flare
Well-known member
That's excactly what will happen now :grin:Just wait until flare assigns your reported JIRA issues back to you :tongue:
EDIT:
Last edited by a moderator:
That's excactly what will happen now :grin:Just wait until flare assigns your reported JIRA issues back to you :tongue:
That's excactly what will happen now :grin:
EDIT:
Hmmm... This is going popular...
Code:darkcoind masternode list | sort | uniq -c | grep -v "1 " 2 "107.170.242.110:9999" : 1, 3 "108.61.172.141:9999" : 1, 2 "188.226.196.182:9999" : 1,
if(tx.AcceptableInputs(state, true)){
LogPrintf("dsee - Accepted masternode entry %i %i\n", count, current);
if(GetInputAge(vin) < MASTERNODE_MIN_CONFIRMATIONS){
LogPrintf("dsee - Input must have least %d confirmations\n", MASTERNODE_MIN_CONFIRMATIONS);
pfrom->Misbehaving(20);
return;
}
addrman.Add(CAddress(addr), pfrom->addr, 2*60*60);
// Fix start
BOOST_FOREACH(CMasterNode& mn, darkSendMasterNodes) {
if(mn.addr == addr){
LogPrintf("Duplicate master node entry - rejected %s \n", mn.addr.ToString().c_str());
return;
}
}
// Fix end
This needs a protocolversion change, otherwise we'll get into trouble...eduffield , what about a quick fix here to get rid of those duplicate entries? https://github.com/darkcoin/darkcoin/blob/master/src/masternode.cpp#L140:
Code:if(tx.AcceptableInputs(state, true)){ LogPrintf("dsee - Accepted masternode entry %i %i\n", count, current); if(GetInputAge(vin) < MASTERNODE_MIN_CONFIRMATIONS){ LogPrintf("dsee - Input must have least %d confirmations\n", MASTERNODE_MIN_CONFIRMATIONS); pfrom->Misbehaving(20); return; } addrman.Add(CAddress(addr), pfrom->addr, 2*60*60); // Fix start BOOST_FOREACH(CMasterNode& mn, darkSendMasterNodes) { if(mn.addr == addr){ LogPrintf("Duplicate master node entry - rejected %s \n", mn.addr.ToString().c_str()); return; } } // Fix end
Thank you! :smile:
[ I simply have no words ] :grin:
darkcoind getcheckpoint
{
"synccheckpoint" : "0000000000026c3cd95dcb540d1f3cc611a6ce798257cffbf4ad10834c0da392",
"height" : 171644,
"timestamp" : 1416304598,
"subscribemode" : "enforce",
"enforcing" : "on"
Hey, you might be next on the list for an offer you can't refuse... :grin:He's gonna hate me
I hereby officially deny having made above post, and the proposal to add him to the development team as well.
My account was hacked.
Wasn't me...
REALLY!
There is a cause why its not officially supported yet: Its utterly not ready for production!
You are right, there should be a warning IN CAPITAL LETTERS...Does using it trigger a warning to the user/operator? Anything like this should cause a big impossible-to-miss equivalent of hands coming out of the screen to shake you awake and make sure you know what you're doing because you're stepping off the path and into the scary dark forest to get lost and eaten by wolves.
lol, it was flipped Friday or Saturday.:tongue:Hey... who flipped the switch ?
lol, it was flipped Friday or Saturday.
Does using it trigger a warning to the user/operator? Anything like this should cause a big impossible-to-miss equivalent of hands coming out of the screen to shake you awake and make sure you know what you're doing because you're stepping off the path and into the scary dark forest to get lost and eaten by wolves.
eduffield , what about a quick fix here to get rid of those duplicate entries? https://github.com/darkcoin/darkcoin/blob/master/src/masternode.cpp#L140:
Code:if(tx.AcceptableInputs(state, true)){ LogPrintf("dsee - Accepted masternode entry %i %i\n", count, current); if(GetInputAge(vin) < MASTERNODE_MIN_CONFIRMATIONS){ LogPrintf("dsee - Input must have least %d confirmations\n", MASTERNODE_MIN_CONFIRMATIONS); pfrom->Misbehaving(20); return; } addrman.Add(CAddress(addr), pfrom->addr, 2*60*60); // Fix start BOOST_FOREACH(CMasterNode& mn, darkSendMasterNodes) { if(mn.addr == addr){ LogPrintf("Duplicate master node entry - rejected %s \n", mn.addr.ToString().c_str()); return; } } // Fix end
Making the code only accept unique masternodes is really easy, but it's also exploitable. For example, what if you started a masternode with someone else's address during a protocol change. That would allow you to register and they wouldn't be able to after that. There's really no way to prove you own that ip address beyond my proof-of-service concept.
Mine sat about 18 hours with no activity with one remaining 500 denomination. I'm now moving along, but still not finished compared to my 10s, and 1s.Hmm, having trouble mixing again with v.15. Lots of the "last Darksend was too recent" errors...
Seems like a logical approach... there would be no other way for the fake node to get the key generated from the masternode genkey command unless you were the one generating it (or logged their computer).Quick idea (right now I'm at work and can't test this):
When the bad node registers let the other nodes ask THAT IP-address for the corresponding vin (or pubkey or whatever else is easy to access).
No correct answer, node not accepted.
- it's a honest node -> it will give you the correct answer
- it's the bad node -> the 'good' node (which owns the physical address) is connected (we don't talk about IP-spoofing here, don't we?) and gives you the wrong answer (it can't return the bad node's vin/pubkey/etc. because it has no idea what's going on).
Same here :-(Hmm, having trouble mixing again with v.15. Lots of the "last Darksend was too recent" errors...
Same here :-(
8 hrs running .16.15 and still sitting at 1% (which I think really means 0%, since that what it started at).
Look at your coin control. Are your coins put into denomations in powers of 2 (1024, 512, 256, 128, 64, 32, 16, 8, 4, 2)? If so, you'll want to select all and send to a fresh address in the wallet. Not sure why it is doing that but it would never start when the coins were broken up like that.Same here :-(
8 hrs running .16.15 and still sitting at 1% (which I think really means 0%, since that what it started at).