Why don't you watch the video? They have code running on the MCU. They explain the super secure magic value that the firmware checks against.

They also explain the communication between the main processor and the secure element.


Not out of choice but because that wouldn't have allowed him to go public with the exploit.

That's far from the truth.

The presentation mainly focused on the original research, but the serious potential is in the earlier hack by Saleem Rashid which is clearly explained in the video.


What good is a bug bounty if it's only paid out for less serious issues? Rashid did not receive a cent, and the Ledger CEO called the hack "massive FUD" and has continuted to downplay the implications since.


The researchers specifically explained this in the presentation. There is no need to access the private keys since all communication (the display output and the key input) takes place through the application processor. A hacked firmware would just send a transcation to the secure element, skip displaying any message and then send the required keypress to the secure element.

Interesting project! Electrum server could certainly be improved on.

Is this software for running a personal server or could it be used to run a public server?

How well would it handle the load of thousands simultaneous users, asking for many addresses each?

The disagreement is exactly that: It is better work out all concerns that has been put forth as to how this is being implemented, than to try to push a change that many won't agree with. It is better to have one bitcoin, after all.


The fixed 1MB size is history. Since last week segwit is activate on mainnet, which means the fixed max block size is replaced by a flexible limit of 1-4MB.

If you look at the developers of the software bitcoin-core they have all individual opinions. But there are a few things there are consensus about. One thing is the process where every improvement proposal is put forth to the community for peer review and eventual concerns addressed.

Don't be blind about the various cash, 2x and other forks. They all speak about whatever changes or improvements they have done to their software. Sure, read about these technicalities but keep in mind that's not what's important about them. They are different software projects than bitcoin, with a handful developers all on a single company's payroll.

Might as well make this correct when someone did ask: Keeping the segwit functionality where fixed max block size is removed. The allowed size is now dependent on the types of transactions used resulting in blocks of up to 4 megabytes.


Same here but up to 8 megabytes.

Making a backwards compatible block size increase was one of the design factors behind segwit. I'm sure you've heard about it by now, the documentation has been updated and is actually rather good so you can get all the technical details there.


This is really misleading. Search the source code for "MAX_BLOCK_SIZE", or "1000000". You won't find it. Because there is no such limit.

There are many people from the early days that have 3k BTC. There are a bunch on this very forum with 10k+.

It looks like one of the output addresses is stamp's trading wallet, so it's likely that this guy is looking to cash out 1k and hodling 2k.

I hope this person gets a vacation house somewhere nice as it takes some nerves to hodl through the extra long sub-30 sub-1000 dips. But it is silly to implicate Satoshi. There's absolutely no reason to believe it is as there were plenty miners in 2010.

Also, look at the depth of the exchanges today. 1k coins won't even move the needle.

Electron Cash does not support BCH properly? Who thought it was a good idea to release a half baked crapjob to the public?

If it doesn't support P2PK properly, did I just create a BTC transaction and tried to push it to the BCH network? Would I have lost my money had my Electron been connected to the "wrong" network?

Where can I read more about how the replay protection is supposed to work? Can Electrum show me the transaction in human readable format?


Well now you know then. A grep (or google) will show you what kind of payments Bitcoin can do. Public key and public key hash are the two basic types, then there's stuff like script hash which came later, and tomorrow we'll have witness script hash too.

Sorry for cluttering the Electrum forum with an Electron Cash question, but I was hoping someone who had used it could chime in. Is there an official forum somewhere?

I wanted to split a little bit of BTC into BCH. The first attempt using Electron Cash was successful. The second was not, and resulted in a transaction the server did not accept ("non-canonical DER signature").

Has anyone encountered this problem and knows what the cause might be?

One difference is that the first transaction spent a p2pkh uxto and the second one spent a p2pk. Has anyone spent a pay-to-public-key uxto with Electron Cash and did it work?

Segwit will reduce fees, but only after you move your coins to a segwit address (in a segwit capable wallet).

So it will still take some time until we reap the full benefits.

Can we please stop this endless stream of bullshit? Segwit didn't turn Litecoin into a settlement layer and it won't turn Bitcoin into one either.

Instead of cut and pasting nonsense, why not spend a few hours to learn how it works instead? The word "segregated" comes from the change of an underlying data structure, which is done to the data that make sense to include in the transaction hash is actually included in it. It does absolutely nothing to turn Bitcoin into a settlement layer, nor does it make the signatures disappear, nor does it do any of the other crazy stuff people show up out of nowhere to suggest.

But that name alone seems to act as a magnet for people with more opinions than clues. Next time, let somebody else pick a name, ok..?

Sure, but I suspect 0.30 will look like a great deal even then. That's ten times the value of LTC, which actually has use. So far this amounts to one pool's own token, and looking at the hash rate it doesn't seem like they will want to prop it up for long.

Even in the unlikely case the exchange rate doubled that seems like a high risk moderate reward scenario.

No kidding. I got desperate to find a working exchange when the price closed in on 0.30. But hey, free money, right? One shouldn't be too greedy.

Have you tried withdrawing BTC? Did it work? It seems some people tried ViaBTC but they doesn't seem to honor withdrawals right now.

I can't seem to find the exchange rates. Is it the one trading as BCC? I thought everyone had settled on BCH as the ticker.

So this time you should have kept your BTC with an exchange! How ... fitting.

It's probably the same handful of people that are trading the same IOU tokens among themselves (as you can't withdraw any BCH yet). That explains the swings.

I have not been able to find an exchange where you can actually deposit your BCH.

I can see trades taking place on Kraken. Who is doing this and how? I want my free cash!

Which people? You can't sell it yet. That's the whole problem.

The entire transaction volume is less than 500 BCH. I don't know how many early adopters hold more than that, but I know there are a lot of peole eagerly anticipating to sell their stake.

I don't think so. ViaBTC doesn't honor BTC withdrawals, and Bittrex seems to have problems with BCH deposits.

How Coinmarketcap can report $279k volume I do not understand. Where is that trading done?

The reason exchanges have to turn off Ethereum time and time again is probably just shoddy code. The software doesn't really behave well under load.

But the reason scaling is problematic is the nature of the scripting engine. It's supposed to do everything for everone, so the number of corner cases with exponential validation is unknown. The transaction fee system on top of that is centrally managed, not in theory but in practice. That doesn't adapt fast enough for rapid load changes.


Oh dear, the images in my head.

There's also the fact that every time Ethereum comes close to Bitcoin in the number of transactions processed, exchanges needs to shut down ETH processing completely and wait for it to blow over.

Imagine if Bitcoin was like that. "No, I can't pay you right now because Bitcoin is down."

I think people are catching on to the fact that if Bitcoin doesn't scale then Ethereum really, really doesn't scale.

Sure, suppose the ICO craze spreads even further. It carries the ETH price to a thousand bucks. Or several. Whatever. Something extreme.

What exactly have shifted? Will your BTC be worthless? No. Will the companies and services go away? No. Or consider the other way around, there is a new DAO and now it's worth fifty cents. BTC doesn't care.

For a something supposedly declared obsolete, altcoin shills sure have a fixation with Bitcoin...

Why do people bother posting these things?

It's not like Bitcoin is hurt by people buying other coins as well. The people buying shitcoins might be hurt by it but Bitcoin will not. After all, it started on 100% "dominance" so the only way is down. Why make up some controversy here?

The also the fact that "market dominance" is completely made up. It is based on "market cap" which is a real word but completely irrelevant to Bitcoin. People don't speak about the market cap of the US dollar or even of gold. Because it would be irrelevant.

Then there's also the fact that the majority of altcoins aren't even traded at any remotely reputable exchange. People sell a token for a dollar, then make another million tokens which nobody wants to buy and somehow that counts as a million dollar "market cap". Which somehow would unseat Bitcoin "dominance factor". It's ridicolous on the face of it and it's really tiresome when people pretend to take it seriously in some misguided attempt to pumpt altcoins.