On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:54 PM, m...@bitwatch.co wrote:
> These website list Tor nodes by bandwidth:
>
> http://torstatus.blutmagie.de/index.php
> https://torstatus.rueckgr.at/index.php?SR=Bandwidth&SO=Desc
>
> And the details reveal it's a port 8333 only exit node:
> http://torstatus.blutmagie.d
Here's a packet dump of a connected client:
http://wari.mckay.com/~rm/unknown.tcpdump
Doesn't seem particularly abusive.. only one connection, not doing much
traffic. I don't have any easy way to deserialize this and see if it's
doing anything unusual but it's there if someone wants to have a g
These website list Tor nodes by bandwidth:
http://torstatus.blutmagie.de/index.php
https://torstatus.rueckgr.at/index.php?SR=Bandwidth&SO=Desc
And the details reveal it's a port 8333 only exit node:
http://torstatus.blutmagie.de/router_detail.php?FP=0d6d2caafbb32ba85ee5162395f610ae42930124
bloc
It's not quite accurate that the Tor node's throughput is 'mostly'
plaintext Bitcoin traffic. The node will only exit bitcoin traffic (or
anything else on port 8333) but most of the bandwidth is probably used
in being a Tor relay where there can be no port number discrimination.
However by providi
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:45 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> Or its a complete snipe hunt, I'm unable to find any nodes with it
> connected to them. Does anyone here have any?
[unimportant update] Turns out that my IPv4 nodes already have
iptables blocking of that subnet, presumably due to other misc
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Peter Todd wrote:
> Anyway, just goes to show that we need to implement better incoming
> connection limiting. gmaxwell has a good scheme with interactive
> proof-of-memory - where's your latest writeup?
Or its a complete snipe hunt, I'm unable to find any nodes w
It’s in my logs:
2014-07-28 02:00:24 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.9.2/: version 70002,
blocks=302684, us=**:8333, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=5.9.93.101:33928
On Jul 27, 2014, at 10:45 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Peter Todd wrote:
>> Anyway, just goes to
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 10:12:11PM -0400, Jeremy wrote:
> Hey,
>
> There is a potential network exploit going on. In the last three days, a
> node (unnamed) came online and is now processing the most traffic out of
> any tor node -- and it is mostly plaintext Bitcoin traffic.
>
> http://torstatus
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Jeremy wrote:
> Hey,
>
> There is a potential network exploit going on. In the last three days, a
> node (unnamed) came online and is now processing the most traffic out of any
> tor node -- and it is mostly plaintext Bitcoin traffic.
>
> http://torstatus.blutmagie
Credit to Anatole Shaw for discovering.
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 10:12 PM, Jeremy wrote:
> Hey,
>
> There is a potential network exploit going on. In the last three days, a
> node (unnamed) came online and is now processing the most traffic out of
> any tor node -- and it is mostly plaintext Bit
Hey,
There is a potential network exploit going on. In the last three days, a
node (unnamed) came online and is now processing the most traffic out of
any tor node -- and it is mostly plaintext Bitcoin traffic.
http://torstatus.blutmagie.de/router_detail.php?FP=0d6d2caafbb32ba85ee5162395f610ae429
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 12:30:11PM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote:
> >
> > Ok... 'time' on the blockchain could be 'gamed' ... but with great
> > difficulty.
>
>
> Unfortunately not: miners have in the past routinely gamed the timestamp in
> order to use it as an extra nonce and squeeze some more gigaha
Hi Mark,
This is very similar to a proposal I made some time ago:
https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04053.html
I think the outlines of a design are clear - my proposal and yours don't I
think differ substantially. Someone needs to make it happen though.
13 matches
Mail list logo
