Unlock time's dual interpretation causes conflict in Feb 2019 with recent code changes

[who-biz]

See below

[moneromooo-monero]

Thanks for the examole at last. It is incorrect, you are simply misunderstanding how it works. Open a new bug IF you come up with an actual bug (test it first, since it seems all your reports are wrong). I'll ignore the paragraphs of baiting.

+invalid

[who-biz]

No one has explained how the ambiguity does not cause conflicts. If you’re going to claim that this is invalid, or that I am misunderstanding — shouldn’t there be a reason for such a conclusion?

The basis that the encoded representation in my example does not end in FF01 (Read left-to-right) doesn’t detract from the fact that any unlock time which does, would exhibit that behavior.

Should I open a new issue for this, and exclude the ar.stream_good() catalyst? I mean, ignoring the fact that the eof bit could be set, and the good() check wouldn’t catch it.

[who-biz]

You should probably go and work on your 9 vulnerabilities and come back when you have something different to go chasing shadows about.

Particularly tasteful way to say: “Go screw yourself and have fun cleaning up our mess.”

Seems that you have an inability for empathy except when you need it from others... Still, I hope this kind of conduct between developers comes to an end. The atmosphere your group creates is absolutely toxic.

[HorribleGelatinousBlob]

You said there was an issue, repeatedly. there is no issue. you have a history of fearmongering and fudding monero. Taking all this into consideration, go screw yourself seems appropriate

[HorribleGelatinousBlob]

And I should also point out you are not "cleaning up our mess". Monero, nor any of the contributors involved in monero owe you anything. It is your responsibility to make sure your shitcoin is kept up to date if you don't want to be left out in the cold when vulnerabilities are disclosed

[who-biz]

I have more history contributing to Monero than doing any sort of fear-mongering. Further, I’ve been cursed at, flamed, and slandered by you and others for doing what? Disclosing vulnerabilities properly in good faith?

Do you guys do anything in good faith? I don’t sink to the levels you’re operating on.

Edit: I don’t mean that to include people who have been reasonable. I’ll name selsta and SGP as two who have been rational, and gone further than simple efforts to mislead/dodge questions.

Answering my questions that pertain to this issue would be the preferred and productive road to take.

Food for thought: nobody defends the truth this way.

[HorribleGelatinousBlob]

what truth? you have been told you don't know what you're talking about. simple as that. the only truth here is that you have claimed an issue exists when it doesn't. You have not disclosed any vulnerabilities. people that do that don't get abused and cursed at. just you. that would tell most normal people that it is in fact you who is the problem. food for thought.

[who-biz]

And no one has explained a rationale behind the opinion that this is not an issue. Wonder why.

[lobstachub]

because you’re an ignorant child who is babbling nonsense.

your intentions is to bait into some nonsense. You are best left ignored

[HorribleGelatinousBlob]

How many times must you be told. your understanding of how a varint is serialized is wrong. There is nothing more to discuss. it is not an issue, because what you think is an issue is based on you misunderstanding how the code works. if you can demonstrate that there is a problem, reopen an issue and post an actual working proof of the issue. until then, there is nothing more to discuss

[who-biz]

Lol. No one told me that. I told you in my post.

Since we’re so hung up on variable length integers and my understanding, it’s safe to say that you guys all understand them very well.

Maybe someone could tell me how block height is encoded in this field, then, too? Also a varint? :)

[lobstachub]

Get a formal education

[who-biz]

@tchun Please stop the incessant typeface vomiting. Or use your actual account instead of a sock puppet for disparagement. You’re looking like a bytecoin sock puppet right now.

[lobstachub]

Child please. You’ve wasted enough people’s time.

[HorribleGelatinousBlob]

moneromoo said you don't understand

Thanks for the examole at last. It is incorrect, you are simply misunderstanding how it works.

jtgrassie also said you don't understand

You have just demonstrated your complete lack of understanding

I also am telling you you lack understanding. But it is not the responsibility of monero or it's contributors to educate shitfork plebs who demand answers. You now just sound like a child throwing a tantrum. I hope you do not expect to be taken seriously in the future.

[who-biz]

Thanks, Mr. Parrot. No, you guys don't care to explain things like this because you prefer simply saying "you don't understand". It's a cop-out. Look at how much time you're spending doing this instead of eradicating any "misinformation" I may be accidentally spreading. Instead, you prefer to avoid actually answering the questions, and proceed with ad hominem attacks which -- lets be honest -- are a sign of weakness. This leaves one to wonder why we would not want to answer the questions, despite criticizing others for their lack of understanding.

So again: I'll ask that you explain how timestamps within the unlock_time field are kept from conflicting with block_height values in interpretation. Specifically if an EOF is reached in the middle of that field's stream, or through conflict in the varint representation of a timestamp versus the size_t representation within block height.

[hyc]

@who-biz You clearly decoded the varints incorrectly. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. The obvious thing for you to do is go look up what the encoding rules of varints actually are. Not to keep haranguing everyone here to teach you how the code works.

[HorribleGelatinousBlob]

why do we need to eradicate your misinformation? just stop talking rubbish. you have been told go go away and do your research. there are many resources on the internet that will show you how this is done. don't want us spending time telling you that you are wrong. fine. stop posting rubbish.

as for explaining how unlock times are differentiated from block heights. read the code and you will find the answers you seek

[who-biz]

@hyc I'm agreeing with you that those encodings are incorrect. It says so in my original post.

But you know what, you guys are probably right! I've seen the error in my ways in asking direct questions. Clearly, no one here is reliable for disambiguating code or concepts. I guess from the outside, this maybe looks like you guys are the wrong people to ask questions. It's ok. I will source my information from elsewhere. I recommend others do the same.

[iamamyth]

Next time, you might want to read the github index page:

Built for developers
GitHub is a development platform inspired by the way you work. From open source to business, you can host and review code, manage projects, and build software alongside 36 million developers.

It's not meant for teaching people how code works, or how to code; it is for facilitating actual project development.

[HorribleGelatinousBlob]

This is what we have been saying. This is an issue tracker. This is not a classroom to answer questions you demand answers to. Finally you have decided to seek answers elsewhere, which is what we have all been saying for days. But the joy of open source code is that you can read the code and have your questions answered. Seems to me you just have not done that. So why would you expect anyone here to answer your questions, when from all appearances you appear to have put in none of your own effort. Seems all your effort is spent on arguing with people who don't really care about your opinion.

[who-biz]

I still strongly feel this is an issue. This wasn't an attempt to learn from you guys. It was an attempt to alert you to an issue. You instead, focused on a point that is irrelevant to the conceptual core of this issue. I agree, you all should be working to fix this, not questioning semantics in order to divert.

[HorribleGelatinousBlob]

thus is getting silly now. what you feel doesn't matter. show an issue. people dismiss you cause you say there is an issue, yet demonstrate a lack of understanding of how the code works and ask people to explain it to you. that makes your feelings invalid. no one is going to investigate any feelings from someone who doesn't know how the code works. you are just wasting yours and everyone else's time. I should also point out the programming in general is not subject to feelings. either something works or it doesn't. to that end, there appears to be no issue with how the code works, otherwise you would be able to show how it doesn't work. constantly replying here saying you feel like something is wrong is just pointless for the reasons I just mentioned

[who-biz]

@HorribleGelatinousBlob why are you even polluting this discussion? You’re not a contributor to Monero.

[lobstachub]

Why are you still replying to this when it’s closed

[HorribleGelatinousBlob]

babysitting the children is my contribution to monero.

[who-biz]

Because the issue still persists. Its okay. I’ll open a new one, if that’s what we prefer.

[HorribleGelatinousBlob]

the issue was closed as invalid because you demonstrated a lack of understanding of how the code works and could not identify an issue. You are free to open another issue, however without clearly articulating the issue, it will end in the same way

[who-biz]

I've a feeling it will end the same way, regardless :)