[ANN][X11][PoS only] NinjaCoin - Ninja Launch - Hard fork 1.2.2 - page 19.

kryptologist

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 500

@kryptographer

Quote from: richiela on June 16, 2014, 02:39:03 PM

We will be shutting down the market due to the dev fork - the wallet will be open for anyone that wishes to withdraw on the current fork. Again we WILL not be taking the new wallet or fork. If you do not understand why, please read the posts above. There is no way for us to undo things if coins disappear. These were coins that have already been traded and there is no way to recoup the value gained/loss by them.

@kryptologist - that is a valid suggestion, but I want to re-iterate that we do not police coins. There is also no way for us to know if that value changes because the ANN is constantly changing which is why we rely on programmatic approaches like moneysupply. feel free to PM me to brainstorm about more automated things we can do though, i'm always looking for more ideas. I understand your concern but the damage was done way before the coin max limit was hit; the order books are not that deep. It would not have prevented this.

@stenull - I guarantee you if any coin destroys their marketcap and then wants to reactively roll back the blockchain, there isn't an exchange in the world that's going to follow that fork

I do sympathize with people that got scammed by this coin. We got scammed as well and have our associated costs but this is the unfortunate dark side of crypto currencies. We rely on the community as much as you guys rely on us to make crypto safer for everyone.

Thanks
Richie

Do you think it would work to set an internal max total supply variable and check that against the network to catch it early? If a coin developer wants to change total supply it has to be in the open, the exchanges must know about it first? It would prevent ninjas from pulling such moves and I don't see the downside of it.

chrissibel

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Got Crypto?

JUST MINE KORE INSTEAD hehe Grin

Spartan10

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Lol, this is big failure dev team. I'm happy that I don't buy it.

chrissibel

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Got Crypto?

EVERYONE CHILL. THIS IS NOT BITTREX'S FAULT. BLAME THE SHITTY NINJA COIN DEV!

coiner5

newbie

Activity: 16

Merit: 0

Quote from: Stenull on June 16, 2014, 02:18:33 PM

Quote from: rudolsen on June 16, 2014, 02:06:58 PM

Quote from: richiela on June 16, 2014, 12:59:33 PM

This is an unfortunate case where the dev screwed up and/or screwed us all.

We will NOT be taking a fork of this coin. The damage is already done here. Our systems worked as designed and our balances match including checking the moneysupply. I would like to remind everyone that Bittrex is an exchange. Our responsibility is to ensure that when you trade xxx A for yyy B, that it happens safely. We do not police what is being traded.

Again, we will not be taking a new wallet or fork of this coin. The damage done is irreparable and would have been after the first trade. The market will remain open and we will let this die its natural death like so many coins before it.

Thanks
richie@bittrex

If I understand it clearly, you stay on unofficial blockchain and hold my money on it (even without value). I'm not make any transactions or trade before block 14000. May I request private key of wallet where you keep my money, so I can import them into official fork and make them valid. I know the answer. Should I expect from you same behavior as reaction on any coin fork you listed in future? ..if you decide not update wallet and let trading in wrong one? At least can you provide wallet link of your "new" NinjaTrexCoin so I can withdraw and keep all my original NJAs out of your "exchange" as memento of this trust failure? Could you mark all coin pairs which you are provide to trade and are on unofficial forks, so I can easily recognize them/can't make you rich on fees? Answer to yourself, damage was done.

Good point! Shouldn't exchanges follow the real fork?
What if BC or DRK would to fork?? Would you just stay on broken fork and don't give a fuck?

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but you are assuming the "real" fork is the hard fork released in 1.2.0 and the other fork is "broken". That is more of an opinion than a fact. The original client as released was designed to do exactly what it did. It has been in the wild for days and the chain is much longer than the forked 1.2.0 chain. Just because most people didn't understand how the original client worked doesn't mean the chain it built is invalid.

If you disagree, imagine everyone switched to the 1.2.0 chain. But two weeks later the new trojan inserted by the dev into 1.2.0 is discovered and it is realized that he profitted again starting at block 14000. So now a 1.3.0 forked version is released that resets everything back to block 14000. But you had bought coins on the 1.2.0 chain. Which was is the "real" chain now?

Anyway this is my last point in this thread. Too much time spent on a shitcoin.

kryptologist

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 500

@kryptographer

Quote from: coiner5 on June 16, 2014, 02:23:50 PM

Quote from: kryptologist on June 16, 2014, 02:08:54 PM

Ninja is dead but I just want a simple answer on this:

At the time of adding a new coin on the exchange, you can also add a value in your internal database for the max total supply of coins. You can then use this to detect if there are more coins on the exchange than there should be total supply. If this is detected the market is immediately suspended. It would be a very simple check and could be implemented with little effort. In fact you could check this value with the network and suspend the market even before all those coins got put on the exchange. So I believe Bittrex could have caught this if they had better checks. I am not blaming Bittrex, I am blaming the developer but saying that Bittrex should be able to catch these things.

Such a change would be a good precaution and I think it's likely Bittrex will consider adding it. However you don't seem to have grasped the concept of max number of total coins yet. The number of coins in the ANN posting is supposed to match the number of coins the source code will produce. In most cases that number matches, in this case it didn't because the dev lied about the max number.

So a precautionary check like the one you suggest would be a good idea, but the number stored in the database could get out of date. A coin could legitimately update their source code to produce more coins than originally intended, and therefore such a precautionary check could halt trading in a legitimate coin.

It's a trade-off that Bittrex will have to decide on, it's not a completely obvious choice to make (although I think they should add it, the trade-off seems highly in favor of it).

I grasp the concept of total supply, I think it's just that producing more coins than total supply is BS in my opinion and I wouldn't support such a coin that "legitimately" did so. I think Bittrex should add such a check and if a coin is going to make a major change like changing total supply the exchanges should be made aware of it in advance anyway.

richiela

hero member

Activity: 937

Merit: 1000

We will be shutting down the market due to the dev fork - the wallet will be open for anyone that wishes to withdraw on the current fork. Again we WILL not be taking the new wallet or fork. If you do not understand why, please read the posts above. There is no way for us to undo things if coins disappear. These were coins that have already been traded and there is no way to recoup the value gained/loss by them.

@kryptologist - that is a valid suggestion, but I want to re-iterate that we do not police coins. . There is also no way for us to know if that value changes because the ANN is constantly changing which is why we rely on programmatic approaches like moneysupply. feel free to PM me to brainstorm about more automated things we can do though, i'm always looking for more ideas. I understand your concern but the damage was done way before the coin max limit was hit; the order books are not that deep. It would not have prevented this.

@stenull - I guarantee you if any coin destroys their marketcap and then wants to reactively roll back the blockchain, there isn't an exchange in the world that's going to follow that fork

I do sympathize with people that got scammed by this coin. We got scammed as well and have our associated costs but this is the unfortunate dark side of crypto currencies. We rely on the community as much as you guys rely on us to make crypto safer for everyone.

Thanks
Richie

chrissibel

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Got Crypto?

the new wallet gives me an error when opening. missing a .dll file.

JohnBirco

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

I know a lot of coin that were on wrong chain with hiccups and still online on bittrex.

Is this coin dead ? NO !
Everything is fxed, people have lost nearly nothing. It was around 14200 or 14400 block until i found the fix an release the fixed source.

NinjaCoin can continue to live !

Must a coin die only because a exchange say us byebye ? NO !
Let bittrex on the wrong chain if they don't want to switch. We can still go on every other exchanges with all the coins from block 1 to 13999.

And p2poolcoin seems to be on the good chain, if some miners can help to move the blochain (at least a little to decrease the diff) it would be nice.

Have you see my nice wallet, i still have a lot of work to do, let's continue ninja story !
Don't let the coin die for a story of 200 or 400 block, that's nothing.

coiner5

newbie

Activity: 16

Merit: 0

Quote from: kryptologist on June 16, 2014, 02:08:54 PM

Ninja is dead but I just want a simple answer on this:

At the time of adding a new coin on the exchange, you can also add a value in your internal database for the max total supply of coins. You can then use this to detect if there are more coins on the exchange than there should be total supply. If this is detected the market is immediately suspended. It would be a very simple check and could be implemented with little effort. In fact you could check this value with the network and suspend the market even before all those coins got put on the exchange. So I believe Bittrex could have caught this if they had better checks. I am not blaming Bittrex, I am blaming the developer but saying that Bittrex should be able to catch these things.

Such a change would be a good precaution and I think it's likely Bittrex will consider adding it. However you don't seem to have grasped the concept of max number of total coins yet. The number of coins in the ANN posting is supposed to match the number of coins the source code will produce. In most cases that number matches, in this case it didn't because the dev lied about the max number.

So a precautionary check like the one you suggest would be a good idea, but the number stored in the database could get out of date. A coin could legitimately update their source code to produce more coins than originally intended, and therefore such a precautionary check could halt trading in a legitimate coin.

It's a trade-off that Bittrex will have to decide on, it's not a completely obvious choice to make (although I think they should add it, the trade-off seems highly in favor of it).

Stenull

hero member

Activity: 585

Merit: 500

Quote from: rudolsen on June 16, 2014, 02:06:58 PM

Quote from: richiela on June 16, 2014, 12:59:33 PM

This is an unfortunate case where the dev screwed up and/or screwed us all.

We will NOT be taking a fork of this coin. The damage is already done here. Our systems worked as designed and our balances match including checking the moneysupply. I would like to remind everyone that Bittrex is an exchange. Our responsibility is to ensure that when you trade xxx A for yyy B, that it happens safely. We do not police what is being traded.

Again, we will not be taking a new wallet or fork of this coin. The damage done is irreparable and would have been after the first trade. The market will remain open and we will let this die its natural death like so many coins before it.

Thanks
richie@bittrex

If I understand it clearly, you stay on unofficial blockchain and hold my money on it (even without value). I'm not make any transactions or trade before block 14000. May I request private key of wallet where you keep my money, so I can import them into official fork and make them valid. I know the answer. Should I expect from you same behavior as reaction on any coin fork you listed in future? ..if you decide not update wallet and let trading in wrong one? At least can you provide wallet link of your "new" NinjaTrexCoin so I can withdraw and keep all my original NJAs out of your "exchange" as memento of this trust failure? Could you mark all coin pairs which you are provide to trade and are on unofficial forks, so I can easily recognize them/can't make you rich on fees? Answer to yourself, damage was done.

Good point! Shouldn't exchanges follow the real fork?
What if BC or DRK would to fork?? Would you just stay on broken fork and don't give a fuck?

sesko

sr. member

Activity: 403

Merit: 250

People you where warned long time ago. DON'T BUY SHITCOINS, do research, ask a lot of question, make sure or insist to community to find someone for review of code.

If people or community around new coin, would ask from the dev a few basic things. A lot of shitcoins would die instantly.

To blame exchanges? are you serious people. You blame Poloniex for fair warning, you blame Bittrex for not doing anything.

SHAME and BLAME is on everybody that buys a shitcoin.

I never said you should not mine and sell shit coin. Be more diligent when investing money in a shitcoin.

coiner5

newbie

Activity: 16

Merit: 0

Quote from: kryptologist on June 16, 2014, 01:34:07 PM

So you have to investigate the code of every coin that you buy? I'd rather trade on Polo and feel secure the code has been reviewed/

You don't have to investigate the code, but you should. You should either review it yourself or you can rely on opinions of people who have.

When you buy a stock you should review the finances of the company to determine if it's solvent and a good investment. If you don't do this yourself you can choose to rely on the opinions of people who have (stock analysts and ratings agencies).

In fact, a cryptocoin analyst service would make perfect sense. The analyst would review the source code and the promise of each coin and pass that information on to their subscribers. An accurate cryptocoin version of S&P would have rated this coin an F.

kryptologist

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 500

@kryptographer

Ninja is dead but I just want a simple answer on this:

At the time of adding a new coin on the exchange, you can also add a value in your internal database for the max total supply of coins. You can then use this to detect if there are more coins on the exchange than there should be total supply. If this is detected the market is immediately suspended. It would be a very simple check and could be implemented with little effort. In fact you could check this value with the network and suspend the market even before all those coins got put on the exchange. So I believe Bittrex could have caught this if they had better checks. I am not blaming Bittrex, I am blaming the developer but saying that Bittrex should be able to catch these things.

Can someone from Bittrex please explain why they can't do this or if it will be implemented in the future?

rudolsen

newbie

Activity: 14

Merit: 0

Quote from: richiela on June 16, 2014, 12:59:33 PM

This is an unfortunate case where the dev screwed up and/or screwed us all.

We will NOT be taking a fork of this coin. The damage is already done here. Our systems worked as designed and our balances match including checking the moneysupply. I would like to remind everyone that Bittrex is an exchange. Our responsibility is to ensure that when you trade xxx A for yyy B, that it happens safely. We do not police what is being traded.

Again, we will not be taking a new wallet or fork of this coin. The damage done is irreparable and would have been after the first trade. The market will remain open and we will let this die its natural death like so many coins before it.

Thanks
richie@bittrex

If I understand it clearly, you stay on unofficial blockchain and hold my money on it (even without value). I'm not make any transactions or trade before block 14000. May I request private key of wallet where you keep my money, so I can import them into official fork and make them valid. I know the answer. Should I expect from you same behavior as reaction on any coin fork you listed in future? ..if you decide not update wallet and let trading in wrong one? At least can you provide wallet link of your "new" NinjaTrexCoin so I can withdraw and keep all my original NJAs out of your "exchange" as memento of this trust failure? Could you mark all coin pairs which you are provide to trade and are on unofficial forks, so I can easily recognize them/can't make you rich on fees? Answer to yourself, damage was done.

kryptologist

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 500

@kryptographer

Quote from: coiner5 on June 16, 2014, 02:03:48 PM

Quote from: bittick on June 16, 2014, 01:54:47 PM

Quote from: coiner5 on June 16, 2014, 01:51:28 PM

Quote from: badam on June 16, 2014, 01:42:33 PM

Quote from: bittick on June 16, 2014, 01:38:23 PM

Quote from: badam on June 16, 2014, 01:35:42 PM

Quote from: bittick on June 16, 2014, 01:33:08 PM

bittrex should change the walet to the new fork and allow users that had valid coins before all this shit happen withdraw safely to the new wallets. Why is this so hard to do?

Because the forked wallet removes millions of coins that were already sold. Some people bought for several btc and their coins would be lost from bittrex.

the coins they bought are invalid anyway now, what are they gonna do with them? At least give a chance to withdraw valid coins dammit

Nobody knew that those are invalid. We knew it only when the price hit 1-2 sat. I think they should remove the coin as it is. The coin is dead:(. Never keep your coins in exchange wallets.

The coins were not invalid. The source code and those on the network running it decide how many coins there are, who owns them, etc. Ninjacoin operated exactly as it was intended to do. How it was intended to operate may have been different from what you and everyone else (except the dev) expected, but that is a interpersonal issue not a technical one.

If you had your wallet open and were staking, your client was complicit in the inflation of the moneysupply. Your client agreed on the new higher number, your client validated the new blocks, etc.

which was not supposed to happen in such amounts, hence, coins are invalid.

Yes, it was supposed to happen. That was my point. The inflation in the number of coins was part of the source code and was destined to happen. You might not have known it was going to happen, but that doesn't make it invalid. Again, the moneysupply is decided by the network and is not a fixed number. The "max number of coins" you see in ANN posts are not definitive. The source code and those who run it are the definitive reference for the moneysupply.

Yes but when Bittrex adds a coin to their exchange they can also input a max supply value. Use this to check with the coin network. It could have been suspended immediately before the coins even went on the exchange. Dev scammed us, Bittrex has weak coin security.

coiner5

newbie

Activity: 16

Merit: 0

Quote from: bittick on June 16, 2014, 01:54:47 PM

Quote from: coiner5 on June 16, 2014, 01:51:28 PM

Quote from: badam on June 16, 2014, 01:42:33 PM

Quote from: bittick on June 16, 2014, 01:38:23 PM

Quote from: badam on June 16, 2014, 01:35:42 PM

Quote from: bittick on June 16, 2014, 01:33:08 PM

bittrex should change the walet to the new fork and allow users that had valid coins before all this shit happen withdraw safely to the new wallets. Why is this so hard to do?

Because the forked wallet removes millions of coins that were already sold. Some people bought for several btc and their coins would be lost from bittrex.

the coins they bought are invalid anyway now, what are they gonna do with them? At least give a chance to withdraw valid coins dammit

Nobody knew that those are invalid. We knew it only when the price hit 1-2 sat. I think they should remove the coin as it is. The coin is dead:(. Never keep your coins in exchange wallets.

The coins were not invalid. The source code and those on the network running it decide how many coins there are, who owns them, etc. Ninjacoin operated exactly as it was intended to do. How it was intended to operate may have been different from what you and everyone else (except the dev) expected, but that is a interpersonal issue not a technical one.

If you had your wallet open and were staking, your client was complicit in the inflation of the moneysupply. Your client agreed on the new higher number, your client validated the new blocks, etc.

which was not supposed to happen in such amounts, hence, coins are invalid.

Yes, it was supposed to happen. That was my point. The inflation in the number of coins was part of the source code and was destined to happen. You might not have known it was going to happen, but that doesn't make it invalid. Again, the moneysupply is decided by the network and is not a fixed number. The "max number of coins" you see in ANN posts are not definitive. The source code and those who run it are the definitive reference for the moneysupply.

tokyoghetto

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1000

So this is CENT 2.0?

kryptologist

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 500

@kryptographer

Quote from: whatdidshedo on June 16, 2014, 01:58:02 PM

Quote from: kryptologist on June 16, 2014, 01:51:55 PM

I am not just blaming Bittrex. Obviously the developer scammed a bunch of people. My problem with Bittrex is this:

At the time of adding a new coin on the exchange, you can also add a value in the database for the max total supply of coins. You can then use this to detect if there are more coins on the exchange than there should be total supply. If this is detected the market is immediately suspended. It would be a very simple check and could be implemented with little effort. In fact you could check this value with the network and suspend the market even before all those coins got put on the exchange. So I believe Bittrex could have caught this if they had better checks. I am not blaming Bittrex, I am blaming the developer but saying that Bittrex should be able to catch these things.

Can someone from Bittrex please explain why they can't do this or if it will be implemented in the future?

For now I have removed all my funds on Bittrex.

Thanks

well obviously coin is dead but i think even bittrex learned from it and could possibly implement it in future, i knew every coin is a risk and even exchange is a risk, so move on and play responsibly i accept my loss you can't win them all but one thing i do is only bet what i can afford to lose on a coin. major fail by dev bittrex got caught in it it's over.

I agree man it's over. But it would be great if Bittrex could learn and improve on this.

Stenull

hero member

Activity: 585

Merit: 500

Quote from: JohnBirco on June 16, 2014, 01:44:02 PM

Quote from: coiner5 on June 16, 2014, 01:29:43 PM

Some quick facts:

- The moneysupply is decided by the network. There is no fixed number for Bittrex to compare against. The moneysupply went up due to the dev's trojan, and if Bittrex checked against the moneysupply they would have been checking against the new huge number, just like everyone else on the network.

- Check the github tree. The new 1.2.0 release was not submitted as a patch, the entire repo was replaced. This was certainly intentional to try to make it harder to see what changed. Both to hide how obvious the original trojan was, and probably to hide the new trojan that was added in 1.2.0. There is likely no "correct" or "clean" fork, just a choice between two trojanned forks.

- The 1.2.0 release was committed by linked67, not the original dev. Interesting. Maybe he forgot to sign out of his real account and into his shill account.

- I lost money on this coin, but I don't blame Bittrex one bit. They allowed people to buy and sell Ninjacoin, that is their role as an exchange. Ninjacoin was a shitty trojanned product and there should have been no buyers, but lots of people bought anyway. It's like blaming NYSE because Enron when bust. Bittrex didn't force you to buy a shitty coin, they just gave you the opportunity to make a poor decision. And in this case the source code was even out there for anyone to review and nobody did.

In summary if you bought this coin you bought a coin that was publicly designed to inflate the money supply at block 14000. Bittrex allowed you to do that. Congratulations on your purchase, next time you'll be more cautious about what you buy. I know I will.

I'm not affiliated with Bittrex, just pointing out some facts. Your hatred should be directed at the dev.

Where hav you see a trojan Huh

? I can bet a lot of people have previous source on there computer and can compare.
If i have make new release instead of patch on github, it's to hide the changes i make on the UI wallet. To make it more hard for chinese copy/paster to replicate me.

The PoS bug was just a "/COIN" missing in the maths, not a trojan. If you don't know from what you speak, please shut up !

This ^

Topic: [ANN][X11][PoS only] NinjaCoin - Ninja Launch - Hard fork 1.2.2 - page 19. (Read 69024 times)