12016-03-09T00:06:28 *** gevs has quit IRC
22016-03-09T00:10:18 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
32016-03-09T00:11:52 *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
42016-03-09T00:18:33 *** gevs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
52016-03-09T00:18:34 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
62016-03-09T00:18:38 *** gevs has quit IRC
72016-03-09T00:18:38 *** gevs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
82016-03-09T00:19:05 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
92016-03-09T00:26:17 *** ghtdak has quit IRC
102016-03-09T00:31:09 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
112016-03-09T00:38:36 *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
122016-03-09T00:48:28 <GitHub82> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #7656: Improve EncodeBase58 performance (master...enhancement/speedup-encodebase58) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7656
132016-03-09T00:48:46 *** p15 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142016-03-09T00:50:28 <GitHub171> [bitcoin] Lewuathe closed pull request #7653: Suppress unused variable warning in automated test (master...suppress-unused-variable-warn) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7653
152016-03-09T01:00:46 *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
162016-03-09T01:03:11 *** ghtdak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172016-03-09T01:07:19 *** AaronvanW_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
182016-03-09T01:11:06 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
192016-03-09T01:15:39 *** AaronvanW_ has quit IRC
202016-03-09T01:19:13 *** belcher has quit IRC
212016-03-09T01:20:31 *** arowser has quit IRC
222016-03-09T01:20:46 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
232016-03-09T01:29:17 *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
242016-03-09T01:31:13 *** Thireus has quit IRC
252016-03-09T01:39:01 <sdaftuar> sipa: around?
262016-03-09T01:44:03 *** schmidty has quit IRC
272016-03-09T01:53:17 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
282016-03-09T01:53:34 *** p15 has quit IRC
292016-03-09T02:00:01 *** p15 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302016-03-09T02:28:34 *** xiangfu has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312016-03-09T02:40:58 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
322016-03-09T02:50:04 *** zooko has quit IRC
332016-03-09T03:06:21 *** arowser has quit IRC
342016-03-09T03:07:09 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352016-03-09T03:13:57 *** mr_burdell has quit IRC
362016-03-09T03:16:41 *** mr_burdell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
372016-03-09T03:20:38 *** hsmiths has quit IRC
382016-03-09T03:31:20 *** hsmiths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
392016-03-09T03:38:18 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
402016-03-09T04:04:35 *** arowser has quit IRC
412016-03-09T04:04:58 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
422016-03-09T04:05:28 *** jgarzik has quit IRC
432016-03-09T04:06:40 *** jgarzik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
442016-03-09T04:21:05 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
452016-03-09T04:27:52 *** achow101 has quit IRC
462016-03-09T04:41:42 *** Cory has quit IRC
472016-03-09T04:42:37 *** Pasha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
482016-03-09T04:49:30 *** Pasha is now known as Cory
492016-03-09T04:51:14 *** cjcj has quit IRC
502016-03-09T04:55:01 *** dangraham has quit IRC
512016-03-09T05:01:17 *** Giszmo has quit IRC
522016-03-09T05:04:02 *** Alopex has quit IRC
532016-03-09T05:05:07 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542016-03-09T05:14:17 *** ghtdak has quit IRC
552016-03-09T05:40:57 *** ghtdak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
562016-03-09T05:45:23 *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
572016-03-09T07:24:12 *** molz has quit IRC
582016-03-09T07:36:29 *** cfields has quit IRC
592016-03-09T07:38:38 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
602016-03-09T07:39:22 *** Thireus has quit IRC
612016-03-09T08:01:17 *** chris200_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
622016-03-09T08:05:40 *** frankenmint has quit IRC
632016-03-09T08:08:25 *** xabbix has quit IRC
642016-03-09T08:08:49 *** BashCo has quit IRC
652016-03-09T08:08:55 *** xabbix has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
662016-03-09T08:10:40 *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672016-03-09T08:24:45 *** paveljanik has quit IRC
682016-03-09T08:36:49 *** Don_John has quit IRC
692016-03-09T08:37:08 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
702016-03-09T08:41:52 *** BashCo has quit IRC
712016-03-09T08:42:08 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
722016-03-09T08:43:19 *** chris200_ has quit IRC
732016-03-09T08:59:54 *** frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
742016-03-09T09:06:15 *** jtimon has quit IRC
752016-03-09T09:11:56 *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
762016-03-09T09:17:16 *** AaronvanW_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
772016-03-09T09:22:08 <GitHub57> [bitcoin] btcdrak opened pull request #7658: Add curl to Gitian setup instrustions (master...curl) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7658
782016-03-09T09:27:51 <phantomcircuit> are we using git submodule or git subtree ?
792016-03-09T09:29:45 *** frankenmint has quit IRC
802016-03-09T09:33:01 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
812016-03-09T09:35:07 <jonasschnelli> phantomcircuit: subtree
822016-03-09T09:35:19 <jonasschnelli> secp256k1, univalue, leveldb
832016-03-09T09:39:34 *** frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
842016-03-09T09:40:02 <nsh> jgarzik, is univalue de novo code or based on another library?
852016-03-09T09:40:30 <nsh> (parsers scare me from a software security perspective. i wonder if it should be fuzzed or otherwise audited)
862016-03-09T09:43:16 <gmaxwell> it's denovo. it was originally vulnerable when it was merged in bitcoin core.
872016-03-09T09:43:37 <gmaxwell> after the first vulnerability was found extensive fuzz testing was done.
882016-03-09T09:44:18 <gmaxwell> Andytoshi implemented a functional equivilent in rust so we could do cross implementation round-trip/agreement tests, and a number of non-security bugs were found in it which haven't been fixed yet.
892016-03-09T09:44:24 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
902016-03-09T09:44:29 <nsh> ah, great
912016-03-09T09:44:52 <nsh> i scanned the respository for the words 'grammar' 'lexer' and 'parser' and was disappointface but not surpriseface :)
922016-03-09T09:45:05 <jonasschnelli> univalue was used <0.12 for bitcoin-tx ... and its the default json parser/encode since 0.12
932016-03-09T09:46:18 <jonasschnelli> And by default I think there are no attack vectors for the JSON parser/encode...because you can't parse/encode unless you can do RPC auth or unless you enabled -rest=1
942016-03-09T09:46:29 <gmaxwell> nsh: fortunately we also do not take json from untrusted inputs.
952016-03-09T09:46:39 <nsh> right
962016-03-09T09:46:53 <gmaxwell> (even with rest=1)
972016-03-09T09:47:01 <gmaxwell> so that helps too.
982016-03-09T09:47:09 <nsh> there may be some instances where people are running services that expose the RPC to unvalidated input
992016-03-09T09:47:32 <nsh> even though this would be inadvisable. we can't really see how people use bitcoind in their services easily
1002016-03-09T09:47:36 <gmaxwell> yea, maybe but I caution against that.
1012016-03-09T09:47:39 * nsh nods
1022016-03-09T09:48:08 <gmaxwell> I would be kind of surprised if there werent vulnerabilities there beyond the obvious.
1032016-03-09T09:48:15 <nsh> likewise
1042016-03-09T09:48:29 <gmaxwell> (obvious being that the walletexport/backup rpcs that take files can overwrite anything bitcoind can write to.)
1052016-03-09T09:49:01 <gmaxwell> there are almost certantly memory exhaustion attacks one can perform from the RPC.
1062016-03-09T09:49:03 <nsh> in principle bitcoind could be containerised to only have write access to the leveldb and config files it needs to overwrite
1072016-03-09T09:49:12 <nsh> but that might not be proportionate
1082016-03-09T09:49:27 <nsh> (and container solutions are not mature yet)
1092016-03-09T09:49:28 <gmaxwell> it doesn't overwrite its own config files.
1102016-03-09T09:49:33 <nsh> ah, my bad
1112016-03-09T09:50:37 <phantomcircuit> nsh, backupwallet can write anywhere
1122016-03-09T09:51:13 <phantomcircuit> which makes building a selinux profile mostly useless
1132016-03-09T09:51:15 * nsh nods
1142016-03-09T09:51:22 <phantomcircuit> etc etc for containerization
1152016-03-09T09:51:58 <nsh> what's a sensible way forward in terms of least privilegeing [if that can be granted as a verb]
1162016-03-09T09:52:00 <nsh> ?
1172016-03-09T09:53:20 <jonasschnelli> phantomcircuit: In case you want to check my first logdb implementation, check: https://github.com/libbtc/libbtc/pull/41 and feel free to feedback
1182016-03-09T09:53:25 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: warren has been working on selinux policy that just denies that external FS access, and there is an selinux bool to reenable it if you really want it to be able to access outside of its directory.
1192016-03-09T09:53:42 <jonasschnelli> format is explained here: https://github.com/jonasschnelli/libbtc/commit/319cce54c34f6c91a4f58d4bd4823c177f206579#diff-73f280355a901d2fc049af287aed9e90R29
1202016-03-09T09:54:31 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: ultimately I think we should add replacements for those rpcs that send the data over the rpc... and depricate the ones that write locally.
1212016-03-09T09:55:01 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, that sounds like a sound plan
1222016-03-09T09:59:34 *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
1232016-03-09T10:23:50 *** AaronvanW_ has quit IRC
1242016-03-09T10:24:20 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1252016-03-09T10:26:53 *** xiangfu has quit IRC
1262016-03-09T10:30:28 <GitHub190> [bitcoin] btcdrak opened pull request #7659: gitian: Add suport for deterministic armhf builds (master...arm) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7659
1272016-03-09T11:40:04 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1282016-03-09T11:40:12 *** fengling has quit IRC
1292016-03-09T11:49:58 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1302016-03-09T11:53:04 *** arowser has quit IRC
1312016-03-09T11:53:19 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1322016-03-09T12:04:56 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1332016-03-09T12:24:07 *** BashCo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1342016-03-09T12:24:13 *** laurentmt1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1352016-03-09T12:25:23 *** hsmiths2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1362016-03-09T12:26:08 *** Ylbam_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1372016-03-09T12:27:01 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1382016-03-09T12:27:01 *** hsmiths has quit IRC
1392016-03-09T12:27:01 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
1402016-03-09T12:27:02 *** Guest30748 has quit IRC
1412016-03-09T12:27:02 *** jron has quit IRC
1422016-03-09T12:27:02 *** BashCo has quit IRC
1432016-03-09T12:27:02 *** viderizer2 has quit IRC
1442016-03-09T12:27:03 *** arowser has quit IRC
1452016-03-09T12:27:03 *** xabbix has quit IRC
1462016-03-09T12:27:03 *** JackH has quit IRC
1472016-03-09T12:27:04 *** droark has quit IRC
1482016-03-09T12:27:04 *** anttea has quit IRC
1492016-03-09T12:27:04 *** laurentmt1 is now known as laurentmt
1502016-03-09T12:27:04 *** Ylbam_ is now known as Ylbam
1512016-03-09T12:27:11 *** ChillazZ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1522016-03-09T12:27:26 *** anttea has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1532016-03-09T12:27:30 *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1542016-03-09T12:27:35 *** ChillazZ is now known as Guest15994
1552016-03-09T12:28:00 *** xabbix has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1562016-03-09T12:28:31 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1572016-03-09T12:34:57 *** jron has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1582016-03-09T12:37:28 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1592016-03-09T12:39:45 *** viderizer2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1602016-03-09T12:41:24 *** BashCo_ has quit IRC
1612016-03-09T12:46:50 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1622016-03-09T12:51:42 *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1632016-03-09T12:52:08 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
1642016-03-09T12:52:16 *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
1652016-03-09T13:28:53 *** lysobit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1662016-03-09T13:34:57 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
1672016-03-09T13:40:47 *** chris200_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1682016-03-09T13:51:13 *** cjcj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1692016-03-09T14:18:13 *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1702016-03-09T14:18:37 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1712016-03-09T14:25:22 *** chris200_ has quit IRC
1722016-03-09T14:42:04 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1732016-03-09T14:54:11 *** zooko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1742016-03-09T15:05:18 *** xiangfu has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1752016-03-09T15:22:06 *** xiangfu has quit IRC
1762016-03-09T15:22:06 *** zooko has quit IRC
1772016-03-09T15:23:23 <GitHub137> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #7660: [amount] Extend GetFee() by optional flag ceil (master...Mf1603-amountCeil) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7660
1782016-03-09T15:24:51 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1792016-03-09T15:25:12 *** Thireus has quit IRC
1802016-03-09T15:25:38 *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1812016-03-09T15:26:02 *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1822016-03-09T15:34:44 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1832016-03-09T15:38:38 *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1842016-03-09T15:38:38 *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1852016-03-09T15:45:21 *** treehug88 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1862016-03-09T15:48:50 *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1872016-03-09T15:56:27 <instagibbs> what does this mean:
1882016-03-09T15:56:28 <instagibbs> The command "if [ "$RUN_TESTS" = "true" ]; then qa/pull-tester/rpc-tests.py --coverage; fi" exited with 1.
1892016-03-09T15:57:04 <MarcoFalke> Some issue in the rpc test suite?
1902016-03-09T15:57:18 <MarcoFalke> Likely the well know wallet issue?
1912016-03-09T15:58:15 <instagibbs> hmm, my pull is failing this for one travis build, i barely changed the test too, before it was fine. Is it likely my fault?
1922016-03-09T15:59:40 <MarcoFalke> Just look for the line with "AssertionError" or something like this, to see where it fails. (Or send us the link)
1932016-03-09T15:59:56 <warren> gmaxwell: oops, I forgot about the FS access part, only the exec bool, I'll have both.
1942016-03-09T16:04:57 <instagibbs> MarcoFalke, nevermind, I'll do more investigation first thanks
1952016-03-09T16:06:26 <instagibbs> https://travis-ci.org/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/114248476#L4131
1962016-03-09T16:14:06 *** BashCo has quit IRC
1972016-03-09T16:16:32 *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
1982016-03-09T16:17:30 <GitHub107> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #7661: [wallet] Round up to the next satoshi on odd fee rates (master...Mf1603-walletCeil) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7661
1992016-03-09T16:26:20 *** Squidicc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2002016-03-09T16:29:35 *** Squidicuz has quit IRC
2012016-03-09T16:36:40 <GitHub100> [bitcoin] rat4 opened pull request #7662: remove unused NOBLKS_VERSION_{START,END} constants (master...patch) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7662
2022016-03-09T16:42:47 *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
2032016-03-09T16:42:56 *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2042016-03-09T16:44:31 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
2052016-03-09T16:44:40 *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
2062016-03-09T16:47:44 *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2072016-03-09T16:47:44 *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2082016-03-09T16:50:07 <MarcoFalke> morcos, IsStandard depends on IsDust which depends on GetFee()
2092016-03-09T16:50:24 <MarcoFalke> so making GetFee() do a ceil all the time would cause unwanted side effects prob.
2102016-03-09T16:51:08 <morcos> MarcoFalke: eh.. then make it truncate all the time
2112016-03-09T16:51:25 <MarcoFalke> ... would introduce the regression for small fee rates
2122016-03-09T16:51:40 <MarcoFalke> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/4465#issue-37199263
2132016-03-09T16:51:44 <MarcoFalke> second bullet point
2142016-03-09T16:51:50 <morcos> I'm not sure that really counts though, who cares if the defniition of IsDust changes microscopically. It already changed drastically from 0.11.1 to 0.11.2 and back for 0.12.0
2152016-03-09T16:52:28 *** zooko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2162016-03-09T16:52:28 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2172016-03-09T16:52:59 <morcos> MarcoFalke: yeah i read that bullet point... is that even how the code works now?
2182016-03-09T16:53:28 <MarcoFalke> yup, I guess so: https://github.com/MarcoFalke/bitcoin/commit/1923bb13de2bb45646b3437ecfa1781df15f88e9
2192016-03-09T16:53:43 <MarcoFalke> if (nFeeNeeded == 0) check is still there
2202016-03-09T16:53:58 <morcos> yeah
2212016-03-09T16:54:11 <morcos> but that seems intended behavior right
2222016-03-09T16:54:24 <morcos> at least if you change it round (neither ceil nor trunc)
2232016-03-09T16:55:08 <MarcoFalke> If I `settxfee 1e-8`, I expect the wallet to go into the paytxfee-branch
2242016-03-09T16:55:13 <morcos> if you say you want to pay 1 sat per 1000 bytes, and you put something of 499 bytes in there. why should we intrepet that as you intending to pay 1 satoshi and not 0
2252016-03-09T16:55:46 <morcos> we already don't let you pay 0... so if you specify 0 another way, why is that different
2262016-03-09T16:56:10 <morcos> i don't really care, but i just think the CFeeRate class needs to not get more convoluted
2272016-03-09T16:56:14 <morcos> its already an annoying class
2282016-03-09T16:56:22 <MarcoFalke> In the first case you pay fallbackfee, in the other case you pay 1 sat
2292016-03-09T16:56:30 <MarcoFalke> It's mostly not relevant for mainnet
2302016-03-09T16:56:32 <morcos> but you asked to pay 0
2312016-03-09T16:56:56 <morcos> make it do ceiling then, i agree we need to just look through the follow on effects
2322016-03-09T16:57:07 <morcos> but i don't see a priori why they would be a problem
2332016-03-09T16:57:47 <MarcoFalke> You asked to pay 1 sat per kB and the wallet should always pay that fee rate (or slightly more)
2342016-03-09T16:58:40 <MarcoFalke> Ok, I had the ceil-only patch somwhere laying around this mornig but I deleted it in the meantime
2352016-03-09T16:58:46 <morcos> so are you ok with just making it always ceiling then?
2362016-03-09T16:58:57 <MarcoFalke> I will just create a pull and see what others think
2372016-03-09T16:59:08 <morcos> anyway, got to run, i don't like making that silly class more complicated though
2382016-03-09T17:18:01 *** moli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2392016-03-09T17:20:16 *** skyraider_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2402016-03-09T17:21:29 *** skyraider_ is now known as skyraider
2412016-03-09T17:27:27 <wumpus> back in NL
2422016-03-09T17:28:39 <sipa> congrats!
2432016-03-09T17:29:31 <btcdrak> wumpus: \o/ now for jetlag sleep :)
2442016-03-09T17:33:17 <Bootvis_> welcome back
2452016-03-09T17:33:35 *** bsm117532 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2462016-03-09T17:38:39 *** Tasoshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2472016-03-09T17:43:56 *** ghtdak has quit IRC
2482016-03-09T17:48:02 <wumpus> thanks :)
2492016-03-09T17:48:18 *** Don_John has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2502016-03-09T17:50:32 *** frankenmint has quit IRC
2512016-03-09T17:50:41 *** gevs has quit IRC
2522016-03-09T17:53:06 *** gevs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2532016-03-09T17:53:06 *** gevs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2542016-03-09T18:01:10 *** Don_John has quit IRC
2552016-03-09T18:14:36 <jonasschnelli> wumpus: welcome back, hope you had a good flight!
2562016-03-09T18:16:36 *** arowser has quit IRC
2572016-03-09T18:16:57 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2582016-03-09T18:25:03 <sipa> i'll be back in europe on friday
2592016-03-09T18:25:09 *** zooko has quit IRC
2602016-03-09T18:25:33 <jonasschnelli> sipa: still in Boston?
2612016-03-09T18:26:30 <sipa> sf now
2622016-03-09T18:26:59 *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2632016-03-09T18:27:01 <jonasschnelli> hah. Globetrotter.
2642016-03-09T18:28:57 <morcos> jonasschnelli: missed you in boston, we were about to split the wallet out from Core, but decided to push it off another 5 years since you weren't there
2652016-03-09T18:29:10 <sipa> haha
2662016-03-09T18:29:48 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
2672016-03-09T18:32:33 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2682016-03-09T18:36:47 <Luke-Jr> lol
2692016-03-09T18:40:04 *** fkhan_ has quit IRC
2702016-03-09T18:48:21 *** zooko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2712016-03-09T18:48:50 *** zooko` has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2722016-03-09T18:52:10 <morcos> sipa: did you see my other comment on versionbits. about setting block version = 4?
2732016-03-09T18:52:32 *** fkhan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2742016-03-09T18:52:42 <morcos> i think it would make sense to also include in the first version bits soft fork a requirement that block version > 4
2752016-03-09T18:53:16 <morcos> then the warning code can ignore blocks <= 4 because they will be invalid once the soft fork activates. this is analogous to how ISM soft forks have worked
2762016-03-09T18:54:02 <morcos> we should also start setting TOP_BITS immediately... yes that means that old code will be warned to upgrade potentially before any soft fork is being rolled out, but that to me only serves to be more warning time.
2772016-03-09T18:54:43 <morcos> if we were going to roll out verison bits code without the soft fork included, then i could see the argument against, b/c they'd get tricked into upgrading twice. but as long as they only need to upgrade that first time, its only a good thing that they are warned about it earlier
2782016-03-09T19:05:26 *** cfields has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2792016-03-09T19:18:32 *** zooko` has quit IRC
2802016-03-09T19:19:07 *** zooko has quit IRC
2812016-03-09T19:22:03 <jonasschnelli> morcos: haha!
2822016-03-09T19:22:41 <jonasschnelli> morcos: You and Suhas where there?
2832016-03-09T19:25:07 <morcos> yeah, just came for the day monday
2842016-03-09T19:28:06 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2852016-03-09T19:29:09 *** zooko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2862016-03-09T19:31:00 <jonasschnelli> To bad I had to fly home on sunday.
2872016-03-09T19:31:44 <cfields> jonasschnelli: you didn't come home and find a new baby, i hope? :)
2882016-03-09T19:32:04 <jonasschnelli> cfields: Not yet. Still a couple of month to go...
2892016-03-09T19:32:10 <jonasschnelli> (buhh...)
2902016-03-09T19:32:27 <cfields> heh, good
2912016-03-09T19:34:48 *** zooko has quit IRC
2922016-03-09T19:43:04 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2932016-03-09T19:47:26 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2942016-03-09T19:49:25 *** treehug88 has quit IRC
2952016-03-09T19:51:42 *** p15 has quit IRC
2962016-03-09T20:06:54 *** treehug88 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2972016-03-09T20:11:26 *** achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2982016-03-09T20:12:43 <GitHub69> [bitcoin] btcdrak closed pull request #7659: gitian: Add suport for deterministic armhf builds (master...arm) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7659
2992016-03-09T20:13:55 *** moli has quit IRC
3002016-03-09T20:26:09 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
3012016-03-09T20:32:23 *** moli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3022016-03-09T20:40:18 <GitHub124> [bitcoin] sipa pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/87d65622996d...386f4385ab04
3032016-03-09T20:40:18 <GitHub124> bitcoin/master 7d2f84c Pavel Vasin: remove unused NOBLKS_VERSION_{START,END} constants
3042016-03-09T20:40:19 <GitHub124> bitcoin/master 386f438 Pieter Wuille: Merge #7662: remove unused NOBLKS_VERSION_{START,END} constants...
3052016-03-09T20:40:28 <GitHub8> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #7662: remove unused NOBLKS_VERSION_{START,END} constants (master...patch) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7662
3062016-03-09T20:43:44 <jonasschnelli> sipa: BTW, I have written a C implementation of "logdb". If you want to rain down your criticism (which is appreciated!).
3072016-03-09T20:43:53 <jonasschnelli> https://github.com/libbtc/libbtc/pull/41
3082016-03-09T20:44:23 <jonasschnelli> It will be used as wallet data-format in the SPV implementation I'm writing.
3092016-03-09T20:46:08 <cfields> jonasschnelli: nice
3102016-03-09T20:46:52 <jonasschnelli> cfields: a design decision would be, to use your libbtcnet implementation for the network layer.
3112016-03-09T20:47:01 <jonasschnelli> Though, would be C++ then.
3122016-03-09T20:47:09 <jonasschnelli> I guess even C++11.
3132016-03-09T20:47:23 <cfields> jonasschnelli: It was designed so that a C api should be simple enough
3142016-03-09T20:47:35 <jonasschnelli> But,... I don't expect people using the net layer on a MCU device. C++ could be fine for that case...
3152016-03-09T20:48:13 <cfields> jonasschnelli: so you'd end up with the c++ runtime, but it wouldn't require a c++ compiler for your stuff
3162016-03-09T20:48:58 <jonasschnelli> cfields: Hmm.. but I guess the c++ runtime is to big for atmel cortex chips...
3172016-03-09T20:50:13 <cfields> jonasschnelli: unsure what spec you're dealing with, but yes, i can see how that'd be much heavier than what you're currently working with
3182016-03-09T20:50:46 <jonasschnelli> I just hope I made the right design choices... always unsure about C vs C++
3192016-03-09T20:51:14 <sipa> jonasschnelli: you're not alone :)
3202016-03-09T20:51:20 <sipa> libsecp256k1 started as C++, btw :p
3212016-03-09T20:51:38 <sipa> then C99, then C89
3222016-03-09T20:51:40 <cfields> jonasschnelli: well c++11 adds even more into the mix. It hugely reduces allocations
3232016-03-09T20:51:52 <jonasschnelli> sipa: ah. Didn't know that. But C makes certainly sense for a crypto library... not sure for a SPV library..
3242016-03-09T20:52:39 <jonasschnelli> But I kinda like the simpleness and portability of C
3252016-03-09T20:52:46 <GitHub95> [bitcoin] sipa pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/386f4385ab04...c8d2473e6cb0
3262016-03-09T20:52:46 <GitHub95> bitcoin/master 9988554 R E Broadley: No "Unknown command" for getaddr command.
3272016-03-09T20:52:47 <GitHub95> bitcoin/master c8d2473 Pieter Wuille: Merge #7642: Avoid "Unknown command" messages when receiving getaddr on outbound câ¦...
3282016-03-09T20:53:06 <GitHub152> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #7642: Avoid "Unknown command" messages when receiving getaddr on outbound c⦠(master...GetAddrUnknownCommand) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7642
3292016-03-09T20:55:08 <cfields> sipa: i managed to process where we were mis-aligned wrt threading models. I was far too close to the code to see what you were asking. I'll add some notes to the design doc to explain.
3302016-03-09T20:56:20 <sipa> cfields: please don't let my comments cause you extra work
3312016-03-09T20:56:41 <sipa> i think the model you used is perfect as a lowest-layer replacement for the current network code, and we should work to get it in
3322016-03-09T20:56:44 <cfields> sipa: tl;dr: the event loop is essentially a large wrapper around select/epoll/etc, so thread management must be done a layer above
3332016-03-09T20:58:17 <cfields> sipa: no problem, i just want to be able to explain the design choices, so that discussion was helpful.
3342016-03-09T21:04:06 *** zooko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3352016-03-09T21:09:50 *** moli has quit IRC
3362016-03-09T21:16:57 *** zooko has quit IRC
3372016-03-09T21:20:31 *** skyraider has quit IRC
3382016-03-09T21:32:00 <GitHub45> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #7663: Make the generate RPC call function for non-regtest (master...generatenonreg) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7663
3392016-03-09T21:32:38 *** jannes has quit IRC
3402016-03-09T21:44:45 <gmaxwell> I'm concerned about this: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7657
3412016-03-09T21:48:44 <gmaxwell> My analysis on #1643 was that the change suggested there would potentially cause wallets to be more ground up into small coins; the author there did some simulation and and it least some models saw that effect. (doubling the utxo set size in test case 7, and increasing it by 40% in test case 8).
3422016-03-09T21:48:55 <gmaxwell> And now we have a user complaining about the effect.
3432016-03-09T21:51:25 <gmaxwell> I missed that we merged this.... I think immediate action may be needed to improve the situation, explosion in the utxo set size may take a long time to reverse.
3442016-03-09T21:51:35 <sipa> which PR changed it?
3452016-03-09T21:51:43 <gmaxwell> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/4906
3462016-03-09T21:52:11 <gmaxwell> sipa: basically the old behavior didn't do what it said on the tin, the coin selection would sometimes select extra coins that it technically didn't have to select.
3472016-03-09T21:52:19 <gmaxwell> So the change fixed that to prune them out.
3482016-03-09T21:54:04 <gmaxwell> and I'm wondering if this wasn't responsible for the increase we've seen in the utxo growth rate even after filtering out some of the obvious dust-spam.
3492016-03-09T21:54:19 <sipa> perhaps we should make the wallet produce 2 change outputs, where one mimicks the amount sent (mimcks, not equals)
3502016-03-09T21:55:09 <sipa> that's for privacy, not for utxo optimization, but i expect it to lead to a better distribution of coin sizes to pick from
3512016-03-09T22:00:34 <gmaxwell> sipa: I've suggested a scheme before where you do two change outputs and flip a coin: either you split the change amount, OR you copy the output amount.
3522016-03-09T22:01:22 <gmaxwell> (though I suggested doing this only when the change would be fairly large)
3532016-03-09T22:02:08 <gmaxwell> in general I think we should have a scheme which does not select coins but selects 'taint groups' (maybe a taint group is just a particular scriptpubkey) and spends all the coins in it, subject to some sanity limitation.
3542016-03-09T22:02:17 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3552016-03-09T22:14:48 *** treehug88 has quit IRC
3562016-03-09T22:24:53 <cfields> morcos: https://github.com/theuni/bitcoin/commit/eeda3643766b2110ecf6596d7fb24718412a043a
3572016-03-09T22:27:30 *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3582016-03-09T22:28:33 *** nsh has quit IRC
3592016-03-09T22:30:38 *** lysobit has quit IRC
3602016-03-09T22:33:07 *** nsh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3612016-03-09T22:33:31 *** moli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3622016-03-09T22:34:20 *** lysobit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3632016-03-09T22:43:02 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
3642016-03-09T22:45:00 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3652016-03-09T22:45:22 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
3662016-03-09T23:00:01 *** Squidicc has quit IRC
3672016-03-09T23:00:19 *** gevs has quit IRC
3682016-03-09T23:01:18 *** berndj has quit IRC
3692016-03-09T23:01:55 *** amiller has quit IRC
3702016-03-09T23:03:02 *** berndj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3712016-03-09T23:04:49 *** gevs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3722016-03-09T23:11:07 *** Guest88865 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3732016-03-09T23:16:06 *** Guest88865 has quit IRC
3742016-03-09T23:17:10 <cfields> sipa: re our aes impl. Would you prefer to remove the tables before merge? Or ok to do it as a next step?
3752016-03-09T23:17:52 <cfields> (assuming it wouldn't be worse than what we currently have with openssl)
3762016-03-09T23:21:39 *** amiller_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3772016-03-09T23:23:02 <cfields> sipa: by which i mean "would you prefer that i remove the tables" ofc :)
3782016-03-09T23:24:16 <sipa> cfields: i'm now thinking about how you would implement all of the AES steps without tables
3792016-03-09T23:25:07 <gmaxwell> AES is notoriously painful to do both sidechannel free and fast.
3802016-03-09T23:25:13 *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
3812016-03-09T23:25:20 <gmaxwell> The tables could be converted into CMOV oblivious lookups, for a big speed hit.
3822016-03-09T23:26:28 <cfields> sipa: ah, our discussion had me believe that there was a standard alternate approach
3832016-03-09T23:27:00 <sipa> cfields: hmm, no; i think you'll find plenty of academic work for fast & sidechannel free AES, but nothing standard
3842016-03-09T23:27:15 <sipa> *but* i think AES is trivial to do slow & sidechannel free
3852016-03-09T23:27:20 <sipa> well, constant-time
3862016-03-09T23:29:16 <sipa> hmm, the S-box is nontrivial
3872016-03-09T23:39:44 <sipa> i guess you'll need a cmov for the sbox
3882016-03-09T23:39:57 *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
3892016-03-09T23:40:13 <sipa> everything else can be done algebraically... the first thing besides the S-box is a GF(2^8) multiplication by 3
3902016-03-09T23:40:37 <sipa> s/first thing/worst thing/
3912016-03-09T23:42:46 <morcos> gmaxwell: re: #4906, i flagged that shortly after it got merged echoing your concerns. wumpus asked us if we should revert it and you and i both told him no.
3922016-03-09T23:43:38 <gmaxwell> lol
3932016-03-09T23:43:44 <morcos> gmaxwell: i think its unlikely that its had much of an effect on utxo set already, b/c its only been included since 0.12 right? but this is an example of something that we'll all forget about revisiting in time for 0.13 if we don't put it on a list somewhere
3942016-03-09T23:44:08 <gmaxwell> morcos: it's been merged for a while, so it may be the case that people running pre-releases have had an effect.
3952016-03-09T23:44:26 <gmaxwell> certantly if it is the cause of this user's complaint it's a cause for concern.
3962016-03-09T23:44:40 <gmaxwell> But I think we wouldn't revert regardless, we would move forward.
3972016-03-09T23:45:48 <morcos> Should we maintain an issue that includes goals for 0.13, or open a new issue and tag it with milestone 0.13 or something.. it'd be nice if we were more organized about this stuff
3982016-03-09T23:46:36 <gmaxwell> I think perhaps one reason I also might have said to not revert it was a belief that we'd move forward and further fix the issue before the release but then it fell off the radar. A milestoned issue would probably be fine.
3992016-03-09T23:53:12 *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
4002016-03-09T23:53:27 <morcos> ttps://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7664
4012016-03-09T23:53:30 <morcos> oops
4022016-03-09T23:53:31 *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4032016-03-09T23:53:31 *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4042016-03-09T23:54:42 *** blkdb has quit IRC
4052016-03-09T23:55:32 *** blkdb has joined #bitcoin-core-dev