Topic: Cleanup: I'll attack some coins - I owned APEXcoin for 90 blocks - page 2. (Read 17227 times)

It's a novel trick! Guys from the future are not that bad as I judged looking at you. 

If you choose to troll in this way, you have to affect an air of indifference to maintain any credibility in your baseless claims. Unfortunately,  you failed as it painfully obvious you are desperate for "Nxt=Welchers" to be seen as the truth

I am waiting for the modified client tests. If proven, I have never seen a bounty not be paid in this situation.

Oh, you have come back to edit your "last" post? I bet you don't know what "integrity" is...

Jones said "Doubling the staking power is interesting, I'll do some more thinking and try to figure this out for myself, my bounty is 0 though Smiley"

1. He is not "they", he is Jones and Jones obviously likes to dig deeper (I'd like to remind you that NXT is decentralized)
2. And that does hardly have an influence on a possible bounty if CynicSOB found a real flaw and gives proof.

By breaking a bike lock I don't proof that I can crack a safe.

Now, after you suddenly got a lot of free time, you could spend it on a little education. Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy, you'll find a lot of revelations here.


PS: Oops, looks like I made him upset because right after my reply I got such the PM:

So many sockpuppets around these days... (ab592726692ce7ce3999a4f59e53b3616f8a8416a869203c57de56a1e38c5ad3)

Not Trolling , just don't like Welchers.
Skeptical is fine, but if you read there forum they said they would figure it out themselves, but only after he brought it up, they would have not even know to look for it.
NXT=Welchers
So last post here, so you know I am not trolling.
__________________________________________________________________

Just to show you are not as smart as you think you are Come-from-Beyond
That Post did not come from me, so you insulted my IQ , but was proof yours is lacking,
since I did not send you a post!

Editing the Last Post is still the last Post ,Come-from-Beyond.
or are you too limited to see that, and want to pull more words from a dictionary.
You just ill, because you were wrong!
And now see me everywhere, sad.

Funny 7 posts after this one , still trying to dispute NXT=Welchers
Insults , will not change the facts, so keeping adding posts to support your weak arguments.

Low-quality trolling. You all in the future degraded too much. 

@Argon18

WTF, why are you trolling here?

Just read what was written...
IMO, NXT developers haven't had welching tendencies ever.

Being skeptical until proof is produced is normal.

You Found me Out ,
 Yes I am from the Future where we Know NXT can't be trusted.
  What you get to ponder is just how soon before that future is your present.

The 3rd party must decide on the amount too in this case. I believe his attack is not worth 200k NXT.

Don't trust just words , but what he did to apex was proof it can be done.
And if you follow the numbers he did it with 20% of apex stake weight.
Nxt could have said let's pick a 3rd party both trust to hold the bounty and received the info ,
if it turned out to be true, cynicSOB is paid by 3rd party and 3rd party relays the info to NXT,
if it turned out false 3rd party returns the bounty to NXT and deletes the info cynicSOB sent them without giving it to NXT.

The 3rd party would make the decision if it was true or not, just pick someone both sides agree too.

You seem to be from the future where time machine is an ordinary device and bets are paid before the evidence is provided. In our time we used to go the other way around.

With the evidence we have so far, CfB's 30GH/s attack on bitcoin is just as possible as cynicSOB's is on Nxt.

Do you see the problem?

I like what cynicSOB is doing and hope he finds something, and I'm glad to donate some Nxt if he found a flaw,
but you shouldn't trust just words from strangers on the internet.

If they had invited you to a forum and you spent a few days testing your theory which would benefit them by helping secure their network , they would owe you something for your efforts.
And I would call them welchers too.

I know how to attack Bitcoin with a 30 GH/s mining rig but noone paid me bounty in advance.
Well, at least we know BTC is untrustworthy now plus a major security flaw in its code...

If NXT really wanted to see evidence , they would have used the regular network and not testnet.
He found something and now they want all of the info without paying him.

Welching is Welching , no matter what kind of spin you put on it.
At least we know NXT is untrustworthy now plus a major security flaw in its code.

Many people on the nxtforum are in favor of a bounty. But you have to understand that some are sceptic and want to see evidence first.

cynicSOB said himself that his attack is only theoretic so far, and he has yet to modify the client and try. I'm 100% sure that he will get a bounty once he provides evidence.

Nxters have been quite fair with bounties so far.

Doctorevil recieved a bounty for doing a security audit.
Minusbalancer recieved a bounty for finding a bug.
There were 3 bounties paid for finding (purposely set) flaws

etc.

edit: He was already wrong once:

his 2% stake requirement has now gone up to 10% stake

Or reach some whales and secretly hand over them the code for the attack...

Nxt Forum
_______________________________________________________________________________ ________
Quote from: cynicSOB on February 10, 2015, 08:51:02 pm

    updates:

    - I found no advantage in splitting the stake in various accounts.
    - NXT's POS using block generator signatures is robust, probably even better than PPC's stake modifiers. You should probably thank Cunicula for that: his discussions with cfb led to that design.
    - It's still POS, so 20% of the staking weight, which is at best 10% of the total supply, is enough to double spend once every 30hs. Here, double-spend is calculated for 10 confirmations. For 4 confirmations (like some exchanges use) half of that much is more than enough
    - I found a hole that allows me to (aprox) double my staking weight: I can make 1M NXT forge as often as 2M should. This would allow a 51% attack with 25% stake. This is still theory, I need to modify the client to generate the attack.

    So, I can't attack testnet with only 200K.. that thing was an underestimation... but I could with 2M. And I found a serious security problem, so please organize a bounty and set the goals to claim it. Come on, let's gather some 200K real NXT (not just testnet) I'm sure once the devs understand this they'll agree and fix it.
    Since I don't need to split the NXT in several accounts, if I wanted to try to double spend with 10% of the supply I could do it with leasing.
    Leasing is a good idea: I think it's the reason why the total network staking weight is high for NXT compared to others.
_______________________________________________________________________________ ____

Quote from: jones
I'm skeptical, as always

I'm not sure how 20% staking weight can double-spend a transaction every thirty hours if the person waits the normal 10 confs. A finney attack would be regular, the evil forger wouldn't include the block when it forged, and the person that accepted after one confirm would be double spent on, when we wait more than one confirm, the security increases with all the different forgers that pile blocks on top, with 10 confirms, the chance of a person with 20% staking power forging 10 consecutive blocks would be (0.2)^10 would take over a million blocks to happen. (0.2)^4 is much less, but since the largest staker has about 10% right now (0.1)^4 is small enough to only happen twice so far in nxt's existence.

Doubling the staking power is interesting, I'll do some more thinking and try to figure this out for myself, my bounty is 0 though

_______________________________________________________________________________ __


@cynicSOB

It looks like NXT devs are trying to welch on any bounty, bad form on their part.
You could just post their vulnerability for them acting that way.