Topic: [ANN][XCN] Cryptonite - NEW Thread | 1st mini-blockchain coin | Bounties! - page 95. (Read 215666 times)

Let's stop complaining and move on.
What problem do they have? Please have them contact us thru this forum or, better, thru slack so we can help them with their issue. Maybe they are just using an old wallet.

Using the new xcn is the perfect way out
OLD XCN replaced with new xcn

xcn  wallet still has a lot of problems,Many Chinese people can not synchronize wallet, mistakes

I give cryptoid.info  btc
add xcn
But he said the block is not complete

xcn not re-development, will die！

Unfortunately it looks like btc38 is going to remove XCN based on that announcement. Btc38 were the ones who first realized something was wrong because they had a suspiciously high number of XCN in their exchange wallet.

btc38 is all right with us and xcn, they opened their wallet some days ago because I'm in contact with them and provided the new wallet.
trading is closed, along with other coins, because they are closing ALL trading, like all the other chinese exchanges.
it is not related to any xcn issue.

2 months ago I said to him
He thinks it is BTC38 problem
I calculated by the number of blocks and the output   1645179*195 =345487590

Block Count:   1645179
Block Reward≈ 210

But he does not believe, and do not check
I do not know why he does not attach importance to the problem,

I calculated that the total amount of xcn and the blocks are almost equal
btc38 found the problem is that I said


I suggest you let btc38 help solve.
Old xcn replaced by new xcn,This will allow you to solve all the problems and let xcn start again
So I can also help xcn on China overseas platform

I am always in communication with pallas and we were not aware there was any serious issue until just recently when btc38 made us aware. There were bugs with the wallet but those issues were not linked to this attack.

Well it's not about a statement people are free to go or stay with; it is more about how you listen people's comments.

When it sayed this is an obvious bug, I got astonished. Obviously this coin wasn't well looked after. The suggestion I'd give is how you can show your devotion to plans of development, rather than just marketing plans (don't talk Bittrex or Poloniex anymore pls until get it). Convince people how this coin is going to make improvements, and continue to improve the stability to make sure likability of "obvious" bugs are going to be reduced by orders. High-tech is great, but reliability is the first priority on top of anything else.

I recalled few pages back people were still saying sync issue; I might be wrong that has been years and that can make people think something not right. Just get it done if not.

Well it's not about a statement people are free to go or stay with; it is more about how you listen people's comments.

When it sayed this is an obvious bug, I got astonished. Obviously this coin wasn't well looked after. The suggestion I'd give is how you can show your devotion to plans of development, rather than just marketing plans (don't talk Bittrex or Poloniex anymore pls until get it). Convince people how this coin is going to make improvements, and continue to improve the stability to make sure likability of "obvious" bugs are going to be reduced by orders. High-tech is great, but reliability is the first priority on top of anything else.

I recalled few pages back people were still saying sync issue; I might be wrong that has been years and that can make people think something not right. Just get it done if not.

I talked to pallas  had problems with xcn， but he did not believe it

How do you deal with these problems now?

The Chinese trading pages of Bter will be surely shutdown, as it is dominated by a mainland company, there was already a public notice; whether or not the English trading pages is gonna down or they have channels to keep trading will see.

We still have 3 exchanges: bx, nova and bter.
And bter is hong kong based, maybe will not be influenced by PBoC ban.
Bittrex or poloniex will be great, yobit can be a good start.
If @bitfreak! is back on the team, sky is the limit.

I talked to pallas  had problems with xcn， but he did not believe it

How do you deal with these problems now?

I don't agree. XCN has unique features and is now more stable than ever. Plus, I find that the long history of the coin (almost 4 years) is a big plus, not a deficiency.
If you like pump and dump coins, which are abandoned after a couple months, then yes, you are better with another coin.

Ok guys now the main pool and many exchanges have updated to the new version I feel it's safe to release more information about exactly what happened.

Unfortunately it looks like btc38 is going to remove XCN based on that announcement. Btc38 were the ones who first realized something was wrong because they had a suspiciously high number of XCN in their exchange wallet. They notified us there was something wrong a few days ago and I coded up a blockchain analyzer to look for anything suspicious. I discovered that an attacker found a way to create transactions with outputs larger than the inputs, allowing the attacker to essentially create free coins. The first example of the attack can be seen in this block: http://xcn-explorer.selektion21.de/?b=1007085

They were able to generate a negative fee value because of an integer overflow bug, making it possible to have outputs larger than the input value. Obviously there were checks for integer overflows in place but some integers which should have been unsigned were left signed in the worst place possible, either intentionally or by simple mistake, by the original dev. It looks like the attacker spent most of the smaller outputs and left the massive outputs alone, the latest version should block those massive balances but I calculated they were able to get away with around 260 million XCN from the smaller outputs.

We gave btc38 and other exchanges a list of the addresses used by the attacker so they may have been able to freeze some of the attackers funds, based on my analysis it doesn't seem like there's a whole lot of transactions stemming off from the bad transactions. I also want to make it clear this bug has nothing to do with the mini-blockchain technology, the bug in the code was pretty obvious and quite easy to fix just by making some signed integers unsigned. Look at the latest changes on pallas's github to see exactly what we did to prevent this happening again.

In a few days I will release the source code for an XCN blockchain analyzer that I made to find the issue, it should also be useful for building an explorer that works efficiently. I will also release the javascript code I wrote some time ago for creating raw transactions and signing them, which I used to make sure our fix worked and should also be useful for creating a web wallet. Hopefully we can move past this even without too much issue, I was hoping our quick fix would be enough for btc38 not to drop XCN but I cannot blame them for being spooked by this, especially with the new laws in China.

The following is a list of blocks where the exploit was detected:

1007085, 1009490, 1035837, 1044220, 1052967, 1073572, 1103770, 1119219, 1139944, 1171685, 1188258, 1232798, 1246249, 1255968, 1271558, 1274983, 1278864, 1279894, 1281781, 1284716, 1286093, 1288597, 1290084, 1291824, 1294633, 1297819, 1298379, 1300671, 1302547, 1320111, 1320830, 1322596, 1323220, 1350726, 1360510, 1363161, 1364581, 1366301, 1366351, 1367675, 1369704, 1371786, 1373205, 1375144, 1377644