💬 achow101 commented on pull request "rpc: Handle -named argument parsing where '=' character is used":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32821#issuecomment-3141265710)
> because the current syntax for distinguishing named parameters is inherently ambiguous.
But since the server knows the names of the named parameters, it can also check whether the incoming string starts with the name of a parameter.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32821#issuecomment-3141265710)
> because the current syntax for distinguishing named parameters is inherently ambiguous.
But since the server knows the names of the named parameters, it can also check whether the incoming string starts with the name of a parameter.
💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "[WIP] policy: lower the default blockmintxfee, incrementalrelayfee, minrelaytxfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#issuecomment-3141277334)
Concept ACK
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#issuecomment-3141277334)
Concept ACK
💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "log: rate limiting followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33011#discussion_r2246301270)
(source location is unrelated, just wanted to get into thread mode)
I wanted to add something to this [this thread](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32604#discussion_r2115526293).
I didn't review the original PR, but I would appreciate an `-ratelimitlogging` option for the sake of testing, undocumented / `DEBUG_ONLY` would be fine for me:
- already now, multiple functional tests hit the limit (`feature_taproot.py`, `p2p_headers_sync_with_minchainwork.py`, `wallet_avoidreuse.py`, `wal
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33011#discussion_r2246301270)
(source location is unrelated, just wanted to get into thread mode)
I wanted to add something to this [this thread](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32604#discussion_r2115526293).
I didn't review the original PR, but I would appreciate an `-ratelimitlogging` option for the sake of testing, undocumented / `DEBUG_ONLY` would be fine for me:
- already now, multiple functional tests hit the limit (`feature_taproot.py`, `p2p_headers_sync_with_minchainwork.py`, `wallet_avoidreuse.py`, `wal
...
💬 caesrcd commented on pull request "[WIP] policy: lower the default blockmintxfee, incrementalrelayfee, minrelaytxfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#issuecomment-3141298823)
@luke-jr
> Everything below 1s/vB is spam.
That’s false. I recently made several consolidation transactions myself, all confirming at <1 sat/vB. Labeling everything below 1 sat/vB as "spam" ignores legitimate use cases like UTXO consolidation, which is actually beneficial for the network.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#issuecomment-3141298823)
@luke-jr
> Everything below 1s/vB is spam.
That’s false. I recently made several consolidation transactions myself, all confirming at <1 sat/vB. Labeling everything below 1 sat/vB as "spam" ignores legitimate use cases like UTXO consolidation, which is actually beneficial for the network.
🚀 glozow merged a pull request: "descriptors: MuSig2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31244)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31244)
💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "rpc: Handle -named argument parsing where '=' character is used":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32821#issuecomment-3141318636)
> Alternatively, maybe we can make the rpc client aware of all of the rpcs so it can do that conversion?
That's basically what the PR does implicitly and what my refactoring of the PR does more explicitly with string/json formats in
[rpc/client.cpp](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/b998cc52d51b48db9271fdba0bd69e9aaccb7999/src/rpc/client.cpp#L16).
I think if you look at that file you will see that the the parsing logic is not that complicated and can be well explained. The code the
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32821#issuecomment-3141318636)
> Alternatively, maybe we can make the rpc client aware of all of the rpcs so it can do that conversion?
That's basically what the PR does implicitly and what my refactoring of the PR does more explicitly with string/json formats in
[rpc/client.cpp](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/b998cc52d51b48db9271fdba0bd69e9aaccb7999/src/rpc/client.cpp#L16).
I think if you look at that file you will see that the the parsing logic is not that complicated and can be well explained. The code the
...
🤔 willcl-ark reviewed a pull request: "cmake: Move internal binaries from bin/ to libexec/"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31679#pullrequestreview-3076892707)
Concept ACK.
I still see a number of references to out-dated locations in our codebase with this PR:
```bash
$ git grep "bin/\(test_bitcoin\|bench_bitcoin\|bitcoin-chainstate\|bitcoin-gui\|bitcoin-node\|test_bitcoin-qt\)"
.github/workflows/ci.yml: ./bin/test_bitcoin.exe -l test_suite
.github/workflows/ci.yml: run: ./bin/bench_bitcoin.exe -sanity-check
ci/test/03_test_script.sh: DIR_UNIT_TEST_DATA="${DIR_UNIT_TEST_DATA}" LD_LIBRARY_PATH="${DEPENDS_DIR}/${HOST}/lib" "${B
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31679#pullrequestreview-3076892707)
Concept ACK.
I still see a number of references to out-dated locations in our codebase with this PR:
```bash
$ git grep "bin/\(test_bitcoin\|bench_bitcoin\|bitcoin-chainstate\|bitcoin-gui\|bitcoin-node\|test_bitcoin-qt\)"
.github/workflows/ci.yml: ./bin/test_bitcoin.exe -l test_suite
.github/workflows/ci.yml: run: ./bin/bench_bitcoin.exe -sanity-check
ci/test/03_test_script.sh: DIR_UNIT_TEST_DATA="${DIR_UNIT_TEST_DATA}" LD_LIBRARY_PATH="${DEPENDS_DIR}/${HOST}/lib" "${B
...
💬 fjahr commented on pull request "test: Perform backup filename checks in migrate_and_get_rpc in wallet_migration.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33104#issuecomment-3141363807)
reACK 4b80147feb97300e92e1f940b8d989a0af331e06
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33104#issuecomment-3141363807)
reACK 4b80147feb97300e92e1f940b8d989a0af331e06
💬 achow101 commented on pull request "rpc: Handle -named argument parsing where '=' character is used":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32821#issuecomment-3141369795)
> That's basically what the PR does implicitly and what my refactoring of the PR does more explicitly with string/json formats
Yes, but I meant more so in having access to `RPCHelpMan` which already has the names and types of all parameters.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32821#issuecomment-3141369795)
> That's basically what the PR does implicitly and what my refactoring of the PR does more explicitly with string/json formats
Yes, but I meant more so in having access to `RPCHelpMan` which already has the names and types of all parameters.
💬 aeonBTC commented on pull request "[WIP] policy: lower the default blockmintxfee, incrementalrelayfee, minrelaytxfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#issuecomment-3141370193)
Concept ACK
In the past month, over 200,000 sub-1 sat/vB transactions were propagated and confirmed, despite a super majority of nodes not relaying them. This again demonstrates that market-driven blockspace demand and economic incentives consistently prevail over relay policies.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#issuecomment-3141370193)
Concept ACK
In the past month, over 200,000 sub-1 sat/vB transactions were propagated and confirmed, despite a super majority of nodes not relaying them. This again demonstrates that market-driven blockspace demand and economic incentives consistently prevail over relay policies.
💬 RobinLinus commented on pull request "[WIP] policy: lower the default blockmintxfee, incrementalrelayfee, minrelaytxfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#issuecomment-3141404798)
> It's the USD that has fallen, Bitcoin has only increased _relative to_ it.
Making such a bold claim—especially one that clearly contradicts observable reality—without any justification makes it seem like you're just trolling. Bitcoin hasn’t only risen against the USD; it has also significantly outperformed gold, stocks, and nearly every other asset over the past decade.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#issuecomment-3141404798)
> It's the USD that has fallen, Bitcoin has only increased _relative to_ it.
Making such a bold claim—especially one that clearly contradicts observable reality—without any justification makes it seem like you're just trolling. Bitcoin hasn’t only risen against the USD; it has also significantly outperformed gold, stocks, and nearly every other asset over the past decade.
🤔 fjahr reviewed a pull request: "[WIP] policy: lower the default blockmintxfee, incrementalrelayfee, minrelaytxfee"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#pullrequestreview-3076976529)
Concept ACK
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#pullrequestreview-3076976529)
Concept ACK
💬 fjahr commented on pull request "[WIP] policy: lower the default blockmintxfee, incrementalrelayfee, minrelaytxfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#discussion_r2246439610)
This was reduced by a factor 100 and not by a factor 10 like all the other tests here. Probably a typo?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33106#discussion_r2246439610)
This was reduced by a factor 100 and not by a factor 10 like all the other tests here. Probably a typo?
💬 achow101 commented on pull request "validation: detect witness stripping early on":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33105#issuecomment-3141419839)
ACK 0e22a1401c7edee8946f404dd0deb59a94231340
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33105#issuecomment-3141419839)
ACK 0e22a1401c7edee8946f404dd0deb59a94231340
💬 Crypt-iQ commented on pull request "log: rate limiting followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33011#discussion_r2246449498)
Oh, I did not know functional tests were hitting the limit. I will add an option to disable the rate limiting.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33011#discussion_r2246449498)
Oh, I did not know functional tests were hitting the limit. I will add an option to disable the rate limiting.
⚠️ vishalnimavat2004 opened an issue: "Bitcoin and Quantum Computing: A Path to Post-Quantum Security"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33107)
Bitcoin and Quantum Computing: A Path to Post-Quantum Security
Abstract
This whitepaper explores the looming threat of quantum computing to Bitcoin's current cryptographic structure. It outlines how Bitcoin's existing security (based on ECDSA) is vulnerable to quantum attacks, explains how post-quantum cryptography (PQC) provides a viable defense, and proposes a technically feasible path forward using NIST-approved quantum-safe algorithms like SPHINCS+ and Dilithium.
---
Table of Contents
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33107)
Bitcoin and Quantum Computing: A Path to Post-Quantum Security
Abstract
This whitepaper explores the looming threat of quantum computing to Bitcoin's current cryptographic structure. It outlines how Bitcoin's existing security (based on ECDSA) is vulnerable to quantum attacks, explains how post-quantum cryptography (PQC) provides a viable defense, and proposes a technically feasible path forward using NIST-approved quantum-safe algorithms like SPHINCS+ and Dilithium.
---
Table of Contents
...
💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "Musig2 tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32724#issuecomment-3141547340)
Rebased and fixed `musig.mutant.2.cpp`.
It is impossible to reach the condition in `musig.mutant.5.cpp` with valid public keys. The condition detected by mutant 2 prevents sending invalid public keys to `secp256k1_musig_pubkey_agg`.
Even if I try to send P and -P, the MuSig2 protocol prevents key cancellation attacks.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32724#issuecomment-3141547340)
Rebased and fixed `musig.mutant.2.cpp`.
It is impossible to reach the condition in `musig.mutant.5.cpp` with valid public keys. The condition detected by mutant 2 prevents sending invalid public keys to `secp256k1_musig_pubkey_agg`.
Even if I try to send P and -P, the MuSig2 protocol prevents key cancellation attacks.
✅ achow101 closed an issue: "Bitcoin and Quantum Computing: A Path to Post-Quantum Security"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33107)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33107)
💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "Musig2 tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32724#issuecomment-3141549392)
The CI error is related to the wallet migration test.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33096
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32724#issuecomment-3141549392)
The CI error is related to the wallet migration test.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33096
💬 achow101 commented on pull request "validation: periodically flush dbcache during reindex-chainstate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32414#issuecomment-3141578226)
ACK 0431a690c3a498a1e728c9df34a132ac16177a04
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32414#issuecomment-3141578226)
ACK 0431a690c3a498a1e728c9df34a132ac16177a04