Topic: [ANN] Zcoin (XZC) - Implementing ZKP privacy without trusted setup - page 284. (Read 663312 times)

n was taken from the factoring challenge as detailed in the article linked above. No new creation needed. We don't know what is p and q that was used to derive n.


Thanks! Will announce it on all our channels


Thanks for helping out and sorry to hear about your experience. We will honor bounties a lot faster now. The dev fund from Tim's funding is more than enough to cover Poramins coding for a year and to fund additional devs to help him. This doesn't even include any of the founders reward or the bounty fund so we are in good hands.

Hey guys !

Here is a new pool:

https://xzc.maxminers.net

We yet have to find our first block, testnet was working, so it should working fine on mainnet as well.

When XZC will be listed to Poloniex?
Predictions?

Funny coincidence that they are just going rampage now after Gary' fork failed.


They even called Gary the dumpster as a "nice guy". According to their logic, the one (Gary) who invested nothing and just dumped the coin is the nice guy because he "dumped and keep silent about it"   while investors and dev who invested time and money are scammers. ROFL, LOL.

It isn't hard to understand their motivation now. People like them are cancer of this world.

Trolls feed on action. There is a button called Ignore

The founder wallet address that was dumped and was removed was Gary's.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xzc/address.dws?aLrg41sXbXZc5MyEj7dts8upZKSAtJmRDR.htm

The other wallets in the Founder's Reward are more or less intact and that can be verified on your own. What is important is that the initial investors and dev are not dumping their entire stashes and are vested in the long term growth of the coin. We have already disclosed that these wallets belong to initial private investors and Poramin and a bounty fund.

The other wallet address that had quite a lot of deductions is the bounty fund which were used to pay various bounties which include (but not an exhaustive list) dev help (various people), community manager pay (Reuben), Glitch (website and logo design), ocminer (for pool code), blockchain explorer (chainz), coinpayments listing, our introductory video work and voice actress, various people for contributions on social media and maintaining other language communities, initial Zcoin giveaways for promotion and translation work.

Poramin's founder's wallet address which I am at liberty to disclose is: a1kCCGddf5pMXSipLVD9hBG2MGGVNaJ15U

With a bit of deduction, you can probably tell whose wallet is whose but we won't be making any official announcements on this at this time as we have not received clearance from the investors. What's important is that they are largely intact.

You can view the relevant history of Github here: https://github.com/zcoinofficial/zcoin/commit/6ad9bdf2ea1a01df2ce757eb842fb278f0f6582d?diff=split

The investors are Roger Ver, Tim Lee and one other investor who wishes to remain anonymous. Roger Ver and the anonymous investor were the initial investors together with some money from Startup Chile. Tim Lee is the new investor who is bringing in new investment (since the initial investment was largely taken by Gary) and also bringing the support of his team which we will see over the coming months.

As to why Founder's wallets are not 'anonymous' and how to prevent Founders from secretly 'minting' their own Zerocoins there's a lot of misunderstanding here and hope this clears it up. It is however ironic that when we do disclose further info on the founder's wallets we are then criticized for not being 'anonymous'.

How Zcoin and its Zerocoin implementation works for anonymity and how it affects Founders

Zcoin is anonymous by choice. This is a similar setup as Zcash and Dash. You can either choose to send coins like normal like Bitcoin or to anonymize your coins.
The anonymity in Zcoin works by burning up existing coins (minting Zerocoins) and then generating new coins (Zerocoin spend) with no transaction history. The zero knowledge proof ensures that you need not show people which coin you burnt but can prove that you burnt it that allows you to redeem. So you will get new coins on a new address with no transaction history.
Founder's wallets are built into the block reward and are directly given to them from the block reward. These are done in normal Coinbase transactions.
Founders can of course choose to mint their block rewards which will anonymize them and make it unclear which coins they still keep and which coins they have spent. But they have for the most part not done this (with the exception of Gary). If their founder's wallet is untouched, it is untouched. If it has deducted an amount, they have either been transferred out or minted Zerocoins. Once they have minted Zerocoins, they could be still kept by them or they could have spent it elsewhere but you can not tell which. This is where the anonymity comes in but I suspect if they do this, more FUD will come about.

Can Founders secretly mint Zerocoins?

No, they (and not including the dev) do not have access to the initial parameters and are subject to the same rules as everyone else.

Zcoin uses Zerocoin. Zerocoin's 'trusted setup' is purely two distinct large prime numbers which is normally referred to as p and q. Multiply them together and you get the parameter n which is used for the RSA accumulator setup. p and q needs to be destroyed. This is why we use parameters that were generated for a cryptographic challenge created in March 1991 which we believe is unlikely to be compromised. For further reading on how these parameters came about and the cryptographic challenge, you can view this article.

Zcash's setup on the other hand is much more complex and is >1 GB in length and their trusted setup and how they did it is a lot more complicated and there have been criticisms of it.

Of course having a trusted setup in general is not ideal and we are exploring ways to do away with this trusted setup entirely (as stated in our roadmap) but we believe our trusted setup is unlikely to have been compromised, and even if it was compromised, would be easily detected (see below). We note that there are some people who claim that they have done trustless setups for Zerocoin via RSA UFOs but this is impractical as it has huge performance hits. Another coin has claimed to find a way to modify this to make it usable but we believe this method is flawed as detailed here (https://twitter.com/secparam/status/449619152685522944) (Ian Miers is one of the original authors of Zerocoin and Zerocash).

Remember, neither the dev nor the founders have the trusted parameters as these were generated by a third party as elaborated in the article above so they aren't able to mint Zerocoins themselves. Even if they did, it will be detected as explained below.

How do we detect a breach in Zcoin's initial parameters or a vulnerability?

In the event of Zcoin's initial parameters being compromised or some other vulnerability is discovered, Zerocoins can be minted. However this is easily detected as total supply is still auditable.
Total supply of coins that should exist = (block number x block reward)
OP_ZEROCOINMINT function shows all mints + 0.1 mint fee
OP_ZEROCOINSPEND shows all spends of Zerocoin
So you know exactly how many Zerocoins have entered the Zerocoin pool and how many Zerocoins have exited the Zerocoin pool.
total supply >= all circular money - (#zerocoin_mint_tx + 0.1 for each tx) + #zerocoin_spend_tx

Remember an example of a bug that can cause things going haywire has been observed in Bitcoin (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Value_overflow_incident) but it was detected and fixed because the total supply was auditable.

This is not possible with Zcash as transaction amounts are obscured making it impossible to determine so if a flaw is found, this is a much bigger risk. This is the trade off for their added anonymity and we feel it's a risky one although they have attempted to mitigate this by multiple costly security audits.

Why the Fork away from Gary?

Without getting into the dramatic details, this mainly arose from a few key factors:

a) lack of transparency to Poramin on how the initial investor funds were utilised and how much was left to fund Poramin's dev (with Poramin doing all the coding work). The vast majority of the initial investors' funds (>90%) remain with Gary so if anyone thinks he was forced out unfairly should consider this.
b) lack of involvement from Gary on his duties with very little disclosure to the team as to how he was working to promote Zcoin despite numerous pushes to help out.
c) the dumping of Gary's wallet and the lack of spending on Zcoin marketing/dev and building the team. This lead to many good people who wanted to work or contribute help to the coin to lose interest when they were not remunerated fairly for their efforts.
d) questionable behavior in a number of specific instances that did not tally with Gary's assertions. I will refrain from going into details. You can dig them by yourself from Slack and BCT.

Happy New Year everyone and stay safe!!!!
 

Maybe. Someone will, one day, make a good coin based on the Zercoin paper, but it's unclear if this coin will be it.
Nah...coins don't get any sort of lasting pump just for going to Polo these days. That is a thing of the past

It seems that over and over we are told there will be an "announcement" made that will clear everything up. But this never seems to happen

This is a really good coin with big potential and it needs Poloniex very fast, that will pump the price very much.
Can we expect this coin on Polo soon?

I suspect a coordinated FUD campaign here (maybe funded by Gary Le, maybe not).

These trolls are so tiring... No need even to read the bullshit they post. CryptoRambler (better to call it "CryptoWhimper") is talking to himself, and listens only himself too, posting nonsense, without making any attempt at understanding the answers graciously provided to him...  
His posts are specifically meaningless, and are 100% malignant bullshit. Either he understands zero technology, or is just a paid fudder troll.

Such people deserve to be ignored, nothing else. They dont want to learn, dont want to understand, but just to broarcast some shit and mislead people. Its a pity others are listening to all that bullshit.

Bitcointalk sometimes is really tiring place, and reading those posts I feel like wasting my time...

P.S. dbt1033, man there is no reason you should join this meaningless "hater-fest" now. I am sure you have better things to do

Why everyone is whining like a little virgin? The coin was never that high in price, so that the devs bought lambo's from them... why so much crying? for a coin with so low market cap? There have been real scams out there with 100x more btc scammed... and yet.... here newbies cry like its the end of the world.

This is like a multi level marketing scam where the initial founders make all the money from the ponzi scheme. They tell everyone they recruit this, that Jim and Maggie sold 1 million of toiletries this year netting them 500k, and it attracts many to work hard doing the same, bringing in others, for materialistic reasons. Only new recruits pay up the lines or channels though. There is never enough.

Here the lure is in the "trusted" setup, but no proof can be given that it should be trusted and isn't simply defrauding anyone dumb enough to get involved. If ZCoin is anonymous at all, it is impossible to know if their trusted info can be trusted

Member when I accused the founders of dumping their coins and you ass holes yelled at me in slack?

Who's holding my bag I dumped at more than 10x the current price?

Gary and Poramin are both sketchy fucks and this code is open source.  Why the hell would you continue to listen to either of these guys bullshit?  Find another project, this is total shit.  Sorry for your losses, but you were warned.

The answer is the simple cold hard facts here with ZCoin. Because the private unlimited key was allegedly destroyed without an audit trail, the people that believe in this coin are indeed believing in something called blind faith.

The blind faith is that Roger Ver, or any other "investor", is being honest:

1. In acknowledging that they purposefully selected a way of disposing of the private shared unlimited coin minting key that left no audit trail. This is simply dishonest and not good business practice
2. There is no way of knowing if the growth of ZCoin is from mining or from use of this private shared unlimited coin minting key
3. The idea that knowing the balances of some accounts that cannot be proven to belong to anyone is a hole in the whole zero coin scam bubble.

If we cannot prove that the so called founders actually own and have possession of the accounts they claim to control, then the whole heartedly false blind faith belief that this is proof that the project is legit is a scam

FAIL

Gary left because this is a complete scam, he is a nice guy, and he did not want to say it in public because it not politically correct to do so.

Gary learned of it, sold his lot, kept his mouth shut, and is looking again to team with Poramin, who can remain in the shadows on a beach in Thailand.

Is it not possible?

<<
Because if you create coins out of thin air, the supply will go up, it's very easy to check. Why are you attacking that fact without any understanding of the underlying mechanism ?<>

Again my friend, if Roger Ver creates coins and does so in different anonymous accounts with a key that allows unlimited number of uses to create coins. That key is not guaranteed to have been destroyed by any auditable means.

How does anyone know which accounts are Roger Vers, and how to prove this is correct? Especially if coins are made out of thin air - prove it.

If there is no metadata or IP data to audit, how do you know in fact that any specific account belongs to any one specific person?

<>

It is simple: no one wants the amount in their bank account linked with their name. They immediately become a target for people to hurt them and take their money. Make sense?

Also, if they can have their accounts de- anonymized, then that tool most likely exists to do that to others. Not convinced that this coin has any financial privacy whatsoever, which may make it worthless because the concept is flawed

Both are very talented people I will try to contribute more soon too, especially with news from China.

Because if you create coins out of thin air, the supply will go up, it's very easy to check. Why are you attacking that fact without any understanding of the underlying mechanism ?


Complete scam because investors forgo their privacy to make funding more transparency ? LOL

I don't understand your logic at all, could you elaborate more?

Obviously having account balances publicly viewable is not full privacy, and could be traced simply by amounts alone in many instances, revealing someone's identity, especially during low volume times.

I still don't see why the devs couldn't make plenty of coins here in secret? According to zcoin logic, you shouldn't be able to see what coins came from or went to who. So how would you verify or how can you tell? Please explain