Topic: Anonymity, Security and Privacy: Anonymous Cryptocurrency Enhancement Comparsion - page 3. (Read 3081 times)

Good read,you just saved me a lot of hours of researching to what privacy coin should i invest in.

I know some coins in terms of anonymity, one thing i know is that Monero is the one who is widely use in darkweb. If im going to invest i would prefer a coin that is widely use like bitcoin.

Indeed, great job... I was thinking of doing something like that but I do not have the necessary knowhow to do so and it seems like a lot of work.
One of the oldest coins named 'Anoncoin' does not seem to be there. I already informed the devs about your thread.
(they are mainly focused on development and less on marketing)

Thank you unkownMe,

I checked it out, looks like a nice coin, but does not appear to have any anonymity enhancements.

I'm missing VIAcoin, check https://viacoin.org for their white paper and stuff!

Great thread, I appreciate it, just wanted to thank you as it's a very nice initiative and a really good job 

great work you've started here man! a table of comparisons is always nice to see, specially when newbies are flocking in and contemplating on where to place their money on.

I really appreciate to read your thread

I thing this last try is the good one!

A nice comparative table is always needed.

I will share this one where i can when i assume you finish it.

Let people know about it etc ...

Anyway thanks for your work.

I think it could be a unique, or very rare feature...I like it.   Encrypted transactions is of course implied in all the coins, even bitcoin, if you exclude the masternodes part of it.

I think it's a great way of mitigating risks of using masternodes.   And just generally, TLS seems like a great idea.

I'd like to do a comparison but I'd have to get a better sense of what kind of encryption each coin uses in its transactions and with its masternodes.    The threads in here are littered with info on their hashing algorithms for mining, but far less on transaction specific information.   That would be really good to have.

Thank you kokopopz,

I think you're the third person to suggest "marketplace".... So ok...I'll add it haha...but I could use some help coming up with the right "name" for it.

First of all we have to know what the objective is.    I'll throw one out:   To allow private, anonymous, peer-to-peer , and "legal" exchange of goods.   (?)

"legal" is an aweful term...everything's legal somewhere, and everything is illegal somewhere else.   By "legal", I'm implying that it is legal in most developed countries.   And, hopefully, would be the most minimal risk to most users.

Now of course, even the most compliant solution will have legal implications in some places, and as such it should be built to protect the users.   Ie., an otherwise marketplace for Venezuelans to get basic medicine.

Things like account balances can be dangerous.

My concern with the terms "marketplace" and "exchange" is that these are things which are often shut down.    Maybe we have to use that term.  If anyone can think of a better one let me know

Thanks, let me know if you think there should be changes here.   Will do my best

I think maybe I took the TLS too far out of context.  The point of the SecureNodes seems to be for "communication and publishing privacy".  May or may not be that novel.  What other privacy coin nodes/masternodes require SSL certificates for security?

Thank you for your time invested in this comparisson, much appreciated!!

I believe adding an extra feature "marketplace" would also be nice.
Afther all, these coins are made to be spent, so I think a platform for anomymous trade is a very good feature.

This especialy now the deep web is being overrun by LE and all major markets where shut down.

Subbing to read and watch. I've been compiling a list like this myself.

Okay

I'm doing my best to work with you on this.  I certainly don't know everything.  You bring up a lot of great points but I need to ask that you consider there may be more than one perspective on it.

Mixing:   Is it an Anonymity feature or a Privacy feature?   There is no perfect answer.   If implemented as intended, I have opted for "Anonymous" because the information on the transaction is actually (or is intended to be) Lost to the world, with the exception of the Sender and Receiver (who also have very limited info on it).    The information is, ideally, even lost to the network itself, and cannot be retrieved.   The theoretical loss of this transactional information....is why I put it as "Anonymous".      Now, I understand your perspective that the above explanation may or may not be entirely mathematically sound, and thus you see it more as obfusciation.    And you have a point, but it is clearly doing more at a practical level than just putting up a wall that can be taken down with the right credentials.

    I will leave mixing as "Anonymous" for now with consideration to the blur and feedback from others.


Masternodes:   Ok, so I will take masternodes out of security because I never entirely liked it there either.  It was only there because you insisted it was a form of "protection".   The problem with categorizing masternodes is that they can serve more than one purpose, depending on their implementation.

    I need to make one thing clear on here though, so there is no confusion:  Most masternodes have security as an objective, which is accomplished both by strengthening the network, and by mixing.     Zencash/Zclassic are actually perfect examples of this.    Their entire networks were both brought down to their knees earlier this year by a replay attack, which could have easily been prevented by the simplest of mixing techniques.    I might suggest that the general attitude of "zerocash solves everything" likely led to this security vulnerability.  I will say that both communities responded professionally, with updates, and affected investors were compensated for their losses.   Thus being listed on Bittrex.

So while I will take masternodes out of the security category, I do so making it clear that this is still a major purpose of most said implementations (although perhaps less relevant to this particular topic).  


"Traffic Encryption":   That would be a pretty good column....the only problem is that all cryptocurrency has some form of this.  I certainly like the TLS approach, to be honest.  



-------------------

So, this is a complicated reply.   But I need to keep that matrix as simple as possible.   So here's what I'll propose:

•     We both agree that masternodes don't really belong in Security, even if most implementations do provide that.      So that column is gone.    
•    Mixing to stay as "Anonymous" for now, but I remain open to alternatives and recognise in this thread that this is very debatable.
•    TLS, and Traffic Encryption:   For now, since all coins have this, I'm not creating a separate column because I want this to be simple, and quite frankly encryption methods aren't that.

          I WILL give ZenCash a "Yes" for Masternodes, and describe their implementation as "TLS Non-Mix".
          While I doubt you will be entirely happy with this, I do believe it is at least an improvement on properly describing Zencash's implementation.
          Colored green to emphasize that the TLS may be arguably equivalent, and/or better, than true mixing.   And Zencash would know, after its replay attack


It's not a perfect solution but it's an honest effort.    I know you see it differently, but I guarantee you if I did it exactly like you wanted there would be three times as many offended community members on here from coins that Haven't had replay attacks and have stood the test of time, and I'm not convinced the matrix would be any more accurate.

Very well ,finally a good comparison between these privacy coins,XMR is too old and outdated we need something new and advanced like XSPEC.

Thanks carap!  I appreciate the feedback and I will stick with this format.  The matrix is of course updated but I also think it's helpful to have a bit of a log.  Certainly doensn't mean I'm 100% right, or that it is the final word.  But that's the best understanding as of that timestamp.