🤔 instagibbs reviewed a pull request: "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#pullrequestreview-2910938872)
reviewed through 128ad62cd68038641ac7c3308ceb40c6c84d325e

CI failure seems unrelated

I'm going to think more about how evicting peers completely interacts with the behavior.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2136251223)
498f1c019197a8e4105490cdc4a0605594ca97d5

if this line is hit, the `rit` iterator is never incremented; infinite loop?

alternative formulation to consider for the entire conditional starting at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829/commits/498f1c019197a8e4105490cdc4a0605594ca97d5#diff-e6100361fa0e9e25478f808ca084e5f681d4dddbbee7b3bea0f9d5bcd29db3aaR596
```
for (auto rit = std::make_reverse_iterator(it_upper);
rit != std::make_reverse_iterator(it_lower); ++rit)
{
if
...

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2137941928)
22d6cdd4f9dd6e03ad88946c130dad98fc45d7ad

why signed int?

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2138115140)
a703a3086a6a3a6250fb97e799712443eaedf5d0

and helps determine the total memory limits based on number of entries

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2137961509)
9afbf15b99508982b1a73bc416246ffbbce22d89

was this logic change necessary for this commit?

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2138082482)
a703a3086a6a3a6250fb97e799712443eaedf5d0

exactly one *announcement* for this wtxid I presume

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2138563428)
nit(?): is it more of an AnnouncementMap?

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2138586549)
"copying one that exists" I assume means grabbing the CTransactionRef?

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2138044941)
a703a3086a6a3a6250fb97e799712443eaedf5d0

I think you can `const` all fields except `m_reconsider`?

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2138569907)
c21466b83d725ab38e8b2b6c5b3e01815b300745

it's not actually bytes; we we want to just refer to Usage() directly here

💬 glozow commented on pull request "config: allow setting -proxy per network":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32425#issuecomment-2960426526)
Needs release note?

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "wallet, refactor: Remove Legacy wallet unused warnings and errors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32481#issuecomment-2960434399)
_<ins>Updates</ins>_:
* Addressed [feedback](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32481#discussion_r2138353475) from @maflcko [and](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32481#discussion_r2138470337) @achow101.
* Removed also wallet descriptor check from `CWallet::EncryptWallet()` and `CWallet::Create()`.

✅ glozow closed an issue: "Apparently CJDNS network does not work with Tor on mainnet."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/24450)

🚀 glozow merged a pull request: "config: allow setting -proxy per network"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32425)

💬 glozow commented on pull request "package validation: relax the package-not-child-with-unconfirmed-parents rule":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31385#issuecomment-2960446263)
Rebased since it's been a while. Still worth doing imo! Getting this out of the way would be good before we try to do subpackage evaluation / package RBF stuff, fwiw.

💬 hodlinator commented on pull request "build: Add resource file and manifest to `bitcoin.exe`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32634#discussion_r2138681467)
Followed up on in #32719.

⚠️ Christewart opened an issue: "`signrawtransactionwithkey` doesn't work with non segwit p2sh scripts"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32722)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [x] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

I'm attempting to reproduce the transaction specified by AJ Towns that pointed out BitVM bridges with CTV+CSFS for p2sh outputs are vulnerable to theft. You can read more about the topic [here](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/how-ctv-csfs-improves-bitvm-bridges/1591/8).

The TLDR is i'm attempting to sign a `p2sh(p2pk)` script.

I've attempted to create this transaction via the `signrawtransa
...

💬 ariard commented on pull request "BIP-119 (OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY) (regtest only)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31989#issuecomment-2960477093)
@jamesob You can break some CTV use-cases by abusing the segwit block limits (i.e the 80k limit sigops).

Here a test case on some 28.x branch, i.e `getblocktemplate` won’t accept more txn, once 80k limit reached)
https://github.com/ariard/bitcoin/commit/b85a426c43cb7000788a55ea140b73a68da9ce4e

An adversary can be break-even by targeting multiples “contract protocols” in overflowing a single sequence of blocks.

The easy fix is to move CTV as an OP_SUCCESS, as like it’s done for OP_CSFS.
...

🤔 pablomartin4btc reviewed a pull request: "wallet, rpc: Remove deprecated balances from getwalletinfo and getunconfirmedbalance"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32721#pullrequestreview-2915057715)
Concept ACK

There are still functional test references to the fields removed in the first commit (also in `wallet_multiwallet.py`, `wallet_reorgsrestore.py`). Should references in the wallet interface be updated as well?

This would need release notes at some point, no?

🤔 mzumsande reviewed a pull request: "index: move disk read lookups to base class"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32694#pullrequestreview-2914928430)
Concept ACK