Still pending attestation

[Asthar0th]

Hello there.

I saw the pending attestation issue was closed but I've found I have the same problem.

Using the browser, when I verify an OTS file with the stamped file, I obtain the green flag of successfully verified file but if I click on the small "i" in the right upper corner, where you can see the details of the operation, there's still a Pending attestation: server https://alice.btc.calendar.opentimestamps.org

Can you check what's going on?

[petertodd]

A pending attestation is totally normal if you recently created the timestamp, as it usually takes a few hours for a Bitcoin transaction to be mined. When did you create the timestamp?

…

On November 16, 2023 1:26:08 PM EST, TVikg ***@***.***> wrote: Hello there. I saw the pending attestation issue was closed but I've found I have the same problem. Using the browser, when I verify an OTS file with the stamped file, I obtain the green flag of successfully verified file but if I click on the small "i" in the right upper corner, where you can see the details of the operation, there's still a Pending attestation: server [https://alice.btc.calendar.opentimestamps.org](https://opentimestamps.org/#info) Can you check what's going on?

[Asthar0th]

Hello Peter

this is occurring with an OTS file produced on 13/09/2023 so likely 2 months ago! But also with another one produced today at 2 p.m.

Thanks for your answer

[petertodd]

On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 12:19:46PM -0800, TVikg wrote: Hello Peter this is occurring with an OTS file produced on 13/09/2023 so likely 2 months ago! But also with another one produced today at 2 p.m.

Interesting! While the 2pm one today is to be expected, the one produced in Sept should not have happened. Would you mind uploading the OTS file for the september one so we can examine it? OTS files do not reveal anything about the document in question other than the document hash, so there is essentially no privacy risk in doing so. If you want you can email it to me personally, ***@***.***

[Asthar0th]

I've sent the file via mail, let me know if you've received it.

[petertodd]

On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 01:35:55PM -0800, TVikg wrote: I've sent the file via mail, let me know if you've received it.

Thanks! I got it. The file you sent me is a valid, fully upgraded, ots proof. It has all the BTC transaction info in it already so it should be validating just fine even without the OTS calendars. So unless you accidentally sent me the wrong file, there must be something wrong with your set. What exact OTS client are you using?

[Asthar0th]

Hi Todd

I used the web interface of the website, nothing special. I'm not using the shell commands, only the website homepage of OpenTimestamps.

[petertodd]

On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 02:03:22PM -0800, TVikg wrote: Hi Todd I used the web interface of the website, nothing special. I'm not using the shell commands, only the website homepage of OpenTimestamps.

Huh, weird. Sorry, but without the file being timestamped I can't easily replicate this on my side. You're welcome to send it to me privately via email; I won't share it further without your permission, and I'll delete it when we're done.

[Asthar0th]

yeah I understand but I can't send you because it's a forensic acquisition. I could send you the file I've timestamped today instead. For how long do you suggest to wait ?

[petertodd]

On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 02:16:58PM -0800, TVikg wrote: yeah I understand but I can't send you because it's a forensic acquisition. I could send you the file I've timestamped today instead. For how long do you suggest to wait ?

That's understandable. Let's wait 24 hours and see if the timestamp from today still has that problem. Fees are very high right now so timestamp transactions are happening slowly; the OTS calendars spend approximately the same amount of money every day. So if fees are higher, timestamp transactions happen less often.

[Asthar0th]

Ok, I'll write you tomorrow after 4 p.m. more than 24 hour the timestamp.

In the meanwhile the timestamp transaction are happening slowly, is the document timestamp valid?

It would be very useful if the timestamp could show the clock time not only the date, like the TSA ones.

[petertodd]

On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 02:41:59PM -0800, TVikg wrote: Ok, I'll write you tomorrow after 4 p.m. more than 24 hour the timestamp.

Great!

In the meanwhile the timestamp transaction are happening slowly, is the document timestamp valid?

The timestamp you emailed me is valid. So I suspect the issue you're seeing is just a glitch on the website.

It would be very useful if the timestamp could show the clock time not only the date, like the TSA ones.

Agreed. The reason why we don't show that by default is because Bitcoin timestamps could hypothetically be manipulated by miners, at least to a degree. Rounding them off to the nearest day is a safe default that is good enough for the vast majority of timestamp applications. However, that's not good enough for everyone. For more precise timestamps, I recommend manually checking the actual timestamp of the specific block that timestamped your document, and then checking that block timestamp against other sources. I have a project that re-timestamps Bitcoin blocks with the trusted timestamp scheme Roughtime: https://github.com/opentimestamps/restamp The timestamps restamp makes are traceable back to Cloudflare, among others. And those signatures are in turn timestamped with Bitcoin, allowing them to be validated in the future even if Cloudflare, etc., later leaks their private keys. Finally, on the TODO list is to add trusted timestamping to OTS directly.