Fake Transactions on Blockchain.info

amaclin

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1019

Quote from: Quickseller on February 17, 2017, 07:38:56 PM

Are they non-standard, or invalid (until if/when SegWit is activated)?

Today they are valid and non-standard.

Quote from: AgentofCoin on February 18, 2017, 02:26:05 AM

Blockchain.info is likely running a node version that understands SegWit.
Other blockexplorer nodes are likely running older non-SegWit versions.

Wrong

AgentofCoin

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1001

Quote from: kolloh on February 18, 2017, 01:49:42 AM

So why does BC.I accept this transaction while almost all other nodes reject it? Are they running an older/newer node or something?
...

Blockchain.info is likely running a node version that understands SegWit.
Other blockexplorer nodes are likely running older non-SegWit versions.

kolloh

legendary

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1023

Quote from: achow101 on February 17, 2017, 07:51:26 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on February 17, 2017, 07:38:56 PM

Are they non-standard, or invalid (until if/when SegWit is activated)?

IIRC, amaclin had claimed to get BC.I to display a SegWit transaction that was "from" an address whose private key he did not control/have possession of.

They are non-standard because old nodes will still accept segwit transactions if they are included in a block.

So why does BC.I accept this transaction while almost all other nodes reject it? Are they running an older/newer node or something?

Other nodes give errors such as "Error sending transaction: Error running script for input 0 referencing 725c1a127e66c6e9ebc97ef065d5fff8cb43234651ef4e1fe5eec29175ff28e7 at 1: Script was NOT verified successfully.." when attempting to push this TX.

achow101

staff

Activity: 3374

Merit: 6530

Just writing some code

Quote from: Quickseller on February 17, 2017, 08:54:11 PM

Did you mean to write "shouldn't"? (feel free to delete this if yes)

If the block contained a segwit transaction in segwit format, then it should reject the block.

If the block contained a segwit transaction in legacy format, then it shouldn't reject the block and accept it.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2870

Merit: 2298

Quote from: achow101 on February 17, 2017, 08:48:43 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on February 17, 2017, 08:44:44 PM

What about nodes running 13.2? If a miner included a SegWit transaction in a block today, would a 13.2 node accept or reject the block?

It should accept the block as it will still recognize that the segwit rules have not activated yet.

Did you mean to write "shouldn't"? (feel free to delete this if yes)

achow101

staff

Activity: 3374

Merit: 6530

Just writing some code

Quote from: Quickseller on February 17, 2017, 08:44:44 PM

What about nodes running 13.2? If a miner included a SegWit transaction in a block today, would a 13.2 node accept or reject the block?

It should accept the block as it will still recognize that the segwit rules have not activated yet.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2870

Merit: 2298

Quote from: achow101 on February 17, 2017, 07:51:26 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on February 17, 2017, 07:38:56 PM

Are they non-standard, or invalid (until if/when SegWit is activated)?

IIRC, amaclin had claimed to get BC.I to display a SegWit transaction that was "from" an address whose private key he did not control/have possession of.

They are non-standard because old nodes will still accept segwit transactions if they are included in a block.

What about nodes running 13.2? If a miner included a SegWit transaction in a block today, would a 13.2 node accept or reject the block?

achow101

staff

Activity: 3374

Merit: 6530

Just writing some code

Quote from: Quickseller on February 17, 2017, 07:38:56 PM

Are they non-standard, or invalid (until if/when SegWit is activated)?

IIRC, amaclin had claimed to get BC.I to display a SegWit transaction that was "from" an address whose private key he did not control/have possession of.

They are non-standard because old nodes will still accept segwit transactions if they are included in a block.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2870

Merit: 2298

Quote from: achow101 on February 17, 2017, 06:15:32 PM

However, segwit transactions currently are considered non-standard

Are they non-standard, or invalid (until if/when SegWit is activated)?

IIRC, amaclin had claimed to get BC.I to display a SegWit transaction that was "from" an address whose private key he did not control/have possession of.

achow101

staff

Activity: 3374

Merit: 6530

Just writing some code

The transaction is not fake, rather it is a segwit transaction. However, segwit transactions currently are considered non-standard so these transactions are being rejected so these transactions are not propagating well.

kolloh

legendary

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1023

Does anyone know how this transaction and string of transactions is showing up on Blockchain.info when they don't exist on the network?

https://blockchain.info/tx/cbe60842c6b0d98042c680ffff172db55fe5ad48ac90c31ed61bd4e30ce1eb51

Is this some bug with multisig transactions that makes blockchain.info think the transactions is legitimate? I tried decoding the transaction but I don't know enough about raw transactions to further investigate the actual cause.

There is a scammer going around that is able to make fake transactions appear on blockchain and is using it to attempt to scam people by making them think he made a payment to them.

Topic: Fake Transactions on Blockchain.info (Read 1411 times)