Why the zcash choice.
A similar question was posted before and this was jl777 answer:
Did the dev team ever consider using Zcoin over Zcash?
you must be kidding.why would we choose an obsolete 3 year old libzerocoin implementation that has significant bloat issues?
it would be like choosing an Intel 8080 CPU over Xeon
so no, never considered zcoin
I was thinking more of how parameter generation happens in both, I just read this comparison,
http://blog.zcoin.tech/zcoin-and-zcash/
If you would rather trust parameters generated by a single entity that has been caught putting backdoors into encryption, then that is your choice. Keep in mind that if anybody in the 25 years has gotten a hold of the RSA factoring parameters, it is compromised. What assurance is there that it hasnt been compromised?
As opposed to zcash which will use a carefully thought out parallel oblivious transfer method with a peer reviewed research paper where all participants need to be compromised.
We might as well compare zcash to ring signatures.
There is a lot of FUD against zcash parameters, but nobody has described to me how all the zcash parameter creation participants will be fooled into running the mystery laptop gift that just arrived in the mail. Or that they can all be bought. Or all their systems can be compromised.
It is not that any one of them can be compromised to compromise the parameters. ALL participants need to be compromised.
Good points, I'm still trying to get my mind around things. Which organisation created the Zcoin parameters 25 years ago? That is the key 'trust' point in Zcoin
you are putting your trust in RSA
the same one as in this article: http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/12/report-nsa-paid-rsa-to-make-flawed-crypto-algorithm-the-default/
Ok thats great, always straight to the point answers - i appreciate it..
