Curious how much monero the core team donations wallet received ?
Now you can look!
With latest git:
./build/release/bin/simplewallet --generate-from-view-key 46BeWrHpwXmHDpDEUmZBWZfoQpdc6HaERCNmx1pEYL2rAcuwufPN9rXHHtyUA4QVy66qeFQkn6sfK8a
HYjA3jk3o1Bv16em:e422831985c9205238ef84daf6805526c14d96fd7b059fe68c7ab98e495e5703:/home/user/monero-core-team-donations-watch
refresh
Enjoy
awesome! can this already be applied to other sites like safedice for a proof of solvency?
Somewhat. It makes received transactions visible.
So this could be use for periodic proof of solvency as follows: There is a verification account with a public view key, and the reserve coins are regularly moved to that address. At the time of that transaction, it can be seen that the coins exist and immediately after that transaction are in control of the account corresponding to the view key.
But you can't currently monitor a view key address to see if the coins are spent. To do that the account holder needs to publish the key images for any received payments, and then tools need to be created to use those images in a view type wallet to identify spends. Either that or protocol changes.
I wrote up another method of doing proof-of-solvency using just payment IDs a while back. It involves first publishing the hash of a one-time payment ID you are going to use then doing the proof-of-solvency transaction with that payment ID. This proves you are in control of all of the coins moved by that transaction, since no one else could have published the hash before you did the tranasction.
That is good idea, to publish the PID hash before the transaction to prove solvency. Although we have to send it to separate address each time we want to do that, right? Monero doesn't allow sending coin to the same address.
In terms of address on the blockchain, yes it will be different. The public stealth address (which doesn't appear on the blockchain) can be the same.
For the hash->payment ID method, the address doesn't matter, and that is the motivation behind it. Searching for a specific payment IDs is possible so any transaction on the blockchain (with whatever address) using the payment ID after the hash is published will suffice.
I didn't mention earlier that you should ideally publish the unhashed payment ID
after the transaction is confirmed. This isn't entirely required because someone could scan the entire blockchain (after the original hash publication time), hashing each payment ID looking for a match. But it is easier to just publish the unwashed payment ID.
Because of the possibility of reorgs or transactions confirming out of order this method isn't entirely secure. Someone could see the transaction being sent, compute and match the hash, and then send a smaller transaction using the same payment ID to call into question which is the real proof. To avoid that you can append a secret to the payment ID before hashing it, then send the payment, wait for it to be sufficiently confirmed, then reveal the secret (and optionally the payment ID).
I agree with luigi1111 that this method isn't idea for cold storage and using validated key images is better.
