Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 6829. (Read 9724017 times)
February 21, 2014, 10:56:07 AM
Thats informative dev . .
February 21, 2014, 10:25:41 AM
send please link for new cpu miner. i not found(
What cpu miner are u using?
Here-> https://github.com/elmad/darkcoin-cpuminer-1.3-avx-aes/releases
you can get the windows binaries of my first release.
Can you paste link for non avx-aes cpu miner? My Phenom X6 run very slow on first xcoin-miner.
February 21, 2014, 10:22:54 AM
In reply to: http://www.reddit.com/r/DRKCoin/comments/1yit1a/using_coinjoin_for_anonymity_is_errorprone/
I'm posting this here, for everyone's benefit. Thanks!
First off, these are fantastic questions. The answer to implementing this in such a way where it is very difficulty to exploit is by adding cost and verification.
Here’s the gist of how I envision DarkSend to work in the long run. Some of what I’m going to mention is done, some of it I’m working on currently. I’d love some ideas on possible attack vectors on my implementation, so we can make it as bulletproof as possible.
Pools
DarkSend adds various extensions to the Bitcoin protocol for implementing transaction pooling. Like normal Coinjoin the pools take transactions in stages. The stages currently are:
POOL_STATUS_IDLE
POOL_STATUS_ACCEPTING_INPUTS
POOL_STATUS_ACCEPTING_OUTPUTS
POOL_STATUS_SIGNING
POOL_STATUS_TRANSMISSION
So the users relay these items throughout the network as the stages happen. After all items are gathered into the pool, the transactions are merged together into one, remotely signed and then broadcasted.
Masters
To defeat propagation problems, master nodes are elected each new block. They are responsible for being the authority of what goes into the joined transaction each session. This is done in a tamperproof way, but I think it’s not important to the discussion.
So what is the cost?
There must be a cost to using this anonymous network, otherwise like you say there will be issues with millions of accounts popping up. I’m not dead set on which solution(s) to implement, but here’s a couple ideas:
Burnt Identities
Higher difficulty shares to the current block would be mined and then stored in the blockchain permanently. Multiple of these would be used for each transaction and would be “burnt” when misused, causing the attacker to have to mine them again.
Verification?
To use the pools it will require unique unspend outputs, someone that wants to mess with the system would have to have a large pool of funds in many addresses. So to attack a pool with 100 slots, you would require funds dispersed to 99 addresses, on 99 nodes working in common.
Other possible fee-less solutions?
There is interesting research on protecting against sybil attacks that lends itself really well to a decentralized ledger, such as this paper:
http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/Workshops/InformationSecurity/slides/gamesandreputation.pdf
The idea is to build a social graph of the inputs and outputs of each entry and they should all know different people. If 99 of them all have the same “friends” that they associate with, then they’ll have to enter a different pool. Which will ensure the pool is not full of the nodes belonging to the attacker.
An application for machine learning?
I’m been making models for trading equities for over 7 years now. I ran a financial firm that sold the signals for a few years and I have experience with natural language processing using classifiers. So, I could make a classifier and actually embed it into Darkcoin to determine which pool a node should use, to separate out nodes that seem to be in common.
Other ideas?
I’m open to ideas on how to provide the best security to the network. I would love to hear what people have in mind.
I’ve been working on DarkSend about a month and we’ve already fixed the decentralization and propagation issues, this is just another bridge to cross in the future.
Thanks!
I'm posting this here, for everyone's benefit. Thanks!
Quote
Hi, I am Gnosis, the Anoncoin developer working on implementing Zerocoin. First of all, I think it is excellent that there is so much interest in developing a fully anonymous currency. I am not just a developer but also a user, or I will be when an anonymous currency exists! When coin creators compete, the coin users win!
However, CoinJoin has been around for a while, and it has not seen much use for anonymity. There's a good reason for that: it's not very anonymous.
Quoting my bitcointalk post:
However, CoinJoin has been around for a while, and it has not seen much use for anonymity. There's a good reason for that: it's not very anonymous.
Quoting my bitcointalk post:
Quote
CoinJoin has questionable anonymity compared to Zerocoin. The reason is that with CoinJoin, two or more users must somehow partner up and forge a transaction together. They communicate over a secure channel to do this. The coins are only mixed among these "partners." Picking partners you can trust is a significant obstacle: how can you know that your partners will "forget" the mixing that happened? One may try to repeat this 10 times with randomly chosen partners, but how can you know that your partners are not all just sock puppets of one malicious entity (on an anonymous network, it is trivial to create as many fake users as you want )? If that is the case, then your efforts are in vain.
Compare this with Zerocoin, where you put your coins in an accumulator, and they are mixed with the coins of all users who have put coins into that accumulator, since the beginning of Zerocoin. There would be a different accumulator for different denominations of Anoncoins (1, 5, 10, 50 ANC, etc.).
To put it simply, the more users' coins your coins are mixed with, the more anonymity you have.
I cannot speak to Darkcoin's implementation (or planned implementation) of CoinJoin since I cannot seem to find any specs or code on their Github or their site. If anyone knows, please point me to them.
I look forward to a practical and secure solution for anonymity from the DarkCoin devs! Compare this with Zerocoin, where you put your coins in an accumulator, and they are mixed with the coins of all users who have put coins into that accumulator, since the beginning of Zerocoin. There would be a different accumulator for different denominations of Anoncoins (1, 5, 10, 50 ANC, etc.).
To put it simply, the more users' coins your coins are mixed with, the more anonymity you have.
I cannot speak to Darkcoin's implementation (or planned implementation) of CoinJoin since I cannot seem to find any specs or code on their Github or their site. If anyone knows, please point me to them.
First off, these are fantastic questions. The answer to implementing this in such a way where it is very difficulty to exploit is by adding cost and verification.
Here’s the gist of how I envision DarkSend to work in the long run. Some of what I’m going to mention is done, some of it I’m working on currently. I’d love some ideas on possible attack vectors on my implementation, so we can make it as bulletproof as possible.
Pools
DarkSend adds various extensions to the Bitcoin protocol for implementing transaction pooling. Like normal Coinjoin the pools take transactions in stages. The stages currently are:
POOL_STATUS_IDLE
POOL_STATUS_ACCEPTING_INPUTS
POOL_STATUS_ACCEPTING_OUTPUTS
POOL_STATUS_SIGNING
POOL_STATUS_TRANSMISSION
So the users relay these items throughout the network as the stages happen. After all items are gathered into the pool, the transactions are merged together into one, remotely signed and then broadcasted.
Masters
To defeat propagation problems, master nodes are elected each new block. They are responsible for being the authority of what goes into the joined transaction each session. This is done in a tamperproof way, but I think it’s not important to the discussion.
So what is the cost?
There must be a cost to using this anonymous network, otherwise like you say there will be issues with millions of accounts popping up. I’m not dead set on which solution(s) to implement, but here’s a couple ideas:
Burnt Identities
Higher difficulty shares to the current block would be mined and then stored in the blockchain permanently. Multiple of these would be used for each transaction and would be “burnt” when misused, causing the attacker to have to mine them again.
Verification?
To use the pools it will require unique unspend outputs, someone that wants to mess with the system would have to have a large pool of funds in many addresses. So to attack a pool with 100 slots, you would require funds dispersed to 99 addresses, on 99 nodes working in common.
Other possible fee-less solutions?
There is interesting research on protecting against sybil attacks that lends itself really well to a decentralized ledger, such as this paper:
http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/Workshops/InformationSecurity/slides/gamesandreputation.pdf
The idea is to build a social graph of the inputs and outputs of each entry and they should all know different people. If 99 of them all have the same “friends” that they associate with, then they’ll have to enter a different pool. Which will ensure the pool is not full of the nodes belonging to the attacker.
An application for machine learning?
I’m been making models for trading equities for over 7 years now. I ran a financial firm that sold the signals for a few years and I have experience with natural language processing using classifiers. So, I could make a classifier and actually embed it into Darkcoin to determine which pool a node should use, to separate out nodes that seem to be in common.
Other ideas?
I’m open to ideas on how to provide the best security to the network. I would love to hear what people have in mind.
I’ve been working on DarkSend about a month and we’ve already fixed the decentralization and propagation issues, this is just another bridge to cross in the future.
Thanks!
February 21, 2014, 10:14:32 AM
There is someone trying to manipulate the price on Polo so that they can buy up as much as possible.
How do you figure?
February 21, 2014, 10:13:06 AM
Anybody found the values for networks.py to Darkcoin P2Pool?
If so I would like to add a node in FR/EU.
If so I would like to add a node in FR/EU.
February 21, 2014, 10:09:18 AM
There is someone trying to manipulate the price on Polo so that they can buy up as much as possible.
February 21, 2014, 10:07:49 AM
Things are starting to really accelerate for Darkcoin now.
Current Difficulty 197.89051534
Est. Next Difficulty 199.95825986 (Change in 1 Blocks)
Current Difficulty 197.89051534
Est. Next Difficulty 199.95825986 (Change in 1 Blocks)
February 21, 2014, 10:04:06 AM
Holy difficulty spike
Yeah, 1.5+ Gh added from pool.darkcoin.io coming back online.Finally <3
February 21, 2014, 10:03:35 AM
Holy difficulty spike
Yeah, 1.5+ Gh added from pool.darkcoin.io coming back online.Not exactly. I assumed most of those folks switched to a different pool. It came back up about 2 hours ago, but the network hash just went up about 1 GH in the last 15 mins.
I might have to switch back to mining max. Profitability is tanking unless value continues to go up.
February 21, 2014, 10:01:05 AM
can someone post a working config for 280x and 7950?
tried on my 280x it was getting only 800kh, i've read that it's supposed to get 2Mh?
thanks
tried on my 280x it was getting only 800kh, i've read that it's supposed to get 2Mh?
thanks
On my 7970's and 280x's I'm getting over 2MH/s per card with the following;
Code:
"intensity" : "20,20,20,20",
"xintensity" : "0,0,0,0",
"rawintensity" : "0,0,0,0",
"worksize" : "256,256,256,256",
"kernel" : "darkcoin,darkcoin,darkcoin,darkcoin",
"lookup-gap" : "2,2,2,2",
"thread-concurrency" : "22400,22400,22400,22400",
"shaders" : "0,0,0,0",
"gpu-threads" : "1,1,1,1",
"gpu-engine" : "700-1030,700-1030,700-1030,700-1030",
"gpu-fan" : "60-100,60-100,60-100,60-100",
"gpu-memclock" : "1500,1500,1500,1500",
"gpu-memdiff" : "0,0,0,0",
"gpu-powertune" : "0,0,0,0",
"gpu-vddc" : "0.000,0.000,0.000,0.000",
"temp-cutoff" : "95,95,95,95",
"temp-overheat" : "88,88,88,88",
"temp-target" : "84,84,84,84",
"xintensity" : "0,0,0,0",
"rawintensity" : "0,0,0,0",
"worksize" : "256,256,256,256",
"kernel" : "darkcoin,darkcoin,darkcoin,darkcoin",
"lookup-gap" : "2,2,2,2",
"thread-concurrency" : "22400,22400,22400,22400",
"shaders" : "0,0,0,0",
"gpu-threads" : "1,1,1,1",
"gpu-engine" : "700-1030,700-1030,700-1030,700-1030",
"gpu-fan" : "60-100,60-100,60-100,60-100",
"gpu-memclock" : "1500,1500,1500,1500",
"gpu-memdiff" : "0,0,0,0",
"gpu-powertune" : "0,0,0,0",
"gpu-vddc" : "0.000,0.000,0.000,0.000",
"temp-cutoff" : "95,95,95,95",
"temp-overheat" : "88,88,88,88",
"temp-target" : "84,84,84,84",
gonna try another rig with same cards
thanks anyway
February 21, 2014, 09:53:34 AM
Holy difficulty spike
Yeah, 1.5+ Gh added from pool.darkcoin.io coming back online. February 21, 2014, 09:51:10 AM
Holy difficulty spike
February 21, 2014, 09:46:02 AM
is coming a pump?
0.00218 4595.88366972 10.0190264
0.00218 4595.88366972 10.0190264
February 21, 2014, 09:45:26 AM
send please link for new cpu miner. i not found(
What cpu miner are u using?
Here-> https://github.com/elmad/darkcoin-cpuminer-1.3-avx-aes/releases
you can get the windows binaries of my first release.
February 21, 2014, 09:41:59 AM
can someone post a working config for 280x and 7950?
tried on my 280x it was getting only 800kh, i've read that it's supposed to get 2Mh?
thanks
tried on my 280x it was getting only 800kh, i've read that it's supposed to get 2Mh?
thanks
On my 7970's and 280x's I'm getting over 2MH/s per card with the following;
Code:
"intensity" : "20,20,20,20",
"xintensity" : "0,0,0,0",
"rawintensity" : "0,0,0,0",
"worksize" : "256,256,256,256",
"kernel" : "darkcoin,darkcoin,darkcoin,darkcoin",
"lookup-gap" : "2,2,2,2",
"thread-concurrency" : "22400,22400,22400,22400",
"shaders" : "0,0,0,0",
"gpu-threads" : "1,1,1,1",
"gpu-engine" : "700-1030,700-1030,700-1030,700-1030",
"gpu-fan" : "60-100,60-100,60-100,60-100",
"gpu-memclock" : "1500,1500,1500,1500",
"gpu-memdiff" : "0,0,0,0",
"gpu-powertune" : "0,0,0,0",
"gpu-vddc" : "0.000,0.000,0.000,0.000",
"temp-cutoff" : "95,95,95,95",
"temp-overheat" : "88,88,88,88",
"temp-target" : "84,84,84,84",
"xintensity" : "0,0,0,0",
"rawintensity" : "0,0,0,0",
"worksize" : "256,256,256,256",
"kernel" : "darkcoin,darkcoin,darkcoin,darkcoin",
"lookup-gap" : "2,2,2,2",
"thread-concurrency" : "22400,22400,22400,22400",
"shaders" : "0,0,0,0",
"gpu-threads" : "1,1,1,1",
"gpu-engine" : "700-1030,700-1030,700-1030,700-1030",
"gpu-fan" : "60-100,60-100,60-100,60-100",
"gpu-memclock" : "1500,1500,1500,1500",
"gpu-memdiff" : "0,0,0,0",
"gpu-powertune" : "0,0,0,0",
"gpu-vddc" : "0.000,0.000,0.000,0.000",
"temp-cutoff" : "95,95,95,95",
"temp-overheat" : "88,88,88,88",
"temp-target" : "84,84,84,84",
February 21, 2014, 09:41:20 AM
Jumping on this now after a while of other altcoin mining.
Regarding p2p pool mining, why is there such big difference between predicted payout when mining with approx. the same hashrate?
See my example:
And if you look at the blockexplorer, the predictions seem quite close to the truth.
Is it the hashrate calculation that is way off in some cases?
Regarding p2p pool mining, why is there such big difference between predicted payout when mining with approx. the same hashrate?
See my example:
Code:
Adress Hashrate Predicted payout
Xxxxxxxxxxx 18.43 MH/s 352.81 KH/s 1.91% 0.44183695 DRK
Xxxxxxxxxxx 18.43 MH/s 563.84 KH/s 3.06% 4.37893675 DRK
This is taken from the p2p mentioned in the first post.Xxxxxxxxxxx 18.43 MH/s 352.81 KH/s 1.91% 0.44183695 DRK
Xxxxxxxxxxx 18.43 MH/s 563.84 KH/s 3.06% 4.37893675 DRK
And if you look at the blockexplorer, the predictions seem quite close to the truth.
Is it the hashrate calculation that is way off in some cases?
Quote
Payout logic
Each share contains a generation transaction that pays to the previous n shares, where n is the number of shares whose total work is equal to 3 times the average work required to solve a block, or 8640 (= 24 hours of shares), whichever is smaller. Payouts are weighted based on the amount of work each share took to solve, which is proportional to the p2pool difficulty at that time.
The block reward (currently 25BTC) and the transaction fees are combined and apportioned according to these rules:
A subsidy of 0.5% is sent to the node that solved the block in order to discourage not sharing solutions that qualify as a block. (A miner with the aim to harm others could withhold the block, thereby preventing anybody from getting paid. He can NOT redirect the payout to himself.) The remaining 99.5% is distributed evenly to miners based on work done recently.
In the event that a share qualifies as a block, this generation transaction is exposed to the Bitcoin network and takes effect, transferring each node its payout.
Each share contains a generation transaction that pays to the previous n shares, where n is the number of shares whose total work is equal to 3 times the average work required to solve a block, or 8640 (= 24 hours of shares), whichever is smaller. Payouts are weighted based on the amount of work each share took to solve, which is proportional to the p2pool difficulty at that time.
The block reward (currently 25BTC) and the transaction fees are combined and apportioned according to these rules:
A subsidy of 0.5% is sent to the node that solved the block in order to discourage not sharing solutions that qualify as a block. (A miner with the aim to harm others could withhold the block, thereby preventing anybody from getting paid. He can NOT redirect the payout to himself.) The remaining 99.5% is distributed evenly to miners based on work done recently.
In the event that a share qualifies as a block, this generation transaction is exposed to the Bitcoin network and takes effect, transferring each node its payout.
this p2pool 12 hours.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool
February 21, 2014, 09:32:04 AM
can someone post a working config for 280x and 7950?
tried on my 280x it was getting only 800kh, i've read that it's supposed to get 2Mh?
thanks
tried on my 280x it was getting only 800kh, i've read that it's supposed to get 2Mh?
thanks
this works for me solo on 7950... set intensity in program after to around 17 for near 2m/hash this is for the sgminer first released for GPU
darkcoin.bat
setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT 100
setx GPU USE SYNC OBJECTS
sgminer.exe --kernel darkcoin -o http://127.0.0.1:1234 -u user -p pass --no-adl
darkcoin.conf
server=1
rpcuser=user
rpcpassword=pass
rpcport=1234
listen=1
February 21, 2014, 09:31:30 AM
Jumping on this now after a while of other altcoin mining.
Regarding p2p pool mining, why is there such big difference between predicted payout when mining with approx. the same hashrate?
See my example:
And if you look at the blockexplorer, the predictions seem quite close to the truth.
Is it the hashrate calculation that is way off in some cases?
Regarding p2p pool mining, why is there such big difference between predicted payout when mining with approx. the same hashrate?
See my example:
Code:
Adress Hashrate Predicted payout
Xxxxxxxxxxx 18.43 MH/s 352.81 KH/s 1.91% 0.44183695 DRK
Xxxxxxxxxxx 18.43 MH/s 563.84 KH/s 3.06% 4.37893675 DRK
This is taken from the p2p mentioned in the first post.Xxxxxxxxxxx 18.43 MH/s 352.81 KH/s 1.91% 0.44183695 DRK
Xxxxxxxxxxx 18.43 MH/s 563.84 KH/s 3.06% 4.37893675 DRK
And if you look at the blockexplorer, the predictions seem quite close to the truth.
Is it the hashrate calculation that is way off in some cases?
February 21, 2014, 09:22:53 AM
can someone post a working config for 280x and 7950?
tried on my 280x it was getting only 800kh, i've read that it's supposed to get 2Mh?
thanks
tried on my 280x it was getting only 800kh, i've read that it's supposed to get 2Mh?
thanks
February 21, 2014, 09:10:07 AM
Hello All,
Yesterday, I bought a handful of DRK, and I am responsible for some of the rise in price.
Suppose I put 1,000 drk into such pool, and invited 10 people that are trusted by the community or myself, each gets 100 drk and is required to open 10 wallets to 10 people he/she trusts and transfer 10 drk each. each of them will them be required to open 10 wallets and transfer 1 drk to each. and so for
Within the third interaction, we reach 1,000 users... and thus the word spreads.
I know this probably sounds naive, but if we had a structured system to verify that the users who get the coins really open new accounts for new people, that could be great. If there is no such system, then social ties/trust is a way to go.
Having coins transfered within minutes, and darkcoin-qt installed and synchronized in minutes is a great advantage that will evaporate over time. Why not be the first coin to tun this disadvantage into an advantage?
No I don't think. I just hate the pyramids schema... Yesterday, I bought a handful of DRK, and I am responsible for some of the rise in price.
Suppose I put 1,000 drk into such pool, and invited 10 people that are trusted by the community or myself, each gets 100 drk and is required to open 10 wallets to 10 people he/she trusts and transfer 10 drk each. each of them will them be required to open 10 wallets and transfer 1 drk to each. and so for
Within the third interaction, we reach 1,000 users... and thus the word spreads.
I know this probably sounds naive, but if we had a structured system to verify that the users who get the coins really open new accounts for new people, that could be great. If there is no such system, then social ties/trust is a way to go.
Having coins transfered within minutes, and darkcoin-qt installed and synchronized in minutes is a great advantage that will evaporate over time. Why not be the first coin to tun this disadvantage into an advantage?
Jump to: