Topic: How many people have received random .00000001 transactions to their wallets? - page 7. (Read 14189 times)
February 15, 2014, 04:23:56 PM
not I, but would welcome a few of those
February 15, 2014, 12:33:43 PM
I believe people were changing a setting on bitcoin-qt wallet to not include unconfirmed coins in the balance as a sort of work around.
February 15, 2014, 12:17:41 PM
hmm... 
February 15, 2014, 12:13:17 PM
These transactions will confirm eventually.
No. I believe they will disappear in many cases.
February 15, 2014, 11:24:35 AM
Mine go away if I "Reset Blockchain and Transactions".
February 15, 2014, 06:48:18 AM
These transactions will confirm eventually.
They are almost certainly intended to defeat pseudonymity. This is discussed extensively in other threads. There is also free software available to get rid of them, at least for bitcoin-qt.
With regards to the original question about how many people have received these, I think it might be easier to ask who has conducted a bitcoin transaction over the past week and has not received any gifts of this one-Satoshi-spam. It seems that whomever is sending these is spamming the entire blockchain.
They are almost certainly intended to defeat pseudonymity. This is discussed extensively in other threads. There is also free software available to get rid of them, at least for bitcoin-qt.
With regards to the original question about how many people have received these, I think it might be easier to ask who has conducted a bitcoin transaction over the past week and has not received any gifts of this one-Satoshi-spam. It seems that whomever is sending these is spamming the entire blockchain.
February 15, 2014, 05:27:05 AM
None have confirms, so when will they disappear from my wallets?
February 15, 2014, 05:10:00 AM
Got lots of random ones across quite a few addresses. Wondered what they were.
February 15, 2014, 12:35:47 AM
Linking addresses requires you to spend these coins. As they will never be confirmed, you won't be spending them. So that is not the purpose (or if it was the purpose, it won't work).
February 14, 2014, 10:38:31 PM
I'm guessing that if this isn't a marketing effort, it's an attempt to associate identity with addresses - if someone receives these and replies in the affirmative with an address, well there's a hit. I'm guessing the effect is also temporal in nature (i.e target addresses within a certain balance range, or of a certain age to try to capture hits where the intended target doesn't respond with a specific address). For this reason, I won't reply whether I received these transactions, or what type of addresses could have received them.
If people remember their history, this is sort of like cribbing as it applied back in WWII (now called a "known-plaintext attack"). In those days, the Allies made strenuous efforts to get Germans to produce messages with known content (i.e. location of a mine, or flying a spy plane in a particular trajectory), so that the Enigma cipher could be attacked.
If people remember their history, this is sort of like cribbing as it applied back in WWII (now called a "known-plaintext attack"). In those days, the Allies made strenuous efforts to get Germans to produce messages with known content (i.e. location of a mine, or flying a spy plane in a particular trajectory), so that the Enigma cipher could be attacked.
That seems possible ... in any case I transferred out of the wallet and am now using a new wallet. Frankly I'm amazed that people so freely post public addresses. I for one don't want people to know which wallet belongs to me.
Exactly the thing though -- from cursory checking of a few cases for other people's addresses, it seems like public addresses are not in fact targeted to the same extent (what with people reporting cold wallet "attacks"). Your public addresses are known; therefore, this seems like an attempt to map "private" to public addresses.
February 14, 2014, 10:37:01 PM
I'm guessing that if this isn't a marketing effort, it's an attempt to associate identity with addresses - if someone receives these and replies in the affirmative with an address, well there's a hit. I'm guessing the effect is also temporal in nature (i.e target addresses within a certain balance range, or of a certain age to try to capture hits where the intended target doesn't respond with a specific address). For this reason, I won't reply whether I received these transactions, or what type of addresses could have received them.
If people remember their history, this is sort of like cribbing as it applied back in WWII (now called a "known-plaintext attack"). In those days, the Allies made strenuous efforts to get Germans to produce messages with known content (i.e. location of a mine, or flying a spy plane in a particular trajectory), so that the Enigma cipher could be attacked.
If people remember their history, this is sort of like cribbing as it applied back in WWII (now called a "known-plaintext attack"). In those days, the Allies made strenuous efforts to get Germans to produce messages with known content (i.e. location of a mine, or flying a spy plane in a particular trajectory), so that the Enigma cipher could be attacked.
That seems possible ... in any case I transferred out of the wallet and am now using a new wallet. Frankly I'm amazed that people so freely post public addresses. I for one don't want people to know which wallet belongs to me.
February 14, 2014, 10:32:21 PM
I'm guessing that if this isn't a marketing effort, it's an attempt to associate identity with addresses - if someone receives these and replies in the affirmative with an address, well there's a hit. I'm guessing the effect is also temporal in nature (i.e target addresses within a certain balance range, certain hash range, or of a certain age to try to capture hits where the intended target doesn't respond with a specific address). For this reason, I won't reply whether I received these transactions, or what type of addresses could have received them. All I can conclude is that not every address is targeted -- anyone can verify that my public address below has not received these transactions.
If people remember their history, this is sort of like cribbing as it applied back in WWII (now called a "known-plaintext attack"). In those days, the Allies made strenuous efforts to get Germans to produce messages with known content (i.e. location of a mine, or flying a spy plane in a particular trajectory), so that the Enigma cipher could be attacked.
If people remember their history, this is sort of like cribbing as it applied back in WWII (now called a "known-plaintext attack"). In those days, the Allies made strenuous efforts to get Germans to produce messages with known content (i.e. location of a mine, or flying a spy plane in a particular trajectory), so that the Enigma cipher could be attacked.
February 12, 2014, 07:16:24 PM
I got 2 of them. F'in sh!t up!
February 12, 2014, 06:05:32 PM
They know these transactions will never confirm. They just spam your wallet. Be glad you don't get 1000s of those a day.
Not sure how they got accepted by the network. Maybe the minimum fee should be enforced to reject transactions like that.
Soon, bitcoind will have to have a spam filter. This is sort of like email in the early days. At first it was all good, now it is a constant war to filter spam.
It just tells you that bitcoin is maturing fast. It will have to handle all these intentional/unintentional attacks sooner rather than later.
Not sure how they got accepted by the network. Maybe the minimum fee should be enforced to reject transactions like that.
Soon, bitcoind will have to have a spam filter. This is sort of like email in the early days. At first it was all good, now it is a constant war to filter spam.
It just tells you that bitcoin is maturing fast. It will have to handle all these intentional/unintentional attacks sooner rather than later.
Hear! Hear! Yes it would be great to enforce the minimum fee! Then miners get something too! Even the post offices charges for bulk mail.
February 12, 2014, 06:02:25 PM
no where is mine wtf?
February 12, 2014, 05:57:15 PM
i didn't get their attention, maybe if i send 1 BTC to them first? 
February 12, 2014, 05:50:26 PM
Indeed. I just checked and some of my wallets have gotten spammed also. All of these cold storage wallets were created carefully by starting up a wallet-less bitcoind then carefully wiping everything. They've been deeply off-line ever since. They would have been created and stored in Q3 2011.
Same here. Most from Q3 2011. At least one of my bigger cold storage wallets was hit with one of these, but it wasn't necessarily recent. I checked and a lot of old 2011 wallets are getting hit with them. It seem the more coin, the more likely to get the dust, too. Appears to have been going on for a while, now, though, not just recently. The paranoid in me suspects it's a TLA/gov't or something. Maybe trying to identify owners of specific wallets? I've also gotten dust on a Casascius coin as well.
February 12, 2014, 04:20:20 PM
They know these transactions will never confirm. They just spam your wallet. Be glad you don't get 1000s of those a day.
Not sure how they got accepted by the network. Maybe the minimum fee should be enforced to reject transactions like that.
Soon, bitcoind will have to have a spam filter. This is sort of like email in the early days. At first it was all good, now it is a constant war to filter spam.
It just tells you that bitcoin is maturing fast. It will have to handle all these intentional/unintentional attacks sooner rather than later.
Not sure how they got accepted by the network. Maybe the minimum fee should be enforced to reject transactions like that.
Soon, bitcoind will have to have a spam filter. This is sort of like email in the early days. At first it was all good, now it is a constant war to filter spam.
It just tells you that bitcoin is maturing fast. It will have to handle all these intentional/unintentional attacks sooner rather than later.
February 12, 2014, 03:01:59 PM
N3 now 
Please!!! Surprize me
Please!!! Surprize me
February 12, 2014, 02:57:31 PM
I have had that happen several times........
Likewise, just ignore it.
Jump to: