https://github.com/Coldcard/firmware/blob/c3f7529a9a57133e05294269c4622fa81fc268ee/releases/ChangeLog.md
Also, I'm not about to do a full security audit for them, but this update does NOT appear to sufficiently fix things even for Mk4/5... (but I could be wrong) (Happy to provide details to or verified Coinkite devs)
Bad idea
Quite a few people suggesting/using dice to mitigate the Coldcard vulnerability. Note that common dice are not designed to be cryptographically secure. If you are going to do this, you probably should buy precision casino dice. And even then, have another source of entropy.
Exactly. Validity is an important requirement. And nodes defined that. Which includes BIP110.
"longest chain wins" is the bcash mantra. Go back to bcash if you're not ready to accept that nodes are in control
Complete nonsense
No, UASF is for everything now. Miners don't get to make the decisions.
It's nonsense
I support BIP110 because Bitcoin is essential to the future of mankind and the last 8 months have proven it to be the best immediate solution to the critical injury inflicted by Core 30.
Bitcoin has had proper spam filters for 17 years, NOT just fees
Knots already did years ago
And we shouldn't fork off Taproot, just close the vulnerabilities it introduced
Witness is part of the block....
Removing rules is a hardfork. That includes scheduled rules like subsidy halvings, and yes, even BIP110. Rejecting BIP110 is a contentious hardfork attempt. And unlike softforks, hardforks need consensus to succeed. There is no consensus on rejecting BIP110.
Welcome to Luke Dashjr spacestr profile!
About Me
Roman #Catholic, husband, father of 11 children, #Bitcoin Core developer, and CTO @npub1qtvl2em0llpnnllffhat8zltugwwz97x79gfmxfz4qk52n6zpk3qq87dze ; INTP; I condemn fake "Catholics", cryptobros & pedos; see full bio
Interests
- No interests listed.