17:01 <Lyza> selsta can we throw in #7260 <-- will include it in next release

bevanoff: I saw you mentioning here yesterday that you might start an attempt to implement multisig in the GUI wallet. I was the one implementing the thing named "MMS" in the CLI wallet, so I know a thing or two about multisig :)

If interested I am available for chat about your project.

Hello

.merge+ 7260 7295

Added

.merge+ 7245

...

Hello

FUK has bееn intеnsеly hostilе to Monеro for ovеr 4 yеars. Making minеrs for Monеro, making a pool for Monеro, making codе that Monеro copiеd, not using bugs to stеal millions from еxchangеs. Wow. Such grеat hostility.

selsta great tyvm

anyone else having issues with Tor tx-proxy?

lost all Tor peers on all nodes

not using tor but I have out peers over i2p. no in peers atm though, had 4 yesterday

I2P looks normal here, only Tor seems to have issues

ok, now I’m getting a couple Tor peers again

CLI wallet command 'sweep_all' does not sweep the whole wallet? Only the current account? So there is no command that simply empties the wallet, period?

you can’t make a transaction over accounts

You mean that's a protocol / transaction structure limitation, not only a missing command that I could program?

It is intentional.

(as far as I know)

Yes, I dimmly remember that, fear not I won't program something, but still the question whether the protocol would allow it or not is interesting ...

Somehow it's hard for me to believe that couldn't just grab everything and pack it in a single transaction.

monero-project/monero #2056 is usually good to read up on subaddresses

and monero-project/research-lab #7

as far as I can see, you could program that

but I don’t understand the math enough to 100% answer that :D

Interesting, thanks :)

It would allow it, it can't tell whether inputs are from the same account or not (thankfully).

"thankfully" meaning you would run into all kind of problems if it did?

Yes, like your privacy being invaded.

Ah, ok. I was expecting something on a technical level.

feather should be able to do it if you import a wallet to it

since it doesn't have accounts

Really? "No accounts" as in "no accounts yet", I guess? (It does take a mountain of work to implement that stuff, a whole hierarchy level.)

they have coin control for individual outputs, and no plans to ever implement accounts afaik

accounts are implemented inasmuch as the outputs will be recognized when importing a wallet, though

Interesting.

can also label outputs, is pretty nice

<selsta> anyone else having issues with Tor tx-proxy? <-- twitter.com/MinscTheRashemi/status/1348277018853519362?s=20

I still have a number of in and out tor connections

binaryFate: ok that makes sense, thanks

hyc: I regained them on some nodes, but not on all

use only i2p, lost all INC previously had many

selsta I have 141 peers connected now, none of them are from tor (no blocklist)

Hi Guys, Since I have been operating full node I m seeing a lot of bad behaviouron the network, i'm getting probed, scanned, tcp/udp malicious data packets, etc... I setup a sensor so I could figure out where all this shit is coming from and get an idea how consistant it is. Has anyone else noticed the nodes are exposed to all sorts of attack traffic? IS any of the data I log useful to

the devs?

IS there anyway the node can become hostile to bad traffic and just shitlist it? Is this better done at IPS appliance?

It's normal to get random cunts probe. You can ignore, it's background noise.

"Hi Guys, Since I have been operating full node I m seeing a lot of bad behaviouron the network, i'm getting probed, scanned, tcp/udp malicious data packets, etc."

People are always probing on the internet. If you can, close unused ports and restrict traffic to only tcp on the needed ports using your firewall, at least for your Monero node. When running a webserver like Apache2, if you add ModSecurity, the

OWASP Core Rules and use fail2ban, fail2ban will constantly be banning bots which are probing the webserver.

Port/protocal restrictions do help to secure nodes. If you wanted to put Snort or Suricata in front of your node, I doubt it would hurt, but I also do not know that it would significantly increase your node's security, if you regularly install patches for the node's OS.