< * jonatack>
seems hard to improve your network score as a tor v3 service when there's only one other out there you can connect to :D
[bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #14425: Net: Do not re-enable Onion network when it was disabled via onlynet (master...do-not-reenable-Tor-when-disabled-via-onlynet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14425
ryanofsky: hebasto: the guy here https://reviews.llvm.org/D87629#2272676 suggests "If you want the assertion to exist in parallel to the Analysis and not influence it, don't annotate it at all." which seems like a good idea to me.
Currently, while making a non-manual transaction, it is not possible to persistently discriminate against combining dust inputs under a certain satoshi threshold. 'lockunspent' works, but only as an in-memory solution, and is tedious. Coin selection works, but it's semi-cumbersome and users might forget to use it over time. This allows users to be tracked trivially by unintentionally combining dust inputs from attackers with inputs from
my question is, would it be a good idea to modify IsMine() in wallet/pubkeyscriptman, and create a daemon argument like '-mininput <satoshi threshold>', ex. '-mininput 0.001', or is there a simpler way to achieve this? and if it's a good idea, what would be the best way to approach this, given that there's a legacy function, and a modern function?
motivation: raise the resource requirements of these attackers