Topic: Blowing the lid off the CryptoNote/Bytecoin scam (with the exception of Monero) - page 25. (Read 132873 times)

Yes, the fact that there is so much shadiness behind CN is a huge negative for XMR. Despite the fact that they've taken it in their own direction, there is still the risk of backdoors in the code.

If CN were real people with real names connected to real jobs and universities, this risk would be much lower. But all we have now is obvious lies and pseudonyms.

Monero now has the additonal burden of convincing the public that they've made sure that all of the code is clean. It's not a win for Monero.

Judging by volume on Poloniex, none of these coins are even a remote threat anway. So other CN coins being damaged really has very little effect on Monero. The net result for them here is negative.

I've read the whole thread and posted quite a few times through out it. I have absolutely no involvement with Monero. I wrote that in the interest of full disclosure.

It's honestly obvious what's happening here to anyone who goes through it. Does anyone in the world who's not involved with CN/Bytecoin really believe that Bytecoin came out two years ago? lol...

It's just one of those things that are so ridiculous that I have to point them out. Because your insulting the intelligence of every single person who reads this post.

I have no idea about whatever CN variant being made by the same people as BCN. Or whether or not crypto_zoidberg is really from the CN team. And I don't really care about those things very much to be honest. But the fact that there's a concerted effort to attempt to convince people that Bytecoin "came out on the deep web 2 years ago" is laughable.

Obviously, the CSS has been changed to no longer reflect the original findings. There is no reason such a change would not be made.

Checking website contents or adding new website as proof for something, in such a way that it cannot be verified with archive.org, after the time of this reveal does not prove anything, because websites are easily created, modified and timestamps are trivial to falsify.

As we are all here for the purpose of reasonable discourse, I hope for your understanding and hope that no more of this type of unreliable evidence is posted.

Exposed to illegal access ≠ hacked. But you like to define everything as you wish.

I have no horses in the XMR race (but I do hold some BBR), but let me say that independent of the OP -- and with a little less venom and swearing -- it was very clear from the code that the bytecoin premine was fake.  Nothing to do with the whitepaper, and you can find the obsfucated and slowed-down code in the git history of XMR and Bytecoin.

I have no comment about the other coins, and personally believe both that the XMR dev team is reasonably clean and that BBR was a good-faith effort to create something non-scammy, but I don't have a technical basis for that conclusion.

I don't want you to buy any coin (and I'd never advise anyone to put money on cryptocurrencies unless they want to gamble).  But I do believe it's worthwhile suggesting to people somewhat emphatically that they stay the heck away from BCN and tread carefully with some of the clones that just copy-pasted that code, as much as they should be careful with any alt that just copy-pastes the Bitcoin code and tweaks a few parameters.  Most are at best worthless and at worst outright scams.  The thing that adds potential value to a coin that's not actively used is its development, community (consider dogecoin as an example of the latter, and both BBR and XMR as examples of the former), and in some cases, its underlying technical innovations (cryptonote broadly speaking).

And before you fling accusations, I'm quite sure I'm not a sock puppet:  http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dga/crypto/not_a_sock_puppet.html

I like how you conveniently ignore the fact that it was pointed out, on the previous page, that your account was registered less than 4 minutes after someone who you just happened to be agreeing with. Way back in January too, what are the chances?

Not really doing your credibility in this thread any favours if I'm honest with you.

Wow, this is getting surreal

But CryptoNote guys didn't say CN website was HACKED.

Then you are pretty slow. The motivation is obvious.


It was explained by the OP. Go read it.

Nothing posted since has added significantly to the original findings, nor detracted from them. It is all unverifiable and most likely fabricated. If not, then I ask them again to produce verifiable dated signatures, credible independent third party sources, or other such evidence. They likely can't and won't, and this has been my view, vocally, since several months back on the BCN thread before XMR even existed. This has nothing to do with XMR and your attempt to paint is as some sort of XMR strategy is mistaken and pointless.

The original findings are and the inferred motivation behind them are still the most credible explanation in my view.

I said I don't believe that "explanation" for the faked whitepapers. The conveniently timed, "We got hacked!" defense is just not credible to me.

I have no proof whether their site was hacked or not hacked or if so who did it.


That's because it is.


I'm going to say this again because you apparently didn't get it the first time. Nothing is "proven" by a tor web site. The owner of the tor web site can put whatever they wan't on it. Unless there is verifiability through an independent third party (at the least; multiple independent sources of credible corroboratory evidence would be better), it can prove nothing, and in fact proves nothing.


You are confused. I never said anything was bad about the Bytecode code. My comments are directed at the scam artists behind the fraudulent 80% premine, fake documents, multiple coins operated by the same crew hidden behind multiple anonymous "developers" names, etc., not the code.

no. reading is overestimated. Just wait for the movie...

If not come up with a credible reason somebody would create a fraudulent whitepaper for the clearnet cryptonote website. I seriously would like to hear one, I can't think of one. I thought the "we were hacked" defense was bs too, but how else do you explain somebody going through the trouble of creating a fake whitepaper?

rethink-your-strategy...is that you? :-P

Seriously, though, I don't think that engaging in a debate around this is a defence of Monero, it's just a debate.

There certainly is big money riding on this.

Fact of the matter is simple.  XMR folks would never have wanted to see this discovery.  It is a bad situation and casts a shadow on CN in general.  Just because Monero is, in many people's opinion, the best of the few clean, fair CN based coins doesnt mean having nearly the entire CN community called out for dishonesty does XMR any good.

It doesn't really, IMO.

But most of us who are invested in XMR would prefer light to darkness.  And light has been cast on this situation.  

You would have to be blind to see what recent developments like "Uh Oh, hacked!" really look like.

The dog ate my whitepaper. l0l

So you sticking to the claim their website wasn't hacked?

I came here becasue I saw cryptonote tweeted that their site was hacked and I thought that was a hillarious defense. Since it was proven in this thread that the whitepaper on the CN clearnet site was indeed a fraudulent copy of the one hosted on the tor site the most likely reason for that is it was hacked. Yet you're on here claiming that it wasn't hacked and it's a coin mill with a scorched earth policy towards Monero...it's Monero that has the scorched earth policy with any and everything cryptonote related. You're even shitting on bytecoin code despite the fact that your shitcoin clone is based on the same code, yet XMR is amazing. You're fucking desperate. If bytecoin is a scam which it still probably is, no need to shit on the code to defend your coin which is based on the same code you fucking simpleton

Wow you should probably read the whole thread rather than the first post..

Another "senior" member who needs to point out he only invested a little, or traded XMR and has no horse in the race but feels the need to point out what a scam Cryptonote is, despite the first post being proven to be false. How many of you guys are in on the XMR pump and dump? Must be big money riding on this...

Show me third party verification of the signature and date from 2012 and I'll be impressed. Otherwise what is on the tor website is whatever the owner of that tor website wants it to be. Just more fake documents, in other words.

You're delusional, the proof you Monero pump and dumpers came up with is a fraudulent whitepaper and when it's proven the legit whitepaper was on the tor website proving the clearnet Cryptonote site was probably hacked, you also claim proof it's a scam.
Get real dude, nobody takes you guys serious because you are so desperate. Monero trolls likely behind this whole mess, makes more sense than Cryptonote making a fraudulent paper to expose..who exactly?

you offer nothing, just run around screaming scam. Dude we get it you're a huge bagholder of monero and want to see every other coin fail. Offer something up besides The would have had to swap out the whitepapers prior to this thread, so what exactly does the "we got hacked" claim defend them against..prior to this lame hatchet job by a Monero insider?
Bytecoin probably is a scam but I'm not investing in Monero, you're a bunch of desperate assclowns out to make a quick buck and care nothing about crypto dumping your clone shitcoin and waiting for cryptonote 2.0 coins.

Now that your "fraudulent whitepaper" scam to pump and dump your monero bags has just about run it's course it's time for me to dump your clone shitcoin and wait for a cryptonote 2.0 coin