v0.10.15 - Onyx Release

moli said:
Ah.. Yes.. I have the site open with his address all the time... We all know the story.. But if you see anymore new address, feel free to report here. Thanks :)
Click to expand...
Oh, sorry for my ignorance. I did not know that address is the famous 0.10.14 exploit. I did not see another one that is doing exactly the same thing but I think someone else is doing the same thing with 1000 DRK in his/her wallet to steal others' payments. Let me look up that address again and see if I have the same conclusion right now. I will definitely let you guys know if I see something suspicious.
 
GermanRed+ said:
Oh, sorry for my ignorance. I did not know that address is the famous 0.10.14 exploit. I did not see another one that is doing exactly the same thing but I think someone else is doing the same thing with 1000 DRK in his/her wallet to steal others' payments. Let me look up that address again and see if I have the same conclusion right now. I will definitely let you guys know if I see something suspicious.
Click to expand...

XvH3qoo6F8c9yLCunVaAFt1rY7xj8ngXji is still getting innmlist and not_detected MN payments that was supposed to be paid to other MN's.
 
oblox said:
You can find more information about this exploit on here... it's an injected masternode list. Fixed in later releases (certainly in onyx) but will ocassionally get paid due to lack of enforcement. Nothing new by any means.
Click to expand...
Great, with the source code, I think many are starting their own enforcement now.
 
GermanRed+ said:
Oh, sorry for my ignorance. I did not know that address is the famous 0.10.14 exploit. I did not see another one that is doing exactly the same thing but I think someone else is doing the same thing with 1000 DRK in his/her wallet to steal others' payments. Let me look up that address again and see if I have the same conclusion right now. I will definitely let you guys know if I see something suspicious.
Click to expand...
There's no ignorance here, you just didn't know. If you want to follow the development since the first exploit was discovered, it's here:
https://darkcointalk.org/threads/please-update-to-v10-14-1-masternode-security-update.2615/
And then Evan started doing more testing to fix this problem plus other problems, you can see it here:
https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v0-15-testing.2611/page-2
After this was the release of Onyx... But stay tuned .. still more development going on... :)
 
Just another question. In theory, another enforcement can be applied by pool operators if they decide not to pay the MN's even after our enforcement. Sorry, I know I have many stupid questions. If the operator decide to have his own PROTOCOL_VERSION whether it is a fake one or a real one that is written to exploit the network and disconnect peers from all normal versions. Then, have another node that accept both his own PROTOCOL_VERSION and other normal versions at the same time. What will happen to the network in this scenario?
 
moli said:
There's no ignorance here, you just didn't know. If you want to follow the development since the first exploit was discovered, it's here:
https://darkcointalk.org/threads/please-update-to-v10-14-1-masternode-security-update.2615/
And then Evan started doing more testing to fix this problem plus other problems, you can see it here:
https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v0-15-testing.2611/page-2
After this was the release of Onyx... But stay tuned .. still more development going on... :)
Click to expand...
I'm still a believer in DRK. I should have been following the development but my personal life was keeping me busy for the past few weeks.
 
GermanRed+ said:
Just another question. In theory, another enforcement can be applied by pool operators if they decide not to pay the MN's even after our enforcement. Sorry, I know I have many stupid questions. If the operator decide to have his own PROTOCOL_VERSION whether it is a fake one or a real one that is written to exploit the network and disconnect peers from all normal versions. Then, have another node that accept both his own PROTOCOL_VERSION and other normal versions at the same time. What will happen to the network in this scenario?
Click to expand...

In the case there would be enforcement, I guess the coins would simply not be accepted on the main chain.
 
MrMime said:
Ya, getting that a lot as well. What's really weird to me is that from each MN IP that I log into, it will show up :1, but checking my other nodes will show :0. So for example logging into

mn a will show a:1 b:0 c:0
mn b will show a:0 b:1 c:0
mn c will show a:0 b:0 c:1

They see themselves on the network but not my other ones. --a

EDIT: Deleted peers.dat on local, will try on remote as well and see. Seems to have fixed so far. Will see in the morning
Click to expand...
I just ran this:

% darkcoind masternode list | sort | uniq -c | grep --color -v '^ *1'
3 "37.46.114.158:9999" : 1,
2 "37.46.114.244:9999" : 1,
2 "37.46.114.245:9999" : 1,
2 "37.46.114.58:9999" : 1,
2 "37.46.114.66:9999" : 1,
2 "37.46.114.76:9999" : 1,
2 "37.46.114.94:9999" : 1,

Why are we seeing multiple MN's for the same IP address?
 
GermanRed+ said:
I just ran this:

% darkcoind masternode list | sort | uniq -c | grep --color -v '^ *1'
3 "37.46.114.158:9999" : 1,
2 "37.46.114.244:9999" : 1,
2 "37.46.114.245:9999" : 1,
2 "37.46.114.58:9999" : 1,
2 "37.46.114.66:9999" : 1,
2 "37.46.114.76:9999" : 1,
2 "37.46.114.94:9999" : 1,

Why are we seeing multiple MN's for the same IP address?
Click to expand...
It doesn't look like the same IP to me.
 
MrMime said:
Oh I see. Hmmmm.. no idea.
Click to expand...
And, IP address 37.46.114.158 is associated with the address XvH3qoo6F8c9yLCunVaAFt1rY7xj8ngXji which I mentioned in message #384.

EDIT: BTW, I'm running 0.10.15.14 with the enforcement patch if that matters.
 
He's just spoofing then I'd assume? This should get fixed when enforcement turns on?
 
oaxaca said:
Here's a little brain teaser for you all. I opened up my "transfer" wallet only to find out I'm getting MN payments. Not that I'm complaining about getting a total of 3DRK, but I'd like to know why.

Here's one tx:
http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/4668c8064f29035a943a0864a895ae2ed8f7ed72f256a2ae252809a9b8ad4a3a

Anybody have a guess?
Click to expand...

In other words, you got 2 payments to an address which once WAS a Masternode.

Interesting....I'll open another JIRA issue for that...

Edit: Done, see http://jira.darkcoin.qa/browse/DRK-107
 
crowning said:
In other words, you got 2 payments to an address which once WAS a Masternode.

Interesting....I'll open another JIRA issue for that...

Edit: Done, see http://jira.darkcoin.qa/browse/DRK-107
Click to expand...

I have the same situation
UdjinM6 said:
Good news:
I finally got 1 payment after a lot of tx_out and so on

Bad news:
It came on old mn address that is not online for a few days now and I have no 1000 DRK there :what:
http://explorer.darkcoin.fr/tx/a29e1d92427dc7eef8c9136d84e6bca833b11bc128e1e3dbb366379a00f9bd19

PS. http://explorer.darkcoin.io/chain/Darkcoin stuck on block 156371
EDIT: explorer seems to be fixed now but now it refuses to search by txid :)
Click to expand...

and one more payment received on old address today
http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/655e04e8993130482fc46db5e090f55781944f2d995a640768a7cc1cf935700a

EDIT: commented on JIRA
 
The enforcement period is too long. Plain and simple. No reason to be longer than a week of waiting for people to update, most are done same day or within a few days. Anything longer encourages leeching. Miners shouldn't be mining with pools that don't give two shits about being on the latest wallet.
 
oblox said:
The enforcement period is too long. Plain and simple. No reason to be longer than a week of waiting for people to update, most are done same day or within a few days. Anything longer encourages leeching. Miners shouldn't be mining with pools that don't give two shits about being on the latest wallet.
Click to expand...

3 days is enough. Prior notification of an upcoming update is also an option to make sure pool ops would be on stand-by ready to apply updates as they come.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top