaction_hash": "9e0723c31d005ecb52c76f9fb1f294780271dd4f51fdce52f89ba02fa5f629db",
"script_pub_key": "HASH160 [798f9646eb0c7efdd33eaf019a35fc6e37bffb42] EQUAL",
"to_address": "3CmmhMciChAx4FtGxHtYppoPBLpRLcBy1H",
"value": 100000,
"transaction_index": 0,
"is_spent": 0,
"script_sent_type": "PAY_TO_HASH"
"script_pub_key": "HASH160 [798f9646eb0c7efdd33eaf019a35fc6e37bffb42] EQUAL",
"to_address": "3CmmhMciChAx4FtGxHtYppoPBLpRLcBy1H",
"value": 100000,
"transaction_index": 0,
"is_spent": 0,
"script_sent_type": "PAY_TO_HASH"
I understand there are small differences between the 2 APIs but... they seem to differ heavily.
- The tx_hash (db29...) and transaction_hash (9e07...) are not the same?!
- The tx_index (5480...) and transaction_index (0) are not even close (guess the transaction_index from Biteasy matches with the tx_output_n (0) from Blockchain but if so, what is the tx_index (0))?
- The script (a914...) and script_pub_key (HASH...) are in a different format (guess you can encode one in the other)?
Do they simply use different ways to present the same data or is the data different between the two?
Jump to: