## bitcoind – bitcoin core test configuration error

I tried to configure the bitcoin core test by editing the bitcoin.conf file with the required credentials.

Previously, before writing the test credentials, it was a full running node.
now the mistake is

The configuration for rpcport only applies to the test network when it is in the (test) section.

## core framework entity – EFCore 3.1 – Is it the best practice to save data in related tables?

I have the following relationship in EF Core 3.1.1 (Many to many)

``````public partial class Movie
{
public Movie()
{
Reviews = new HashSet();
}

public int Id { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }

public virtual ICollection Reviews { get; set; }
}

public partial class Review
{
public Review()
{
MovieReview = new HashSet();
}

public string Id { get; set; }
public string Author { get; set; }
public string Content { get; set; }

public virtual ICollection MovieReview { get; set; }
}

public partial class MovieReview
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public int MovieId { get; set; }
public string ReviewId { get; set; }

public virtual Movie Movie { get; set; }
public virtual Review Review { get; set; }
}
``````

And I have the following method to create a `Review`:

``````public Review CreateReview(int movieId, Review review)
{
var movie = _repository.Movie.FirstOrDefault(w => w.Id == movieId);

movie.Reviews.Add(new MovieReview { Review = review });

_repository.SaveChanges();

return review;
}
``````

the `CreateReview` method can perfectly create a new`Review` including relationships

My biggest question is if every time I need to insert in a table that has a relationship I will need:

1. Find the main entity / root (movie)
2. Create a new `MoviewReview` object
3. Associate the new `MovieReview` object with parent / root (such as: `movie.Reviews.Add(new MovieReview`)

Is this correct or is there any kind of shortcut?

## bitcoin core – Segwit with Multisig

I was analyzing a Bitcoin transaction that works with both Segwit and Segwit for multigrade scripts.
Here is the transaction: https://www.blockchain.com/en/btc/tx/80975cddebaa93aa21a6477c0d050685d6820fa1068a2731db0f39b535cbd369

Note that in indexes 0, 1 and 2 we have the unlock script in the archived scriptsig and in index 3 you are using the witness program. No problems so far.

What bothers me is why when I get the redemption script of indexes 0, 1 and 2 and run the ripemd60, sha256, I create a verification sum and code to base58, it generates the public address as we can see in the blockchain screen .com. But when I do the same using the redemption script found in the witness section, it returns me a completely different address, why does that happen?

Also, what is the scriptSig in index 3? How is it generated?

Example:

Redeem index 0 script:

``````522102194e1b5671daff4edc82ce01589e7179a874f63d6e5157fa0def116acd2c3a522103a043861e123bc67ddcfcd887b167e7ff9d00702d1466524157cf3b28c7aca71b2102a49a62a9470a31ee51824f0ee859b0534a4f555c0e2d7a9d9915d6986bfc200453ae
``````

The address generated from index 0 using my script:

``````3JUJgXbB1WpDEJprE8wP8vEXtba36dAYbk
``````

It is the same as the transaction.

Redeem index 3 script (Segwit):

``````5221021e6617e06bb90f621c3800e8c37ab081a445ae5527f6c5f68a022e7133f9b5fe2103bea1a8ce6369435bb74ff1584a136a7efeebfe4bc320b4d59113c92acd869f38210280631b27700baf7d472483fadfe1c4a7340a458f28bf6bae5d3234312d684c6553ae
``````

The address generated from index 3 using my script:

``````36aKiVksQRLKwByBYVz3KwquFcvHZkwroP
``````

``````3CYkk3x1XUvdXCdHtRFdjMjp17PuJ8eR8z
``````

## Security – Ask Marco Falke and other Bitcoin Core developers and / or reviewers

Dear members of the Bitcoin community:

I will briefly explain the reason why I am writing here. I am working as a PhD student in the operation of the cryptocurrency government. I am trying to document two different events / crises: the "The Dao Hack" event in Ethereum and Bitcoin Core CVE-2018- # 17144.
To do this, I conduct interviews with people involved in these events. So I contacted M. Falke for an interview and he replied that he would prefer that my questions be addressed in public to ensure that everyone benefits from the questions and answers. He proposed to exchange bitcoin stack, so I agreed to ask my question here.

I hope to get news from you. Of course, you can decide to answer only some of the questions, or decide to answer in private (see my contact and my PGP code in my biography). So do not hesitate to take some time to share with me your specific work experiences in Bitcoin and some of your views on your particular government. If you are afraid that it will take you a long time to write your answers, I would love to speak with you orally. This would really help me in any case.

Best regards

Questionnaire:

Preliminary questions

Q1: First, could you introduce yourself and get involved again in Bitcoin (when, how, why, etc.)?

General questions about your developer activities and the governance of the Bitcoin Core repository

Q3: Could you return to your activity as a lead developer? What does this bring you, what are your main motivations? Do you get financial compensation for working in Bitcoin? If so, can you give more details? If not, how do you divide your time between your profession and your volunteer work at Bitcoin Core?

Q4: Could you return to the operation of the github repository? You yourself have the rights of Commitment as responsible for quality control / testing. Can you explain how it happened? Did you ask yourself or another member wanted to give them to you?

Q5: Can you explain the criteria for the attribution and withdrawal of these commitment rights?

Q6: Can you describe the daily routine of a Bitcoin Core developer? What are the steps or processes that you respect every day?

Q7: Could you describe, based on your experience, the process that goes from proposing a group request, to your discussion, your test and, in the end, the merger and launch of a new implementation?

Q8: Does everything happen directly on Github or do you have other discussion channels to discuss between developers and collaborators?

Q9: Reviewing the RPs of other members is a crucial activity. Can you describe it accurately? How many people participate in this activity? Could you describe, according to your experience, the process you are following when reviewing the work of others?

Q10: Have you ever seen conflicting debates? In what terms are they resolved?

Questions about Bitcoin CVE 2018 # 17144

Q11: First, when and how did you notice the Bitcoin CVE 2018 # 17144 vulnerability? What did you do after noticing?

Q12: The Awemany error report (BCH dev.) Is addressed to P. Wuille, G. Maxwell – W. Van der Laan. It is then transmitted internally to C. Fields, S. Daftuar, A. Marcos and M. Corallo; Do you have any idea why these four people have been chosen?

Q13: Is there a specific procedure (formal or informal) in the management of errors and vulnerabilities in Bitcoin Core? If so, could you describe it?

Q14: These errors, discovered on September 17, were introduced after a series of modifications ranging from PR 443 (2011, 4 collaborators), to PR 10537 (2017, 5 participants). This underlines the time and long sedimentation of such a technical construction: what limitations does it imply to work on such a project? For reviewers, is it necessary to re-read / verify all codes or practices, necessarily "trust" the work that others will perform due to their limitations (cognitive saturation / division of work / discrepancies of changes)

Q15: It seems logical enough not to reveal to the public the severity of the failure (not to attract the attention of potential hackers) until you have ensured that the problem is corrected (i.e. responsible disclosure). Can you describe from your point of view the criterion of responsible disclosure?

Q16: Do Bitcoin Core members who discover / work privately on a specific defect or error have to follow a specific process? Has the Bitcoin Core team developed a formal framework of good practices to avoid potential conflicts of interest (for example: using their knowledge to obtain financial gains, etc.)?

Q17: In what sense, if we follow a rigorous version of the Code is Law, a transaction that spends twice the same UTXO allowed by the code (BC 0.15) could be characterized as pathological?

Q18: Such an error is not the first in Bitcoin (and probably will not be the last) and we can extend this to the "Error value overflow", since August 15, 2010, for example. How do you interpret the Bitcoin 2010 value overflow error and the fork made by Nakamoto and the first members of the Bitcoin community?

Q19: How are these situations different from what happened with the DAO Hack?

Final questions about the Bitcoin government

Q20: In Hard Fork and Soft Fork: Could you return to the distinction between HF and SF regarding possible changes in Bitcoin? In a sense, version 0.15 introduced an HF that was not activated because it had not been seen as such, right?

Last question: Q21: How do you rate / analyze the specific and innovative government behind Bitcoin? What are the different states and roles in the Bitcoin ecosystem, the different discussion channels, etc. for you?

## bitcoin core – How to configure rpcallowip with rpcbind – version 0.17.0

I am trying to understand the difference between rpcallowip and rpcbind.
I run bitcoind v0.17.0

In bitcoin.conf, I have:

``````rpcport=8332
rpcallowip=0.0.0.0/0
``````

which should allow all connections from any ip.

In the records, I have:

``````Binding RPC on address 0.0.0.0 port 8332 failed.
``````

What is rpcbind and what should I put in bitcoin.conf?
I tried the IP of my computer from which I want to connect
but I have the same error

Finally, what should I do with rpcbind if I want to upgrade to version 0.18 or later?

## bitcoind: is it possible to handle BCH transactions in the Bitcoin Core wallet?

I installed Bitcoin core on a server and it works fine for BTC. I would like to know if I can use the same server and platform to support BCH too?
I know that the addresses generated in Bitcoin Core can also be used for BCH. But how if I am able to handle BCH transactions on this machine, how can I differentiate them from BTC some?

## Calculate the core polynomial given the isogenic curve?

So I was trying to implement a CRS key exchange using a modular polynomial. I start with a curve $$E_1$$, for Elkies prime $$ell$$, I solve the roots of the classic modular polynomial $$Phi_ ell (X, j (E_1))$$. Then I could get the j-invariant $$j (E_2)$$ of an isogenic curve However, you should distinguish two possible isogenies with different Frobenius eigenvalues $$lambda, mu$$. Therefore, I have to somehow restore the isogenic polynomial to do this, which is suggested in (1), page 12.

Issue. Suppose $$E_1, E_2$$ of the same characteristic are isogenic given by $$phi: E_1 a E_2$$ where $$ker phi$$ it is small. Is it possible to calculate your core polynomial? $$chi in mathbb F_p (X)$$ Which collects $$ker phi$$ like his zeros? In particular, I was using SageMath 9.0, is there anything I can use in it?

(1) "CSIDH: an efficient post-quantum commutative group action," Castryck et al.

## Client – How do I get Raw Transaction Txid, Scriptpubkey using the Bitcoin Core console?

I just downloaded Bitcoin Core in Windows 7 and I am trying to create a raw transaction. When I wrote listunspent 0 or listunspent 1 on the console, I did not receive any messages (empty message) on the console. How do I get the raw transaction txid, scriptpubkey using the bitcoin center console?

## error handling: Does Asp.Net Core expose too much information for the required enumerations that were not provided?

I have a simple code for an input model:

``````public class MyClass
{
[Required]
public MyEnum? Type { get; set; }
}
``````

Now, if I don't send Type as part of json to the request, I receive this error from Web.Api:

"JSON value could not be converted to
System.Nullable`1 [MyNamespace.MyClass]. Path:
\$ .type | Line number: 2 | BytePositionInLine: 16. "

This really looks like an exhibition of information to me, although I can't see any real danger in exactly this information, but still, more than anything.

Is it of any real concern or is it okay?