Maand: oktober 2019

I’m attempting to create a PSBT using RPC:

bitcoin-cli createpsbt [[{"txid": "1d76879500aecafde541770b5d44ccec5955b4c1a455fae446bf1df7b5ea43e9", "vout": 0}, {"txid": "e5a8dfa9459ac154fe62652e1d43049dae13f11815da36cc32881e27917a0dff", "vout": 1}], [{"bcrt1qnv3tl3z9cll9faqf79ppfn3rrp7pn9wwmq04p5gqgqtxg55xfxuslkyk94": "0.20000000"}, {"bcrt1qa4h6amsgyc878k094grqh6ktmgvp97dt6et9cy5hjmyxlgd9q63q3p6hch": "1.79900000"}], 0, true]

This is the PSBT I receive in return:

cHNidP8BALICAAAAAulD6rX3Hb9G5PpVpMG0VVnszERdC3dB5f3KrgCVh3YdAAAAAAD9/////w16kSceiDLMNtoVGPETrp0EQx0uZWL+VMGaRanfqOUBAAAAAP3///8CAC0xAQAAAAAiACCbIr/ERcf+VPQJ8UIUziMYfBmVztgfUNEAQBZkUoZJuWAOuQoAAAAAIgAg7W+u7ggmD+PZ5aoGC+rL2hgS+avWVlwSl5bIb6GlBqIAAAAAAAAAAAA=

When decoded, the inputs and outputs sections of the PSBT are empty. Why is this? Bitcoin Core should know everything necessary to fill these sections out. Why doesn’t it?

bitcoin-cli -regtest decode <psbt>
{'inputs': [{}, {}],
 'outputs': [{}, {}],
 'tx': {'hash': 'fd88b50ec52948dcf04b0d802000b325f960f3333cff8bf7a274273c9d7e2ed7',
        'locktime': 0,
        'size': 178,
        'txid': 'fd88b50ec52948dcf04b0d802000b325f960f3333cff8bf7a274273c9d7e2ed7',
        'version': 2,
        'vin': [{'scriptSig': {'asm': '', 'hex': ''},
                 'sequence': 4294967293,
                 'txid': '1d76879500aecafde541770b5d44ccec5955b4c1a455fae446bf1df7b5ea43e9',
                 'vout': 0},
                {'scriptSig': {'asm': '', 'hex': ''},
                 'sequence': 4294967293,
                 'txid': 'e5a8dfa9459ac154fe62652e1d43049dae13f11815da36cc32881e27917a0dff',
                 'vout': 1}],
        'vout': [{'n': 0,
                  'scriptPubKey': {'addresses': ['bcrt1qnv3tl3z9cll9faqf79ppfn3rrp7pn9wwmq04p5gqgqtxg55xfxuslkyk94'],
                                   'asm': '0 '
                                          '9b22bfc445c7fe54f409f14214ce23187c1995ced81f50d100401664528649b9',
                                   'hex': '00209b22bfc445c7fe54f409f14214ce23187c1995ced81f50d100401664528649b9',
                                   'reqSigs': 1,
                                   'type': 'witness_v0_scripthash'},
                  'value': Decimal('0.20000000')},
                 {'n': 1,
                  'scriptPubKey': {'addresses': ['bcrt1qa4h6amsgyc878k094grqh6ktmgvp97dt6et9cy5hjmyxlgd9q63q3p6hch'],
                                   'asm': '0 '
                                          'ed6faeee08260fe3d9e5aa060beacbda1812f9abd6565c129796c86fa1a506a2',
                                   'hex': '0020ed6faeee08260fe3d9e5aa060beacbda1812f9abd6565c129796c86fa1a506a2',
                                   'reqSigs': 1,
                                   'type': 'witness_v0_scripthash'},
                  'value': Decimal('1.79900000')}],
        'vsize': 178,
        'weight': 712},
 'unknown': {}}

I have used electrum for many years on my desktop pc, and have alway felt very secure in doing so because of my ability to use a very strong password to encrypt my seed phrase with. However I just started using the android version and have some concerns.

The android version requires me to select a PIN but it is only 6 digits long? How does the android version of electrum ensure that this tiny keyspace (1 million) stays secure?

The witness script for the output in the HTLC success/timeout transaction is:

OP_IF
    # Penalty transaction
    <revocationpubkey>
OP_ELSE
    `to_self_delay`
    OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY
    OP_DROP
    <local_delayedpubkey>
OP_ENDIF
OP_CHECKSIG

Which already exists a penalty transaction. While in the offered HTLC and received HTLC outputs in the commitment transaction, we have,

# To remote node with revocation key
OP_DUP OP_HASH160 <RIPEMD160(SHA256(revocationpubkey))> OP_EQUAL
...

Why don’t we put the revocation in the HTLC-Timeout/Success outputs only?

I am following this tutorial, which says to use signrawtransaction. However, I get:

error code: -32
error message:
signrawtransaction was removed in v0.18.
Clients should transition to using signrawtransactionwithkey and signrawtransactionwithwallet

The API call in the tutorial shows this:

$ signedtx2=$(bitcoin-cli -named signrawtransaction hexstring=$rawtxhex2 | jq -r '.hex')

How do I do that same thing using the new signrawtransactionwithkey API? I started by generating a 256-bit private key:

https://gist.github.com/rietta/3640002

Now I’m not sure what to do. I guess I am to do something like this, but not sure exactly how to define it using CLI variables and such to make sure it’s going to work.

signrawtransactionwithkey  "0200000001cfe62b9f1c52bc2998f9a0e6d6ee35430c93ec653d5691935178147a43090fee0000000000ffffffff01f0afd320766191d4c5c088ac00000000" "[\"cSXHtKRXWnCLWhuie8WC13cKF3qdnKL8vG3BiRpxgCXZkK2CHe9u\"]"  "[{\"txid\":\"ee0f09437a1478519391563d65ec930c4335eed6e6a0f99829bc521c9f2be6cf\",\"vout\":0,\"scriptPubKey\":\"a914111111111111111111111111111111111111111187\",\"redeemScript\":\"5221033d9aecbced8e776c03d283f6c0d64c6a301ad142d74d500fe8860c9b362fa4932102a4df3cb4e5286e180b7c68e323c778e32350a604d4f4a74c290d1c60c721687a52ae\"}]"

Looking further, I need to base58 encode the key.

I started playing with bitcoind 0.18.1 on a RPI4 and i can see that even when fully synced it is still using 100% cpu so one full core.

Is this normal / expected ?

Looking at the threads is the bitcoin-msghand (ler?) thread that is doing the work

 5946 999       20   0  557016 410080   3392 R  98.8  10.2 226:58.92 bitcoin-msghand       

could it be that my dbcache=100 is causing it to do much IO while relaying data to other peers ?
To be fair i don’t see much IO at all

thanks!

A running bitcoin node doesn’t accept incoming connections when it’s running behind NAT in a docker container.

To confirm the problem is related to docker I edited NAT settings on my router. If router’s WAN port 8333 redirects to a machine running full node as a process incoming connections are possible. But if WAN port 8333 redirects to a machine running full node in docker container – I get inaccessible from outside bitcoin node.

To test accessability that I used this URL https://bitnodes.earn.com/#join-the-network (the website auto detects your external IP address and auto fills the box; only thing left is to press the button). If the node is accessible the test finishes green, if not – red.

The description states:

A script hash is the hash of the binary bytes of the locking script (ScriptPubKey), expressed as a hexadecimal string. The hash function to use is given by the “hash_function” member of server.features() (currently sha256() only). Like for block and transaction hashes, when converting the big-endian binary hash to a hexadecimal string the least-significant byte appears first, and the most-significant byte last.

For example, the legacy Bitcoin address from the genesis block:

1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa
has P2PKH script:

76a91462e907b15cbf27d5425399ebf6f0fb50ebb88f1888ac
with SHA256 hash:

6191c3b590bfcfa0475e877c302da1e323497acf3b42c08d8fa28e364edf018b
which is sent to the server reversed as:

8b01df4e368ea28f8dc0423bcf7a4923e3a12d307c875e47a0cfbf90b5c39161
By subscribing to this hash you can find P2PKH payments to that address.

Can anybody explain what these numbers are:

6191c3b590bfcfa0475e877c302da1e323497acf3b42c08d8fa28e364edf018b

8b01df4e368ea28f8dc0423bcf7a4923e3a12d307c875e47a0cfbf90b5c39161

and how to get them?

In Bitcoin once you own a private key associated with an address that has bitcoins on it, your funds are theoretically safe forever.
But on the Lightning Network, I see that once you send bitcoin to an address there, your funds can somehow disappear. What is the difference with Bitcoin and who or what owns the Bitcoin once they are there?

I followed the instructions in the Electrum Personal Server guide. I know that the transactions are there because I checked wallet.trezor.io. But none are showing up in Electrum. I have run --rescan. I have bitcoind running in the background as a full node.

The instructions are here: https://github.com/chris-belcher/electrum-personal-server