instagibbs 2017-01-12 03:46:45
trotski2000, make sure you make a backup after-encrypt that you can access
instagibbs 2017-01-12 03:46:53
it generates a new HD seed IIRC
instagibbs 2017-01-12 03:47:05
keeps all currently known addresses of course
trotski2000 2017-01-12 03:47:40
instagibbs: that means that after I encrypt I cannot spend money sent to newly generated addresses with the unencrypted wallet - right?
href 2017-01-12 03:47:42
OA
instagibbs 2017-01-12 03:48:03
trotski2000, any already-generated addresses in the keypool should still exist
instagibbs 2017-01-12 03:48:31
nothing is wiped, but when a new batch is created(after 100 addresses or so) they'll be from the new HD key
trotski2000 2017-01-12 03:50:06
instagibbs: ok. anyhow this is really strange. I mean... If it wasn't that my password manager remembers that I pasted the password in core at the exact moment the encrypted wallet was generated I would totally assume that I fucked up and that I had a different string in my clipboard when I pasted.
instagibbs 2017-01-12 03:50:20
I'd suggest that you try the password once
instagibbs 2017-01-12 03:50:27
before saving in password manager
instagibbs 2017-01-12 03:50:34
sanity check, no idea why something went wrong
i0X 2017-01-12 03:53:01
gmaxwell: Didn't Roger say that if his pool would push signaling for SegWit over the threshold, he would do it?
trotski2000 2017-01-12 03:54:03
instagibbs: for sure. The thing is that I generated the password in the password manager and the it automatically recognized that I pasted it in Core. Just to be sure I also stored in a secure note, so in total I pasted it three times: once in a note stored in the password manager itself, and then two times in Core (the fact that I pasted it in Core was
trotski2000 2017-01-12 03:54:03
automatically recognized by the password manager). So all in all I cannot really understand what the fuck happened. It seems that either Core or the Password Manager fucked up.
i0X 2017-01-12 03:54:12
I guess what you said above is still correct..
i0X 2017-01-12 03:54:50
ie. He isn't in favor of it, but won't block it.
wickerman 2017-01-12 03:59:35
can I sign transictions offline with bitcoin core?
Lauda 2017-01-12 04:00:06
Not that I'm aware of
arubi 2017-01-12 04:00:14
huh
Lauda 2017-01-12 04:00:20
Electrum has that if you need it
arubi 2017-01-12 04:00:29
you can sign transactions wherever and whenever
Lauda 2017-01-12 04:00:42
In theory :P
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:00:44
I'd like a full node that did that
arubi 2017-01-12 04:00:47
in theory?
arubi 2017-01-12 04:01:00
you can do that with core, sure
Lauda 2017-01-12 04:01:15
Well you can send and then broadcast raw from somewhere but meh
arubi 2017-01-12 04:01:38
question was just about signing so.. sure for broadcast you'd have to be online
Lauda 2017-01-12 04:02:30
Electrum has a nice interface for all of it tho
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:02:37
i'd like to sign offline and broadcast with a watch only wallet just like armory
arubi 2017-01-12 04:02:54
never used electrum. you can do that ^ with core
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:03:12
Electrum connects with "electrum servers" which I don't trust
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:03:52
wickerman: do it with Core
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:04:02
arubi: so I can make a watch only wallet with bitcoin core?
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:04:03
yes you can
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:04:11
wickerman: yes you can
arubi 2017-01-12 04:04:27
wickerman, yes yes again yes
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:04:48
but I suppose this feature is not graphical yet
arubi 2017-01-12 04:05:08
signing of arbitrary transactions isn't graphical either
arubi 2017-01-12 04:05:44
you can do it from the gui, but might as well use the command line
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:05:46
so I must use command lines
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:05:48
is that so?
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:05:50
wickerman: here you have some instructions I wrote for offline signing. http://pastebin.com/xSJxBT93
piqure 2017-01-12 04:05:51
^^^ WARNING: any URL may lead directly or indirectly to COIN-STEALING MALWARE! ^^^
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:06:26
Read that first. Then there is an even easier way using fundrawtransaction: http://pastebin.com/By2wfY2D
piqure 2017-01-12 04:06:27
^^^ WARNING: any URL may lead directly or indirectly to COIN-STEALING MALWARE! ^^^
arubi 2017-01-12 04:06:46
you have to make sure to tell fundrawtransaction to use a change address from the offline wallet
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:06:50
wickerman: just be sure to play a bit with testnet before going for mainnet
arubi 2017-01-12 04:06:54
that's not very automated yet afaik
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:07:05
arubi: I specify that on the instructions I just pasted
arubi 2017-01-12 04:07:11
ah cool :)
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:07:36
wickerman, arubi: anyhow the good thing is that Core will not allow you to send a crazy transaction. That's a real life saver.
arubi 2017-01-12 04:08:19
yep, core is pretty sweet
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:08:52
thanks for the help
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:10:18
wickerman: it seems harder than it is. Just try.
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:10:32
will
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:12:10
but try on testnet neverthless. An easy way is to start the Core instance you use daily with the -testnet argument for the online instance. For the offline one just start up a virtual machine with no networking. Remember to import the "watch-only" addresses with importpubkey and not with importaddresses so you can get the unspent outputs from the online
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:12:10
instance
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:20:38
trotski2000: I suppose the createrawtransaction command must be done in the offline core, is it right?
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:20:53
no, you do it in the online one.
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:21:49
wickerman: first of all you import the "watch-only" addresses to the online core. Then you create the raw transaction from the online core. After that you sign the transaction on the offline core, to then broadcast the signed transaction from the online instance.
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:23:41
trotski2000: but how the offline instante would know the "transation ID" created by the createrawtransaction command? as the offline and online instances are not communicable in any way?
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:24:05
you take it to the offline instance.
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:24:16
trotski2000: ahhhh I see now
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:24:52
trotski2000: that very large number is like a "seed" for the created transiction
marijnfs 2017-01-12 04:24:59
over how many blocks is the segwit signal counted?
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:25:42
trotski2000: when you use createrawtransiction it generates that large seed that can be decoded by any core instance
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:26:30
trotski2000: it's no like other solutions where you have to use an usb stick to import unsigned transiction to offline instance in order to sign it
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:26:40
right?
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:26:55
wickerman: yessir. Just try it and you will understand it. I didn't really get it until I did it myself a couple of times. As I said its easy to setup, just fire your usual Core with the -testnet flag for the online instance and start a VM with no networking for the offline Core.
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:27:42
wickerman: you can use a USB stick if you want. You still have to move strings from one machine to the other. You can do that with text files on a flash drive
internetman 2017-01-12 04:28:12
does anyone know where i can buy bitcoins with a mastercard online?
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:28:32
internetman: ask on #bitcoin-otc
internetman 2017-01-12 04:28:46
trotski2000: cheers
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:29:40
trotski2000: the very las line of your instructions "2a53d8adaf0aeb18aa28af42d92aaf47f6083757af0beb6fae09ebe3dd12a9e7", do you have to type it or is it returned by the system?
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:30:42
wickerman: it is returned by the system
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:34:01
trotski2000: I got it all and it's even better than usual offline signing where you have to use usb devices to copy unsigned transiction to the offline device
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:35:05
wickerman: its less user friendly but you have more control about what's happening. Furthermore you will be using the most peer-reviewed wallet.
Bugz 2017-01-12 04:37:19
;;tall
gribble 2017-01-12 04:37:23
Bitstamp BTCUSD last: 795.09, vol: 25123.21132074 | BTC-E BTCUSD last: 788.969, vol: 11914.07165 | Bitfinex BTCUSD last: 794.24, vol: 41288.57391445 | GDAX BTCUSD last: 803.5, vol: 16167.7408799 | BTCChina BTCUSD last: 766.032718, vol: 2110746.72070000 | Kraken BTCUSD last: 797.362, vol: 6436.50866569 | Gemini BTCUSD last: 797.0, vol: 4356.88025756 | Volume-weighted last average: 767.436238363
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:39:36
wickerman: with watch-only addresses and fundrawtransaction its pretty easy.
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:40:21
trotski2000: im seeing it
wickerman 2017-01-12 04:42:32
trotski2000: so fundrawtransaction calculates the fee automatically
trotski2000 2017-01-12 04:43:56
wickerman: yessir. And it automatically generates a change address for you if you don't specify it. Anyhow if you don't specify a change address it will probably generate a change address which privkeys are on the online machine. In your use case you want to specify the change address so it's an address for which the privkeys are offline
