#Energiswap is expanding yet again!We just added another batch of 52 new tokens to the platform.
You can now trade more than 180 assets with low fees and the best security in the space.
Get started here:
https://energiswap.orgHere are all the new assets we just added to EnergiSwap:
$CVC $SRM $ANKR $NMR $DNT $IOTX $BTS $SYS $OGN $AVA $NXS $AION $HARD $TRB $CTK $WAN $CELR $LOOM $HIVE $QKC $AKRO $PPT $STORJ $AUDIO $DUSK $YFII $CREAM $MTL $GHST $WRX $BLZ $MFT $ROOK $RGT $KEEP $POWR $PERP $PAXG $DPI $SUPER $FARM $RLC $STAKE $RARI $HXRO $MAPS $FRM $DF $BZRX $BAO $OMI $KP3R
With the best security in the space?
That is quite the statement to say the least. Would you claim to be as secure as the biggest players in the industry? Security requires a lot of resources, manpower, knowledge and money.
Do other projects have such a security system? Can you mention at least one project that a person can contact if their coins have been stolen?
If not, then I would say that it is really "the best security in the space".
Are you saying if someone steals my coins you will reimburse me? It's almost a bit suspicious because there is no legitimate reason for you to be able to get coins back from a hacker, unless...
It's not actually reimbursing, it is recovering the stolen funds. The process freezes the wallet of the hacker so they cannot be moved after it is confirmed a crime is committed.
There is some more information here as to how the process works -
https://medium.com/energi/ebi-recovery-reduces-cybercrime-by-70-5fccc31dd5bAs to not having a legitimate reason to recover stolen property, I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. It is theft and, depending on the exact circumstances, fraud (through impersonating others). I don't think thieves should profit from stealing and the recovery process can prevent that.
I am not saying it is bad to see efforts that want to make crypto space more secure, but there is also a massive element of centralization in your process. Who knows if you don't hold at least 10% of the masternodes and can decide on your own what is a crime and what is not? What if a hacker steals the private key and signs a message? Also, I believe you will be confronted with many edge cases where it is not that easy to tell who is right and who is not.
I am at the mercy of your process then. What if someone is broke and doesn't have money for the deposit? That is a possibility. How would you decide then?
Do I have to provide KYC data before my first deposit? Or before my first withdrawal?
I would say there is more the potential of centralization as I do not know who owns what for masternodes but at the same time, there wouldn't be any positive side to Energi abusing this setup. In other words, abusing the process would cause issues and do damage to everyone including Energi.
As to a hacker getting the private key, that really doesn't matter as there always needs to be proof of the crime in addition to proof of involvement and our EBI does a thorough investigation. For the recovery process, the user also must follow the following (from
Prerequisites for Drain in the link I provided).
Third, the victim needs to submit a Proof of Action Fraud Report. If the victim reports a crime, like stolen funds or impersonation, they will have to file an official action fraud report with their local law enforcement authorities and prove that they have done so. This way, the EBI can act knowing that the alleged victim involves real-world police and legal institutions.
In an edge case, if it cannot be determined "who is right", we wouldn't be able to move forward but our EBI is very good at what they do (investigating). There is no guarantee the recovery process will always work but the alternative is almost 0 chance.
As to not being able to provide the funds, that is taken care of if you report the crime to our EBI. You only need to provide the funds for the various stages if you do not involve our EBI. This is to prevent abuse of the system (like someone trying to lock your wallet just because they want to).
As to the KYC requirement, that is basically the last step before the stolen funds would be released back to the rightful owner. In other words, the stolen funds would have been drained from the thieves wallet and the victim needs to provide KYC (among other documentation) prior to the funds being released and sent to their new wallet.
Finally, the alternative is almost no chance of recovering stolen funds. With as many scams and scammers that are in the crypto space, there needs to be security for everyone, especially those new to everything. One of the biggest "blocks" to crypto adoption in my experience is the fact people can lose everything with basically no chance of getting their funds back.
Thank you for the detailed answer. I can see the value in the action fraud report as the hacker would also have to explain where the funds came from the hacked address. The hacker would have to prove the whole chain of events until he arrives with his explanation at the address he hacked. He most likely can't do that.
The problem is that nobody really likes a centralized authority that has the final word. It is a bit similar to what we are used to anyway.
Wouldn't a security system with built in 2fa, for example an sms to your phone that first has to be verified before a hacker could drain the funds from an address? When an exchange gets hacked, the hackers usually find away to access many personal accounts because of a weakness in the exchange's security system.
Is there any way in your system that you could get access to user funds through a majority of masternode voting? That would mean that the distribution of your masternodes is in fact very crucial for the users! Or do the masternodes just reject the validity of the transaction when it is proven it was a hacker?
No problem and I am glad to answer any questions I can. Thanks for taking the time to bring up these points. Education is key and I'm sure many people will learn from this discussion.
Regarding the centralized authority, that is the purpose of the decentralized masternode voting. This puts the decision into the hands of the people running the nodes who have no incentive to do damage to the project/network because they would be hurting themselves. Again, there is the assumption that the team may own more than the required "voting power" but regardless, as the project grows, more people get involved which causes more decentralization. In fact, when we went from our Gen 2 to Gen 3, we had a vote and changed the minimum masternode requirement from 10 000 NRG to 1 000 NRG to further increase decentralization since more people could get involved. In the last year our masternode owner numbers have continued to climb partially due to this.
For something like built in security, I'm not on our tech side so I cannot say what the challenges to this could be when thinking of putting it right into the coding. I'm sure if it was something easy to do, there would be other projects with it included already by this point. There would also have to be the consideration of what happens if you lose your access to your 2FA. Just as a side note here, SMS 2FA is a bad idea due to
sim swapping.
If you meant putting the security feature in a wallet, the issue there is the number of wallets that can be used. For example we have our MyEnergiWallet but something like MetaMask can be used as well which would defeat the purpose.
I should add here as well that in the case of an exchange hack, as long as we are notified in time, NRG stolen can also be recovered which actually makes exchanges a little safer for those with NRG though we still advise keeping funds in a wallet that you control.
The way our system basically works is there is a delay of 5 000 confirmations when you are leaving the Energi ecosystem. So any movement in our ecosystem, like using Energiswap for trading among other assets, has no delay (just the 1 minute block time) but when you try to leave, that delay gives time to report what happened and provide the needed information to start the block and recovery procedure.
As to using the masternodes to gain funds, the only way that I am aware of would be through the recovery process but this is not something quick (with the required voting times it would take at least 1 month) so in the case of malicious proposals, there will be time to intervene with other masternode owners to lock the wallet attempting to steal the funds. Though it may be a hassle for a user that suffered a malicious attack like this, they wouldn't lose their funds in the end but I don't believe something like this would be likely due to having to own enough NRG to even get the minimum votes (currently 10% would be roughly 1.6 million NRG). Once you also consider that the chances of success are basically nothing, it wouldn't be worth it for a scammer or hacker, especially when there is much easier targets.
Regarding this
Or do the masternodes just reject the validity of the transaction when it is proven it was a hacker?
I am assuming you are talking about the "block". Basically, the wallet, once blocked, is unable to send transactions or even vote until the block is removed. If that wasn't what you were referring to, please let me know.
Have a great day
Holukai
EDIT: To fix quotes
