💬 josibake commented on pull request "Log new headers":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27278#discussion_r1143555402)
leaving this style nit in case someone ends up re-touching this in a follow-up, because this makes my eyes burn :sob:

```suggestion
const auto msg = strprintf(
"Saw new header hash=%s height=%d", hash.ToString(), pindex->nHeight
);
```

👍 john-moffett approved a pull request: "Refactor: Remove unused FlatFilePos::SetNull"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27289)
ACK fa67b8181c3ecf94395ecc50fd8acd436f1f8c3a

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Log new headers":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27278#issuecomment-1478030525)
> FWIW I plan to leave this as-is.

If this is something that we might want in the next released version of Core (24.1), then I think that's preferable. As we'd rather backport a less-involved patch.

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "test: `wallet_importdescriptors.py --descriptors` failure":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27282#issuecomment-1478073717)
> See also https://gist.github.com/fanquake/a458badc73abb47f8c06f009d15e1916 (combined log).

This just looks like a timeout factor error

⚠️ visualbasic6 opened an issue: "p2p dos"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27291)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

oh hey

i'm pretty sure there's a remote `bitcoind` cpu dos. when the messages (version/mempool) are hammered node cpu jumps from < 1% - 4% to > 100%. i've been unable to make it jump beyond ~190% but i'm not sure what a micro or micro botnet attack would look like against individual nodes.

please note that this is "incomplete homework" as @gmaxwell would probably put it. where is he
...

💬 visualbasic6 commented on issue "p2p dos":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27291#issuecomment-1478166944)
also - separate issue - but i don't think anyone ever patched my exposed pw "protected" api crash

https://youtube.com/watch?v=cjJM3y718IM

for that you just spam junk b64 in auth - but anyone with their api exposed, password protected or not, probably deserves to have their node disabled remotely 😏

k i'm done here

mad <3,
https://twitter.com/123456

⚠️ visualbasic6 opened an issue: "issue with bug reports - censorship - issue deletion"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27292)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27291

wat

more info: https://www.reddit.com/r/hacking/comments/11xlis0/bitcoin_dos_github_issue_with_attack_code_written/


![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/38997186/226676286-f5f993e5-e473-4785-8118-1eb335b7ff
...

💬 visualbasic6 commented on issue "issue with bug reports - censorship - issue deletion":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27292#issuecomment-1478177307)
much open source very cypherpunk mucho decentralization

💬 fanquake commented on issue "issue with bug reports - censorship - issue deletion":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27292#issuecomment-1478190517)
You must have missed: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/SECURITY.md.

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "issue with bug reports - censorship - issue deletion"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27292)

💬 visualbasic6 commented on issue "issue with bug reports - censorship - issue deletion":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27292#issuecomment-1478190908)
you must have missed where idc - but thanks

:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "Blocks remaining falls offscreen with dutch language setting."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27266)

💬 jamesob commented on pull request "OP_VAULT draft":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26857#issuecomment-1478200900)
Closing this until the BIP is finalized and this has been tested on inquisition (https://github.com/bitcoin-inquisition/bitcoin/pull/21).

✅ jamesob closed a pull request: "OP_VAULT draft"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26857)

⚠️ Bhaney44 opened an issue: "Inappropriate Spam Flag"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27293)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

I made [PR 27042](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27042) with a dataset I built as a product of meticulous labor. I think it is relatively clear that the dataset adds value to Bitcoin as an information technology by provided data for research and development. However, the PR was flagged as spam and comments were blocked.

If there is a valid reason for why the PR was rejected, I
...

💬 fanquake commented on issue "Inappropriate Spam Flag":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27293#issuecomment-1478240736)
Unfortunately for you, your PR looked exactly like spam:
* Nondescript PR title
* No PR description
* Completely unmergable, nonsense commit list.

Putting that aside. A "CSV dataset of blockheaders" is obviously not something that belongs in this repository, or that we would want to merge.

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "Inappropriate Spam Flag"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27293)

💬 Bhaney44 commented on issue "Inappropriate Spam Flag":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27293#issuecomment-1478253072)
> Unfortunately for you, your PR looked exactly like spam:
>
> * Nondescript PR title
> * No PR description
> * Completely unmergable, nonsense commit list.
>
> Putting that aside. A "CSV dataset of blockheaders" is obviously not something that belongs in this repository, or that we would want to merge.

Alright. No problem. It was my honest attempt to add real value to the network. Thank you for your time and consideration.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet, tests: Expand and test when the blank wallet flag should be un/set":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25634#issuecomment-1478256607)
> As far as I understand after this PR is merged we will start unsetting the blank flag and loosing the users' intent.

We were already doing that in several places, the purpose of this PR is to unify the behavior.

If you make a blank legacy wallet, importing any script, address, pubkey, or compressed private key will currently unset the blank flag. If you import an uncompressed private key and your wallet is not encrypted, we would not unset the flag. I think that's a bug, which this PR fi
...

:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "Inappropriate Spam Flag"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27293)