DRK vs XMR warez - page 9. | Bitcointalksearch.org

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: Pline on March 01, 2015, 07:37:42 PM

Quote from: smooth on March 01, 2015, 06:57:24 PM

Quote from: Pline on March 01, 2015, 05:20:46 PM

Interesting, thanks for the insight. So it seems the main differences between the two, is that Shadow is on a bitcoin blockchain, which gives it some advantages. For example it can plug in better with existing infrastructure, and have benefits of both transparent chain and anonymous chain. Also since only about 1% of transactions are used for anonymity, it will have less blockchain bloat than Monero where 100% of the transactions are done using ring sigs.

If only 1% of transactions are used for anonymity you will have massive timing anonymity leaks and such. If you take transparent coins, convert to anon, pay someone, and he converts back (both of which are logical if most commerce is taking place non-anonymously) then the whole thing is quite obviously traceable.

I don't really see much advantage to a coin that is 99% transparent, and definitely see disadvantages. Just use Bitcoin, or if you really want PoS, use whatever is the leading PoS coin, probably BitShares I guess. BitShares has stealth addresses by the way.

Quote

I wonder if this destruction and reminting gives it any privacy advantages.

It does not. The creation and destruction process is entirely transparent.

Smooth is right Shadow is very similar to cryptonote. I was reading cryptonote whitepaper, and its some genius stuff going on in there. We should be honest about what the system is and its pros and cons. I like Monero, seems like a cool coin, much better than DRK. I do think Shadow does have some advantages being on a bitcoin blockchain. Also I believe Shadow differs in the anonymity system in one major way from what I can tell, and that is the destruction and minting of SDC. To me it seems like this extra part of the system does something extra to sever the link between identities, but I could be wrong. Hopefully the review will help clarify that. Hope our communities can all be friends, as we all are striving for the same goal of privacy and anonymity.

Well i agree with you that the Bitcoin codebase and APIs, etc. are an advantage in terms of integration, etc. I don't agree that the minting/destruction add value to anonymity, and in fact I think the opposite as I explained above. But overall yes the more popular APIs and such are valuable.

I don't think the communities are or need to be unfriendly but there is some confusion that has been spread about the nature of the Shadow solution that has led to some frustration on both sides. We certainly share the goal of greater privacy.

Pline

full member

Activity: 448

Merit: 100

Quote from: smooth on March 01, 2015, 06:57:24 PM

Quote from: Pline on March 01, 2015, 05:20:46 PM

Interesting, thanks for the insight. So it seems the main differences between the two, is that Shadow is on a bitcoin blockchain, which gives it some advantages. For example it can plug in better with existing infrastructure, and have benefits of both transparent chain and anonymous chain. Also since only about 1% of transactions are used for anonymity, it will have less blockchain bloat than Monero where 100% of the transactions are done using ring sigs.

If only 1% of transactions are used for anonymity you will have massive timing anonymity leaks and such. If you take transparent coins, convert to anon, pay someone, and he converts back (both of which are logical if most commerce is taking place non-anonymously) then the whole thing is quite obviously traceable.

I don't really see much advantage to a coin that is 99% transparent, and definitely see disadvantages. Just use Bitcoin, or if you really want PoS, use whatever is the leading PoS coin, probably BitShares I guess. BitShares has stealth addresses by the way.

Quote

I wonder if this destruction and reminting gives it any privacy advantages.

It does not. The creation and destruction process is entirely transparent.

Smooth is right Shadow is very similar to cryptonote. I was reading cryptonote whitepaper, and its some genius stuff going on in there. We should be honest about what the system is and its pros and cons. I like Monero, seems like a cool coin, much better than DRK. I do think Shadow does have some advantages being on a bitcoin blockchain. Also I believe Shadow differs in the anonymity system in one major way from what I can tell, and that is the destruction and minting of SDC. To me it seems like this extra part of the system does something extra to sever the link between identities, but I could be wrong. Hopefully the review will help clarify that. Hope our communities can all be friends, as we all are striving for the same goal of privacy and anonymity.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: child_harold on March 01, 2015, 07:08:09 PM

admittedly u guys know shit, but u dont know the shadow shit

I'm afraid I do, having read the shadow whitepaper, and having some level of understanding of the technology which is more than I can say for a bunch of ~~people~~ accounts running around talking about "shadow Zero Knowledge, woo hoo" as if that is something new. It isn't, it comes straight out of cryptonote.

BTW, I though this thread was about XMR vs. DRK. Why are you SDC pumpers showing up and spamming it?

child_harold

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1000

OK. Deja VU.

smooth and fluffypony in da house!
admittedly u guys know shit, but u dont know the shadow shit

havent yet read the back/forth with Pline (an awesome Shadow community member) but i have a feeling how it goes…

Irregardless I will reiterate what XMR dudes hace been told for some time now…

SHADOW is NOT CRYPTONOTE. PHEW!

I really cant wait 4 this review…

gentlemen… as u were o/

n.b. im no cryptographer but the use of these ZK shadow tokens on a BTC blcokchain smacks of genius. THX.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: Pline on March 01, 2015, 05:20:46 PM

Interesting, thanks for the insight. So it seems the main differences between the two, is that Shadow is on a bitcoin blockchain, which gives it some advantages. For example it can plug in better with existing infrastructure, and have benefits of both transparent chain and anonymous chain. Also since only about 1% of transactions are used for anonymity, it will have less blockchain bloat than Monero where 100% of the transactions are done using ring sigs.

If only 1% of transactions are used for anonymity you will have massive timing anonymity leaks and such. If you take transparent coins, convert to anon, pay someone, and he converts back (both of which are logical if most commerce is taking place non-anonymously) then the whole thing is quite obviously traceable.

I don't really see much advantage to a coin that is 99% transparent, and definitely see disadvantages. Just use Bitcoin, or if you really want PoS, use whatever is the leading PoS coin, probably BitShares I guess. BitShares has stealth addresses by the way.

Quote

I wonder if this destruction and reminting gives it any privacy advantages.

It does not. The creation and destruction process is entirely transparent.

Pline

full member

Activity: 448

Merit: 100

Quote from: ?? on ??

What mythical Bitcoin infrastructure are you guys referring to? Bitpay et al will never allow other coin that is not BTC on their end, Monero not having the same code as BTC is a market multiplier motherload as we'll have to work hard to create or our stuff, stuff that most of the BTC eco-system have proven to not like to share with other coins (see LTC rejected by coinbase, etc).

Well for example https://shapeshift.io/ just added ShadowCash recently. They have not added Monero probably because it doesn't plug in easy with their system. Also Cryptsy has not added Monero probably for the same reason.

Pline

full member

Activity: 448

Merit: 100

Quote from: smooth on March 01, 2015, 04:59:48 PM

Quote from: Pline on March 01, 2015, 04:54:18 PM

Quote from: smooth on March 01, 2015, 04:39:47 PM

Thanks smooth, I didn't realize that. You seem to be right from what I saw in the cryptonote whitepaper: https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

So does Monero also use these dual-key stealth addresses? Also is Monero completely a trustless setup?

Yes and yes.

Interesting, thanks for the insight. So it seems the main differences between the two, is that Shadow is on a bitcoin blockchain, which gives it some advantages. For example it can plug in better with existing infrastructure, and have benefits of both transparent chain and anonymous chain. Also since only about 1% of transactions are used for anonymity, it will have less blockchain bloat than Monero where 100% of the transactions are done using ring sigs. Also Shadow's system is slightly different because the destruction of SDC, and then the minting of new SDC, which is not happening with cryptonote. I believe the SDCDev had highlighted this fact before when comparing the two systems. I wonder if this destruction and reminting gives it any privacy advantages. I am really interested to see the review and how these systems compare to each other.

coinpr0n

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

XMR wins for naming (come on: ringsignatures and cryptonight) but I know DRK better. Anyway why the competition?

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: Pline on March 01, 2015, 04:54:18 PM

Quote from: smooth on March 01, 2015, 04:39:47 PM

Thanks smooth, I didn't realize that. You seem to be right from what I saw in the cryptonote whitepaper: https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

So does Monero also use these dual-key stealth addresses? Also is Monero completely a trustless setup?

Yes and yes.

Pline

full member

Activity: 448

Merit: 100

Quote from: smooth on March 01, 2015, 04:39:47 PM

Quote from: Pline on March 01, 2015, 09:51:40 AM

Ring sigs are only one part of the Shadow system. They serve as an added layer of obfuscation and are just one piece of the puzzle. The other pieces of the puzzle are dual-key stealth addresses, and non-interactive zero knowledge proofs. If you don't know what those are you should look into them, its cutting edge tech. Its a unique system, and its better than cryptonote imho.

Then you are quite confused because cryptonote includes (cryptonote paper sections):

a) ring sigs (4.4)

b) dual-key stealth addresses (4.3)

c) nizkp (4.4, under 2nd heading "SIG")

Shadow's implementation is a warmed-over reimplementation using different elliptic curve paramters. That's analogous to (and about as substantive as) using hexadecimal instead of octal for arithmetic.

I don't know about this Zeuner guy. He might be an expert, but I've seen no evidence of it.

Thanks smooth, I didn't realize that. You seem to be right from what I saw in the cryptonote whitepaper: https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

So does Monero also use these dual-key stealth addresses? Also is Monero completely a trustless setup?

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: Pline on March 01, 2015, 09:51:40 AM

Ring sigs are only one part of the Shadow system. They serve as an added layer of obfuscation and are just one piece of the puzzle. The other pieces of the puzzle are dual-key stealth addresses, and non-interactive zero knowledge proofs. If you don't know what those are you should look into them, its cutting edge tech. Its a unique system, and its better than cryptonote imho.

Then you are quite confused because cryptonote includes (cryptonote paper sections):

a) ring sigs (4.4)

b) dual-key stealth addresses (4.3)

c) nizkp (4.4, under 2nd heading "SIG")

Shadow's implementation is a warmed-over reimplementation using different elliptic curve paramters. That's analogous to (and about as substantive as) using hexadecimal instead of octal for arithmetic.

I don't know about this Zeuner guy. He might be an expert, but I've seen no evidence of it.

fluffypony

donator

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1060

GetMonero.org / MyMonero.com

Quote from: child_harold on March 01, 2015, 12:27:54 PM

Yes. I know who Adam Back is.
No I do not know who Satoshi is.
No I do not know who fluffypony is.

Zeuner? Some people know who Zeuner is…

By all means fluffypony you r entitled to undermine his credibility.
U r equally entitled to ignore his review. Altho it behooves u to do the opposite.

G'day (enjoy the BBQ)

n.b playing with fire now: ur credibility is established how? Can u link me to ur CV/linkedin?

thx

p.s. i like how elusive Isidor is. Hallmark of a crypto-dude imo. He lives in Leipzig Area btw Wink

I'm not trying to undermine his credibility, I'm trying to establish it. My credibility is irrelevant, mentioning it is clearly argumentum ad hominem.

As to the rest of your rambling word-salad, I have neither the patience nor the time to try and extract a coherent thought out of it to formulate a reply.

stopsigningbitch

newbie

Activity: 28

Merit: 0

Quote from: child_harold on March 01, 2015, 01:58:59 PM

Quote from: HCLivess on March 01, 2015, 01:08:35 PM

Quote from: UnicornFarts on February 20, 2015, 11:05:50 AM

Let me sum this up for you.

The technology behind cryptonote obliterates darkcoin. It's mathematically provable, it doesn't have random nodes that mostly exist in the amazon cloud to mix shit.

… snipped

Thank you, I have bookmarked this

And the technology behind Shadow could well obliterate Monero (since it has all the plusses of XMR on a BTC blockchain with a few neat twists Wink

)

p.s.@UnicornFarts

Criticizing DRK for its name might not be wise.
As I understand it Monero is the Esperanto for 'money"

Esperanto is … a joke
and more accurately a dead (still-born) language

Does it say DRK vs XMR vs SDC? No, Shadowcash is utter shit. No one cares about Shadowcash and its crackpot scam signatures. And honestly, any wannabe currency with the English word coin in it's name(Dark"coin"), is going to go nowhere marketing wise.

"Esperanto is a language introduced in 1887 by Dr. L.L. Zamenhof after years of development. He proposed Esperanto as a second language that would allow people who speak different native languages to communicate, yet at the same time retain their own languages and cultural identities."= Global, unifying language

I don't really care, but I admit that choosing the Esperanto word for coin, monero, as a name was a genius marketing move.

child_harold

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1000

Quote from: HCLivess on March 01, 2015, 01:08:35 PM

Quote from: UnicornFarts on February 20, 2015, 11:05:50 AM

Let me sum this up for you.

The technology behind cryptonote obliterates darkcoin. It's mathematically provable, it doesn't have random nodes that mostly exist in the amazon cloud to mix shit.

… snipped

Thank you, I have bookmarked this

And the technology behind Shadow could well obliterate Monero (since it has all the plusses of XMR on a BTC blockchain with a few neat twists Wink

)

p.s.@UnicornFarts

Criticizing DRK for its name might not be wise.
As I understand it Monero is the Esperanto for 'money"

Esperanto is … a joke
and more accurately a dead (still-born) language

HCLivess

legendary

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1090

=== NODE IS OK! ==

Quote from: UnicornFarts on February 20, 2015, 11:05:50 AM

Let me sum this up for you.

The technology behind cryptonote obliterates darkcoin. It's mathematically provable, it doesn't have random nodes that mostly exist in the amazon cloud to mix shit.

Monero cons

Original authors are scam artists so other devs have taken it over (for XMR)
Low market cap
Mostly held up by bitcoin whales who have no experience in altcoins
Not enough money to fund development (devs are using their own money). Probably will run out at some point and project will die.
Kinda fubar'd emission

Dark cons

Massive premine
Alternated emission curve to jack price up (make early guys rich on shoulders of late guys after the fact). Use of node required funding to prop price up.
Spaghetti code
Hypeish name that attracts the wrong crowd
Project will die as soon as devs don't have more coins to unload on a market they create by releasing features. Even if that isn't the case, changing emission curve as dramatically as it was PLUS the massive instamine will kill it longterm.

Thank you, I have bookmarked this

child_harold

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1000

Quote from: fluffypony on March 01, 2015, 11:25:01 AM

Quote from: rustynailer on March 01, 2015, 07:38:56 AM

Here is a link to a recent article he has wrote. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/competing-completing-isidor-zeuner?trk=mp-reader-card

Unfortunately that has zero cryptography in it, and reads more as a fluff piece, so not really relevant.

Quote from: Pline on March 01, 2015, 09:56:14 AM

I saw that negative review when looking into Isidor also. It made me think twice for a bit too, but I don't think its fair to judge on one person's comments.

When looking further into him, I read his posts on the bitcoin developer mailing list. I saw he was active there and many times commenting on anonymity. This made me feel much better about him doing the review. Here is the link, you can search his posts on the bitcoin dev mailing list if you like: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

Here are a couple examples of his posts having to do with anonymity and Tor:

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg06525.html

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg03712.html

I've read his occasional emails to the dev list over the course of 2014 as they came in, I only made the connection after I put my post up. Sending emails to the Bitcoin dev list certainly doesn't make one a cryptographer unless those emails are cryptographic in nature, and Zeuner's have not been. Let me provide a contrast by showing a conversation between two actual cryptographers, Andrew Poelstra and Adam Back. Just in case anyone's credentials are in question, Adam is the creator of hashcash, which is the proof-of-work system (not algorithm, but the actual system) that Bitcoin and virtually every other cryptocurrency uses.

Yes. I know who Adam Back is.
No I do not know who Satoshi is.
No I do not know who fluffypony is.

Zeuner? Some people know who Zeuner is…

By all means fluffypony you r entitled to undermine his credibility.
U r equally entitled to ignore his review. Altho it behooves u to do the opposite.

G'day (enjoy the BBQ)

n.b playing with fire now: ur credibility is established how? Can u link me to ur CV/linkedin?

thx

p.s. i like how elusive Isidor is. Hallmark of a crypto-dude imo. He lives in Leipzig Area btw Wink

fluffypony

donator

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1060

GetMonero.org / MyMonero.com

Quote from: rustynailer on March 01, 2015, 07:38:56 AM

Here is a link to a recent article he has wrote. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/competing-completing-isidor-zeuner?trk=mp-reader-card

Unfortunately that has zero cryptography in it, and reads more as a fluff piece, so not really relevant.

Quote from: Pline on March 01, 2015, 09:56:14 AM

I saw that negative review when looking into Isidor also. It made me think twice for a bit too, but I don't think its fair to judge on one person's comments.

When looking further into him, I read his posts on the bitcoin developer mailing list. I saw he was active there and many times commenting on anonymity. This made me feel much better about him doing the review. Here is the link, you can search his posts on the bitcoin dev mailing list if you like: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

Here are a couple examples of his posts having to do with anonymity and Tor:

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg06525.html

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg03712.html

I've read his occasional emails to the dev list over the course of 2014 as they came in, I only made the connection after I put my post up. Sending emails to the Bitcoin dev list certainly doesn't make one a cryptographer unless those emails are cryptographic in nature, and Zeuner's have not been. Let me provide a contrast by showing a conversation between two actual cryptographers, Andrew Poelstra and Adam Back. Just in case anyone's credentials are in question, Adam is the creator of hashcash, which is the proof-of-work system (not algorithm, but the actual system) that Bitcoin and virtually every other cryptocurrency uses.

neurotypical

hero member

Activity: 672

Merit: 503

Quote from: GreekBitcoin on February 20, 2015, 01:53:40 PM

Quote from: r0ach on February 20, 2015, 11:27:14 AM

Without getting into bloat issues of Monero, or Darkcoin instamine, a PoW coin, if actually able to achieve anonymous transactions, is in a difficult position. Governments would regulate against it, and PoW mining data centers are large attack vectors to be legislated against or just taken over. Yea, they would be located in many countries, but governments seem to cooperate a lot on things like drugs, so they might cooperate on issues like this too. I guess you could say Bitcoin sort of faces this issue as well, but they haven't made any big moves against it yet.

On the other hand, and without getting into why PoS is making the big holders even bigger, PoS coins are not secure since Governments can achieve to hold 51% of coins by using some gag orders on the exchanges without anyone ever realizing.

I wouldn't touch DRK with a stick. Nodes can be attacked easily by an adversary with the required resources, the initial instamine thing and the name... on the other hand Monero has ring signatures which I trust a lot more.

Pline

full member

Activity: 448

Merit: 100

Quote from: fluffypony on March 01, 2015, 06:23:45 AM

Quote from: child_harold on February 28, 2015, 06:39:53 PM

Quote from: stopsigningbitch on February 28, 2015, 02:16:27 PM

Lmao, even the shitcoin Darkcoin cant be compared to the even shittier shitcoin Shadowcash

Shadowcash's implementation of "ring sigs" is mediocre at best. In simple terms, it's kind of like a rusty, broken down version of cryptonote's ring signatures.

And u are? Pls provide some evidence for your claims and a member of the Shadow team will forward to Zeuner for review.

I can't speak for the person you're replying to, but I see this card being played a lot recently, and it gives me pause. Who is Isidor Zeuner, and what qualifies him to evaluate the cryptographic soundness of the proposed scheme as well as the merits and security of the code? I Google'd around to try figure it out, but to no avail.

According to his LinkedIn profile he is an "IT Consultant" whose "mission is to provide quality software solutions to demanding small and medium sized businesses."

His work history details that he has been involved in projects such as "custom functionality for embedded linux devices", "crawling, indexing and retrieval of content", and "web development".

I can find no mention of him on any publication available on arXiv, so given this body of evidence it's safe to say that he is not a recognised cryptographer (or a cryptographer at all).

I'm also not sure if the ShadowCoin team are paying him, but the top review on hie Freelancer profile is quite disturbing.

Don't get me wrong, in today's day and age nearly everyone has had something "controversial" splashed across the Internet, and invariably there are multiple sides to the story etc. etc., but nevertheless I think the term "renowned cryptographer" or whatever should not be bandied about without clarification thereof.

I saw that negative review when looking into Isidor also. It made me think twice for a bit too, but I don't think its fair to judge on one person's comments.

When looking further into him, I read his posts on the bitcoin developer mailing list. I saw he was active there and many times commenting on anonymity. This made me feel much better about him doing the review. Here is the link, you can search his posts on the bitcoin dev mailing list if you like: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

Here are a couple examples of his posts having to do with anonymity and Tor:

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg06525.html

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg03712.html

Pline

full member

Activity: 448

Merit: 100

Quote from: stopsigningbitch on February 28, 2015, 02:16:27 PM

Lmao, even the shitcoin Darkcoin cant be compared to the even shittier shitcoin Shadowcash

Shadowcash's implementation of "ring sigs" is mediocre at best. In simple terms, it's kind of like a rusty, broken down version of cryptonote's ring signatures.

Ring sigs are only one part of the Shadow system. They serve as an added layer of obfuscation and are just one piece of the puzzle. The other pieces of the puzzle are dual-key stealth addresses, and non-interactive zero knowledge proofs. If you don't know what those are you should look into them, its cutting edge tech. Its a unique system, and its better than cryptonote imho. Please study this slide show and captions for a complete understanding of how the Shadow System works: http://www.slideshare.net/shadowcash/presentation3-43827434

Also here is a good article to better understand how the system works: http://www.deepdotweb.com/2015/01/28/shadowcash-zero-knowledge-anonymity/

Topic: DRK vs XMR warez - page 9. (Read 13368 times)