Topic: [ANN][SUPERCOIN] Unique Most Advanced Anonymous Trustless Multisig Technology - page 8. (Read 288864 times)

Clearly this guy does not understand multisig tx and its purpose...

I've been a supporter for supercoin all the time, and still hold some coins. It's sad to see the competent dev left. Whether we find a good dev or not, I hope those who understand the concepts and codes can continue improving on it, as I believe this tech first implemented by supercoindev will be the future of the altcoins.

another thing you can check is that the address in the input had multiple outputs that total X amount to two addrreses (as long as X to both is identical) also outlines the R and S addresses. i can also share with you how to find it that way as well

Yes fastrabbit, I am glad at least some people really understand the concepts. Too many fake experts in this domain.

but it doesnt do that. it could. but doesnt. which is why the coin would need further developement, which is why the community wanted me here.

also thats not the only way to trace it. but that is the blatantly obvious hole in it right now.

Use tx amount to link the transactions?? This only shows you have no knowledge in the anon tx at all. Strasboug described this and an easy way to fix yesterday, you don't read anything else in this thread?? Please read it again.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9608926

Once you have canonical forms, then good luck to match these, especially with a relative big network. BTW, all anon coins (whether centralized or p2p) have the same thing. But this is easily fixable (many proposed ways) and it is not at all an argument that it is not anon (same stupid argument is that look in the same block to relate the unrelated transactions).

Oh well... clearly I am not here to discuss with an expert, but more doing teaching. Forget it. I won't waste my time.

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/super/block.dws?798861.htm this is the link to the M2 -> R block.

look at the address: CNCWvH4Bknr87a4PgDTRDasSxH4LnzX3iu   

if you look at its outputs.


e9a6f7d23b...   264.6595 SUPER   
CNCWvH4Bknr87a4PgDTRDasSxH4LnzX3iu   132.66 SUPER
CNCWvH4Bknr87a4PgDTRDasSxH4LnzX3iu   66.0 SUPER
CNCWvH4Bknr87a4PgDTRDasSxH4LnzX3iu   66.0 SUPER


you will see that it sends those exact values back to itself. along with two additional 66.0 values, one to the R of the SuperSend. 1 to the S of the supersend.

there is an address that does this in EVERY M2 -> block of the SuperSend process. the address that sends to itself not only outlines how much was send in the super send (oulined by the transaction that is listed twice in this case 66.0) but also the two addresses that recieve that number of coins that arent this address are the S and R addresses. this is a pattern that happens in every SuperSend transaction. and thats how you identify the S and R

OK, with your example, this is what I get:

M1:
SUJYKR95xYk6dCA8daZVzRSNvnBPbxViCk

M2:
SUwEUFuNiJHcof9Dhk8NvE4ZDQXqwAAi76

R:
Sh6BvAWyrMfL8W6wNZG3qx9pfZ8KRwnmpc

S:
SPrq8J6vRpy5QZz3AE1TxUiYvfeto3AhqY

G:
SYL272errqj7Laim4uVy4jZAf6mjJ2z78g

I see M1<->MS, S<->MS, G<->MS, and M2->R
tell me, where M2 and S or M1 and R are related? because they are in the same block in the chain? Don't make me laugh again

LOOK AT THE TUTORIAL I POSTED ON HOW TO DO IT. THERES STEP BY STEP IN THERE. I ALREADY EXPLAINED IT IN THAT POST. do you want me to repaste it? M2 oput lines both of ther addresses when it send to the reciever, and sends an identical amount back to the original sender and puts them right next to each other in the block. because the mutlisig takes 2x the amount of the original transactiona and requires a refund, it tells you both addresses in that M2 -> R phase block

?? You are in a dream? I did this many time. From M2->R where is the info of sender;'s address?? again go and read the post #2, there is a detailed example with all the data. I tested it a couple of times, see the similar thing.

go look at the link i posted before. the large post you quoted. i tell you how to do it in that post. i out line it and explain it. go look. the point is you dont need to trace it. all the information you need is in M2 -> R. it not only puts the address of the sender in there. but also the reciever. and marks them in a very obvious way.

You are completely wrong. This is what happened: S->MS->M1, M2->R, where S=sender address, MS=Multisig address, M1, M2 are two addresses from Mixer. You have no way to relate M1 and M2, because these are two independent addresses. So from R or S, how to do trace the tx??

The ignorant is fearless: how true it is! I won't waste more time replying your posts.

i know the multisig is so wallets who are the nodes for the transaction cant steal the coins. the multisig is fine. im agreeing wtih you 100% on that. its good. and solid and works. im saying that there IS NO ANON because both the sender address and recieving address can be easily defined in the transactions sent from the mixers. it doesnt hide them at all. they are both easily recognizeable and that is the problem. thats why i say there is no anon.

And remember that this is a p2p transaction, thus the need for cheat-prevention. If you use a centralized trust system, then you don't have to secure any of these, and this is why most other coins claimed to be anon are centralized mixing systems, which are a lot easier to be implemented. Actually Supercoin phase 1 implemented this system too.

There are 2 new and unrelated things in the supercoin: anon and cheat-pevention. The multisig is for cheat prevention, it is not for anon. You mixed everything and you don't even understand what the purpose of multisig. While anon is realized by the 2 unrelated addresses from mixer (a randomly chosen node).

I don't know you and I don't want to trash anyone, but please don't pretend to be an expert here, many people understands supercoin tech much better than you here. It's ok you want to takeover, but 1st learn and understand its concept, don't get just some surface and make irresponsible and stupid comments like these. Clearly supercoindev is way ahead and it takes time to learn the concepts and algorithms that he realized.

yes im fully aware that it is MIXING. my point is it inst doing anon. all of the addresses INCLUDING the original sender are shown in the transaction and can be identified with the method i stated. i didnt say it wasnt mixing,. in fact you repeated in more words what i was explaining was happening yet forgot to mention the part that by looking at the blocks you can tell who sent what to the mixer and where the mixer sent it. completely destroying the "anon". it isnt anon if i can see who sent it to the mixer and where the mixer sent it all in the same block.

 to find the source of the original super send, all i have to do is see which address in the block the mixer sends coins to and then check thier wallet to see if it is a refund = 1/2 of the transaction directly before it

you literally said nothing in your post. i wasnt saying it wasnt mixing. it IS mixing, thats my whole point. but it is mixing in a way where it is easy to see where everything came from.


the fact that the address started with a C was an example because in my example it did start with a C and i was trying to point out which address i was refering to. if i said mixer address and didnt point out which address it was people would have had a harder time following what i was saying. it doesnt matter what the mixer address is, the only point was to see how much the transaction was for. the address itself is not important. i fully understand what it is doing and i explained, if you actually read the post, how to find the full superSend transaction sender and revciever in the same block.

I really see no need a "dev" with no knowledge on this to "take over". Forget it, better let more comptent people like strasboug to take over, if he has time of course. Strasboug seems to understand details.


Please, don't make people laugh any more, do you have any knowledge about the multisig? You seem to be surprised that the multisig address starts with "C" and not "S", did you read anything in this thread? If you never read it, check the 2nd post of this thread, it has all the details and a detailed example. BTW, do you know for BTC the multisig address starts with which letter? (hint: not "1" of course).

First you show people your understanding of "anon", now "multisig", will this end at all or you just want to continue to act like a joker??

Before making stupid comments like this, do you understand anything about multisig and why it is used? You don't seem to understand anything there. Did you read at all the whitepapers??

I really feel sad that there are people so stupid like this, yet pretending to be an expert and comment on code. Man, go home and learn, before making these comments. Ignorant is fearless - how correct the old Chinese proverb is!

Let me briefly give every people a summary why supercoin use multisig and what is the purpose of those transactions in the "ghost" wallet or multisig wallet. It is difficult to learn these, just go over the whitepaper, supercoindev did a great job to write these in a very clear and concise way.

First you have 4 parties:
- sender
- mixer
- guarantor
- receiver

these are 4 different nodes in the network, where mixer/guarantor are randomly selected from all the nodes satisfying minimum requirements. The problem is that if sender sends to mixer, and then mixer send to receiver with different address, the anon seems satisfied, but the sender and mixer can cheat, especially when mixer can receive the coins first then don't send to receiver, or mixer send to receiver first then sender refuses to send to mixer. To solve this problem, multisig tech is used.

Multisig allows user to create a wallet based on any number of keys, and specify the "unlock" conditions. In supercoin's case, a 2-of-3 multisig wallet is used, meaning that the wallet is created with 3 public keys from 3 different addresses, and it requires 2 signatures with corresponding private keys to unlock the wallet (that is to send out the coins). So with this, no one can cheat as otherwise the cheater could lose more coins.

Now this is the process implemented by the supercoin:
Sender finds randomly 2 nodes, acting as mixer and guarantor. When all parties agree to do the transaction (mixer/guarantor will get commissions), each send their address public key to other parties (they keep their own private key of course). A 2-of-3 multisig wallet address is created. Then sender deposits 2x amount to be sent to the wallet, and mixer/guarantor each deposit amount of send to the wallet. Why they do this? this is the guarantee coins, so no party will cheat. Now once all deposited and verified, mixer will send to receiver the amount needed, he will post the transaction so the 2 other parties can verify. At the same time, he will create the tx for returning all coins and send the amount to his address, and he will sign the tx with his private key. Sender will verify the tx to receiver, once verified, he then sign the tx mixer sent, and all money returned and mixer receives his sent amount + commision. Other 2 gets warantee money back. Transaction completed.

If anyone tries to cheat, the false transaction will not be verified by the other two parties, and because of 2-of-3, they can take the guarantee money from the cheater, and return their own money.

This is a well thought and clever designed scheme. It is not for silly people like the pretended experts here. It is for real expert and competent dev. I can understand why supercoindev had problem finding competent devs to take over. The altcoin space has so many fake experts and they are so stupid.

Learn and not pretend!

I stand for Griffith. His team is established, they also have their own developments, which can be applied to Supercoin and will help to reach new highs. "Anon" or "mixer" - this question is not so important now.

I totally vote to pick Griffith and his team, there is simply NO better way for Supercoin at this point.
They are a dedicated team that is willing to help us, it would be not just foolish but suicidal for this community to reject them !

It does not matter if supercoin is fully anon or not, what matters is that the code is great ( as they confirmed ) and is working, on top of that it can be fixed to become more anon !

WE HAVE TO DO THAT, or the coin will die.

And with all of us giving respect to the old dev i have to say that even if he does not agree on some points. The community should vote and if needed go for a takeover ! The simple reason is that he stated that he has no time for the coin, so even if he does not agree on something, he will NOT do anything to fix it. So a new dev IS NEEDED or the coin will die.

The source code is out there, the new dev team said they are willing to take over the coin and develop it.

Now is the time for this community to decide ! Do you wanna see supercoin survive ? Do you wanna see supercoin have a future ? Do you wanna see supercoin grow. DECIDE NOW and state your vote !

I couldn't agree more. Think before you post people.


Would love to here your proposal. If the proposed change is something that changes how SuperSend fundamentally works, I think it is important that there is a consensus among the technical folk here that the change is for the good.

As for,


I'm not well attuned to know these working details of managing a coin.  I hope this is something that can be worked out, but I dont see it as being a huge hurdle for supercoindev.


I appreciate the layman's terms honestly, it's what the masses need. Talk tech with those who understand it, i.e. strasburg, CryptoCobain, and Kristov Atlas.  I actually think it would be very beneficial for you to discuss with these folk how you see the code & how it could potentially be altered to be a step towards true anon. Cobain & Atlas are recognized names & have a decent following. This exposure could be important depending on their view of our technology.  Super needs a rep to talk to these kind of people.  I gladly would, but the subject matter is far over my head.