Topic: [BCN] Bytecoin. Secure, private, untraceable since 2012 - page 188. (Read 1070344 times)

We continue to introduce you to Bytecoin development process. In our previous article, "Our Approach to Cryptocurrency Development", we covered the task management and development methodologies that we utilize. Today's article provides an in-depth overview of our testing process.

To recap, we rely on a mix of test-driven development (TDD) and extreme programming (XP). The main idea of XP is to create code in small batches. It allows thinking lean and efficient while avoiding excessively complicated solutions and over-design. For Bytecoin team this approach is aligned with the Test First paradigm. It implies that before producing a line of code, we create a test for it.

I've asked seigen to have a look to have a valid answer on this one.

Sorry for the vagueness. If memory serves then Monero's peer review of the CryptoNote whitepaper is what I was referring to. Maybe somebody can clarify. Assuming it is then whilst generally positive I believe it may have made mention of a few libs etc which would be preferable over the ones originally used.

However the code refactoring and "substantial crypto improvement" you speak of does set my mind at ease re this matter. Could you provide any info or clues about some of these improvements forthcoming in 1.0.6?

Many thanks for your reply.

update: improvements anything to do with this? http://www.texpaste.com/n/xaypn9ni

1) Criticism "after audits were performed" is a little bit vague. For my current knowledge nobody has published a full review of Bytecoin/CryptoNote cryptography or code (except for Monero's peer review of CryptoNote whitepaper, but it was generally positive). If there was a specific paper or comment, I may come up with a more relevant response.

2) Peter Todd's comment is in line with previous Monero/Dash comparison. I suppose it means that Monero is based on a good cryptography and they're doing code refactoring, while Dash is supposedly based on some weaker cryptography (I'm not going to comment on this here). As for your question, only DigitalNote made any significant changes in the CN cryptography (encrypted messages).

3) Even though Bytecoin has made tons of code refactoring in the past few months, there were no significant cryptographic changes. However, in the upcoming release 1.0.6 there going to be a substantial crypto improvement. We'll cover that once the release is ready.

I hopes this clarifies your doubts.

In the past criticisms have been made over some of the crypto used in CN after audits were performed*. Thusly one CN coin changed some of the crypto. This was brought up recently on twitter and Peter Todd's comment reads: "Yup! Rather have cleaned up bad code w/ good crypto over bad crypto..." https://twitter.com/petertoddbtc/status/622081863008436225

My questions to the devs here are:

1) Are the criticisms fair?
2) Has BCN similarly changed some of the crypto used?
3) If not will they? If not, why not?

Many thanks in advance for any responses to these question.

*Im not the most super savvy tech guy but if memory serves the criticisms related to some of the libs used. There is at least one post in BCT detailing this.

I like the idea of Bytecoin community taking care of its own files but I would like to see that distributed too, to be a bit more specific by that, what I mean is this...

1) Github it all (source available from github and linking to it off the bytecoin.org downloads page)
https://github.com/amjuarez/bytecoin

2) A harder step perhaps to examine and implement, but one worth taking a look at, is Gittorrenting this
See: http://blog.printf.net/articles/2015/05/29/announcing-gittorrent-a-decentralized-github/

We've temporary put the files on our servers. Check out the downloads page: https://bytecoin.org/downloads/

Wtf. Do you really care so much about monero or the totally anon CN team? Butthurt much? it's pretty clear what your agenda is, and if you think we are stupid and don't get it, you're about 2x as stupid. Go find your purple crayon and be a child again, ffs.

What need has the world for Santa when you are here to determine with equal mad pendulum swings those of us who have been nice and those of u who have been naughty?

The freedom to choose what I believe is not yours to give smooth. It is mine to keep.



p.s. still cherry-picking? state your position on the CN Team pls.

Sure thing child_harold. Nobody has disproven Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy either. Believe what you want to believe then.

ps you use the phrase "essentially disproven"? nothing has been proven or disproven, except the wobbly dates on the whitepaper which the CN team are accountable for.

A while back there was an interview posted with someone alleged to be from cryptonote who said that the bytecoin team split off from cryptonote because they wanted to implement a coin, and cryptonote was more interested in promoting the use of the technology by independent groups (which is exactly what Monero is doing, I might add). It was stated that they were still in contact but no longer working together. I'm simply going based on what they said. I can't easily find that interview now, but I'm sure its around somewhere if someone wants to dig it up.

It is also clear that cryptonote has invited other people, besides Bytecoin, to create coins using the technology they invented when they released the cryptonote starter kit. This is entirely beyond dispute, and again, this is exactly what Monero is doing.

If you prefer Bytecoin for your crypto investment needs because you believe (without any evidence I might add, and I strongly suspect incorrectly) that the people running it now and working on the code are the same ones who implemented the original reference code, and that matters a lot to you, go for it. It's your money.

(BTW, again I would suggest to you that you enlist the advice of technical experts who would tell you -- if they are competent -- from looking at the original and new code that it isn't the same people working on it any more.)


As I explained to you before, the fact that cryptonote repeats the implausible and essentially disproven claim of two-years-in-the-deep-web, it is clear that not all of their statements can be trusted, and their motives appear, to some extent, aligned with those of Bytecoin in perpetuating this false backstory. (This was well-discussed last year, and had nothing to do with you pointing it out.) By the same token, that does not demonstrate that all of their statements are false. Correct logic may be tricky at times, but I'm sure you can understand this, correct?

Of course, I guess there is no easy way then (post edited).

User-agent: ia_archiver
Disallow: /

That only proves that it wasn't created before a certain date, not that it was. I could easily put a news headline from 1850 in a genesis block, that doesn't mean such a coin existed in 1850.

@smooth,
I'm not here to bash you nor Monero, in fact I hold some XMR myself. But as much as I respect Monero and the efforts you're putting into defending it from FUD, quite often (just like now - out of the blue) I come across reading things about Monero that are mostly negative or fueled by hate/FUD. What the hell is up with that? Same goes for some other coins that I support (For example DASH and Shadow) but to a much smaller extent.

- It could have been easy to prove the existence of the blockchain at some date with a News headline (like the one in the bitcoin genesis block).