Core PPA updated for 0.21

Now also including support for @Ubuntu 21.04 (Hirsute Hippo)

Preliminary analysis on the GCC 9 & 10 memcmp bug suggests it CAN affect Core & Knots, but does NOT affect the Bitcoin consensus code (phew).

If yours was compiled with GCC 9/10, use caution for now (or rebuild with GCC 8).

Affected: p2p & PSBT

Note that gitian builds use GCC 7 and LLVM, so should be unaffected.

PPAs for Ubuntu 20.04 (Focal) and 20.10 (Groovy) are affected (and will not be fixed immediately).

IMO if you're spending $849 for a dedicated full node machine, you should expect a POWER9 CPU in it.
Just saying.

(You should also make sure you're only buying node hardware made by reputable developers... But that's another topic.)

PSA: is written in C++, which is almost normal English.

If you're anxious to have deployed, reviewing the code can help.

BIP 8 (Versionbits v2):

Thanks to @[email protected] for merging my BIP 8 improvements and adding me as a co-champion.
Hopefully just in time for finishing it up for deploying to !

Recording of the BitDevsLA video conference where I discuss the recently discovered /PSBT vulnerability in (CVE-2020-14199)

I am a community-paid developer working on Bitcoin Core and many other parts of the ecosystem.

You can help fund my public Bitcoin work by:
1) Sending me bitcoins - contact me for a per-transaction/unique address!
2) GitHub Sponsors:
3) Patreon:

Due to keyserver reliability issues, I have updated my key hosted at to the latest version (and just extended expiration by another year).

Please ensure it matches the key you already have, and/or otherwise verify my key fingerprint from at least a few sources!

For reference, fingerprint should be E463A93F5F3117EEDE6C7316BD02942421F4889F

If you maintain software using libbase58 (typically -related software), please reach out to me privately with a link to your code (if open source) and a PGP key.

This relates to your project's .

Bug in , which can be a security vulnerability for hardware wallets and similar.
isn't vulnerable itself, but users of Segwit wallets should ensure they upgrade if affected, before *sending* any new transactions.
(The solution is to not use a new technical-internals feature Segwit introduced.)

Having an informal Zoom discussion in about 3 ½ hours at:
Tonal: 0·5 T.
UTC: 12:30 Midnight
JST: 9:30 AM
EDT: 8:30 PM
PDT: 5:30 PM

Topics include (but not limited to) , / , , or whatever else we decide to talk about :)

To join (in 3 hours):
1) Open the link below
2) Allow Javascript (sorry)
3) Click "join from your browser" in smaller text on the bottom
4) Enter a name or pseudonym & complete captcha nonsense

I've scheduled an informal Zoom discussion for this Thursday/Friday at:
Tonal: 0·5 T. (Fri)
UTC: 12:30 Midnight (Fri)
JST: 9:30 AM (Fri)
EDT: 8:30 PM (Thurs)
PDT: 5:30 PM (Thurs)

Topics include (but not limited to) , / , , or whatever else we decide to talk about :)

Now that has got the block subsidy reduction out of the way (another success!), should we take another look at a block size limit reduction UASF? 🤔

When should have been reducing block sizes to 300k, instead the community opted to increase them to 2-4 MB.

In the years following, when it became clear that was a mistake, the community still failed to act to fix it.

This may very well prove fatal to Bitcoin.

Show older
Bitcoin Mastodon

Bitcoin Maston Instance