💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "[POC] wallet: Enable non-electronic (paper-based) wallet backup with codex32":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33043#issuecomment-3109229857)
Yes, you're right. I thought the passphrase deterministically modified the seed to create the BIP 32 Extended Key, but that's not the case.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/73e754bd01b0653d1fda2d947fcaed0742da81c3/src/wallet/wallet.cpp#L3542

So the passphrase doesn't provide any additional security in this case.

📝 w0xlt converted_to_draft a pull request: "[POC] wallet: Enable non-electronic (paper-based) wallet backup with codex32"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33043)
This PR introduces support for exporting and restoring wallet seeds using the [codex32](https://github.com/BlockstreamResearch/codex32) format, enabling non-electronic (paper-based) wallet backups.

To accomplish this, the patch ports the `codex32.{c,h}` implementation from Core Lightning to C++, integrating it with Bitcoin Core's libraries. Corresponding unit tests for codex32 encoding and decoding are also included.

Because Bitcoin Core wallets currently do not store the seed material by
...

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "[29.x] test: Do not pass tests on unhandled exceptions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33046)
Backports #33001 to `29.x`.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "test: Do not pass tests on unhandled exceptions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33001#issuecomment-3109248309)
Backported to `29.x` in #33046.

👍 pablomartin4btc approved a pull request: "[29.x] test: Do not pass tests on unhandled exceptions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33046#pullrequestreview-3048147546)
ACK 411e15194b3a770ff455d413a0fe2495f0362297

💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "[POC] wallet: Enable non-electronic (paper-based) wallet backup with codex32":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33043#issuecomment-3109330016)
This could still be implemented—even as part of this PR.

The wallet generates the seed, stores it, and then derives the BIP32 master key by deterministically combining the seed with the user-provided passphrase. This approach allows users to back up the raw seed while still requiring the passphrase for wallet recovery.

Or am I missing something ?

💬 darosior commented on pull request "[29.x] Backport #32521":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33013#issuecomment-3109399111)
Cherry-picked your commit

💬 Eunovo commented on pull request "Silent Payments: sending":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28201#discussion_r2226151771)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28201/commits/e0404435ff4d64b32b58774b6c909c66f1692a9f: `TxoutType::PUBKEY` which represents Pay2Pubkey outputs, is also not eligible to pay to silent payments outputs.

📝 brunoerg opened a pull request: "test: check proper OP_2ROT behavior"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33047)
According to corecheck, the following mutant is not caught by any test (https://corecheck.dev/mutation/src/script/interpreter.cpp).

```diff
diff --git a/src/script/interpreter.cpp b/src/script/interpreter.cpp
index 61ea7f4503..4f6fa34836 100644
--- a/src/script/interpreter.cpp
+++ b/src/script/interpreter.cpp
@@ -746,7 +746,6 @@ bool EvalScript(std::vector<std::vector<unsigned char> >& stack, const CScript&
return set_error(serror, SCRIPT_ERR_INVALID_STACK_OPERA
...

💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "Reduce minrelaytxfee to 100 sats/kvB":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32959#issuecomment-3109422588)
As hinted by @glozow above, `mempool_opts.min_relay_feerate` is set automatically to the minimum of `incrementalrelayfee` and `minrelaytxfee`, so to lower the minimum feerate for what is accepted into a node’s mempool, which means that either `DEFAULT_INCREMENTAL_RELAY_FEE` also has to be lowered or the two need to be decoupled. I would still maintain that relaying things that aren’t mined by default would be odd, and so it sounds to me that lowering the `DEFAULT_MIN_RELAY_TX_FEE` would entail a
...

💬 darosior commented on pull request "Introduce per-txin sighash midstate cache for legacy/p2sh/segwitv0 scripts":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32473#issuecomment-3109476511)
Here is a fuzz test which asserts the cached and not cached versions of the sighash function always return the same result: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/3c056d766d6311e4120d43705b53059e3b1b0bb1. Running it for a while here did not reveal anything.

> I ran IBD on mainnet and signet with caching for blocks enabled and it did not result in any historical block being rejected on either of these networks. I'll do testnet3 and testnet4 next.

Done that and it didn't cause any issue e
...

💬 RobinLinus commented on pull request "Reduce minrelaytxfee to 100 sats/kvB":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32959#issuecomment-3109580155)
Since similar arguments keep coming up: The sole purpose of the minimum relay fee should be DoS protection. Trying to fix the security budget by imposing administered prices on block space seems misguided—market forces will likely circumvent such price controls and make things worse in the process.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: add anti-fee-sniping to `send` and `sendall`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28944#issuecomment-3109583652)
ACK aac0b6dd79b0db1e9d42a6f466709a61cfd1f69f

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "index: initial sync speedup, parallelize process"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26966#pullrequestreview-3048467543)
> What is the step to reproduce your result?

1. Sync your node without any index.
2. Restart the node with block filter or txindex enabled and let it run (you could also set `-connect=0` to sync only the index, without running the net/validation threads. Since threads won't be competing for `cs_main`, this will give you a more accurate result).

You’ll see a "[index name] is enabled at height [height]" log entry once it finishes. Then it’s just a matter of subtracting the index startup tim
...

💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "getbestblockhash is sometimes taking a very long time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32733#issuecomment-3109585516)
I am running Bitcoin Core v28.0.0 with `txindex=1` on an RPi 4 with 8 GB RAM and 1 TB USB-SSD and I have no performance issues at all. I also run LND and some other bitcoin monitoring software that makes RPCs every 1 second.

Just for a sanity check, can you ensure that your bitcoin data directory is being written to external SSD and not the MicroSD card?

💬 furszy commented on pull request "index: initial sync speedup, parallelize process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26966#discussion_r2226285266)
Absolutely

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2226282529)
done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2226282789)
done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2226282376)
Fixed the typos. I didn't mention the `getorphantxs` fields since we haven't mentioned them in release notes before

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2226286848)
Added the option again, a warning, and a more explicit recommendation in the release notes.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2226284019)
Thanks, removed that commit and leaving as is