📅 Original date posted:2013-03-12
📝 Original message:Just a quick and dirty check if something bad actually happened. 430
transactions that were confirmed in the alt-chain, are not confirmed
in the true blockchain. The good news is that as far as I can tell
most of them are low volume transactions destined for SD.
7 transactions were true double spends, or to be more precise
transactions in which an conflicting transaction was confirmed in the
new chain (with their respective amount):
12814b8ad57ce5654ba69eb26a52ddae1bff42093ca20cef3ad96fe7fd85d195 261 BTC
cb36ba33b3ecd4d3177d786209670c9e6cdf95eb62be54986f0b49ca292714af 0.06 BTC
7192807f952b252081d0db0aa7575c4695b945820adaf7776b7189e6b3d86f96 0.01 BTC
355d4ea51c3b780cf0b10e8099a06a31484e0060bc140b63f3d6e5fb713ace5e 0.05 BTC
b961bc0c663a46893afd3166a604e7e2639533522d9fec61fdb95eb665e86f5a 0.61 BTC
138063e4bdb76feaa511f1e7f9c681eb468ef9140c141671741c965e503b84c6 1.62 BTC
a10bd194cdbf9aa4c12eb0b120056998a081a9b0d93d70570edff24dec831f90 0.81
So the one transaction that really hurt was the one published on
BitcoinTalk. We're not yet out of the woods as some of the 423
transactions still have a chance of being doublespent, but looks like
it's not that bad after all.
Cheers,
Chris
P.S.: For a complete list of transactions see http://pastebin.com/wctJU3Ln
--
Christian Decker
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Peter Vessenes <peter at coinlab.com> wrote:
>>> Can some enterprising soul determine if there were any double-spend attempts?
>>> I'm assuming no, and if that's the case, we should talk about that publicly.
> [snip]
>> I agree it would be good to confirm no one was ripped off, even though
>> we can't say there weren't any attempts.
>
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=152348.msg1616747#msg1616747
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Christian Decker [ARCHIVE] /
npub1wt…gtuyn
2023-06-07 11:37:52
in reply to nevent1q…qzu2
Author Public Key
npub1wtx5qvewc7pd6znlvwktq03mdld05mv3h5dkzfwd3dc30gdmsptsugtuynPublished at
2023-06-07 11:37:52Event JSON
{
"id": "95a1196142ab9b4ba82e36d1e68df24bed248d96fb8e34803b09dcd95c6edb1f",
"pubkey": "72cd40332ec782dd0a7f63acb03e3b6fdafa6d91bd1b6125cd8b7117a1bb8057",
"created_at": 1686137872,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"f33f518d3b5ede4c8e85312ebea36f59a0dce8fd1c908dfe9352a4a28b6ea01d",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"6d9c0363a54c17ecdb816b15316c03e2cf668823773f9af8bd1699d2759d2961",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"4aa6cf9aa5c8e98f401dac603c6a10207509b6a07317676e9d6615f3d7103d73"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2013-03-12\n📝 Original message:Just a quick and dirty check if something bad actually happened. 430\ntransactions that were confirmed in the alt-chain, are not confirmed\nin the true blockchain. The good news is that as far as I can tell\nmost of them are low volume transactions destined for SD.\n\n7 transactions were true double spends, or to be more precise\ntransactions in which an conflicting transaction was confirmed in the\nnew chain (with their respective amount):\n\n12814b8ad57ce5654ba69eb26a52ddae1bff42093ca20cef3ad96fe7fd85d195 261 BTC\ncb36ba33b3ecd4d3177d786209670c9e6cdf95eb62be54986f0b49ca292714af 0.06 BTC\n7192807f952b252081d0db0aa7575c4695b945820adaf7776b7189e6b3d86f96 0.01 BTC\n355d4ea51c3b780cf0b10e8099a06a31484e0060bc140b63f3d6e5fb713ace5e 0.05 BTC\nb961bc0c663a46893afd3166a604e7e2639533522d9fec61fdb95eb665e86f5a 0.61 BTC\n138063e4bdb76feaa511f1e7f9c681eb468ef9140c141671741c965e503b84c6 1.62 BTC\na10bd194cdbf9aa4c12eb0b120056998a081a9b0d93d70570edff24dec831f90 0.81\n\nSo the one transaction that really hurt was the one published on\nBitcoinTalk. We're not yet out of the woods as some of the 423\ntransactions still have a chance of being doublespent, but looks like\nit's not that bad after all.\n\nCheers,\nChris\n\nP.S.: For a complete list of transactions see http://pastebin.com/wctJU3Ln\n--\nChristian Decker\n\n\nOn Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Gregory Maxwell \u003cgmaxwell at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Gregory Maxwell \u003cgmaxwell at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Peter Vessenes \u003cpeter at coinlab.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Can some enterprising soul determine if there were any double-spend attempts?\n\u003e\u003e\u003e I'm assuming no, and if that's the case, we should talk about that publicly.\n\u003e [snip]\n\u003e\u003e I agree it would be good to confirm no one was ripped off, even though\n\u003e\u003e we can't say there weren't any attempts.\n\u003e\n\u003e https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=152348.msg1616747#msg1616747\n\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.\n\u003e Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics\n\u003e Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:\n\u003e http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development",
"sig": "21aeb8e2dc3a07032315639d68c0d43afa652a30a9ee32b462c1a030afbdc377322b20b5f68e38fc5ec56dbafc39784bc2469e28186bf0932923b98f9bf8a7cb"
}