- Polish whitespace and newlines; wrap comments at 90 chars
- Use package-private vs protected visibility when exposing
BitcoinFeeRateProvider constants for testing
- Document that 'maxBlocks' is dead code, but do not remove it yet, as
it would disrupt the process of getting this fix out quickly because
it would require operators to change the way they start their
pricenodes.
The API endpoint for fee estimations has been changed to one that delivers more accurate fee estimations.
This is a temporary solution, until a more decentralized approach is found.
Fixes projects/issues/27
When creating an offer the small QR code displayed for funding
was off by an amount that represent the mining fees. This was due
to the QR code being displayed simultaneously with the wallet
calulating the fee.
We fix the issue by listening to the data model `missingCoin`
value of the offer object, and updating the QR code image
appropriately.
Fixes#3666Fixes#4194
The table in the BondsView uses string sorting by default. This results in unexpected behavior when sorting non-string columns.
This commit adds custom comparators to the numeric columns to address that.
Fixes#3231
Add a missing bsqWalletService.isEncrypted() check and optional AES key
argument to the signMessage(..) call in ProofOfBurnService, analogous to
the BitcoinJ call to sign with an EC key in MyBlindVoteListService.
This fixes#3836.
and do not broadcast.
It is unclear why we receive expired data (some are very old), but a
manipulated node might produce that and as it only removed at each
batch process running each minute to clean out expired data it still
could propagate. Is an attack vector also to flood the network with
outdated offers where the maker is likely not online.
Should fix https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/issues/4026
and do not broadcast.
It is unclear why we receive expired data (some are very old), but a
manipulated node might produce that and as it only removed at each
batch process running each minute to clean out expired data it still
could propagate. Is an attack vector also to flood the network with
outdated offers where the maker is likely not online.
Should fix https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/issues/4026
Without the break statement, the execution would continue through the subsequent case clauses until it encountered a break, executing `checkArgument` calls meant for `REIMBURSEMENT_MAX_AMOUNT`. More specifically, the bug would cause a failed check in the case where `inputValueAsCoin.value <= 200000000` is false.
This omission is currently not disruptive, since the next case clause only contains a break. Also converted a few `return false` to breaks, to align with the rest of the switch statement.
