Topic: New Ixcoin fork -> I0coin - page 26. (Read 217119 times)

i0coin is up to 16 giga hash; and it is going up. Doublec you said if enough hash rate u will put it back up;
it is doubled of 8.

And more and more is joining. Get it up.
We all want it back.

Its 17.7 giga hash now
http://allchains.info/

Personally I wouldn't at all mind if exchanges ran pools to protect the network.
Without exchanges coins are essentially useless, so making some concessions to ensure usefulness (read:  profit) makes sense to me.

it's hard to answer this without more information. Are you saying your balance is lower than you thought? If so email [email protected] with details.

Right, I'm throwing out ideas for low hash rate chains moreso than 'fix i0coin'. I agree about a confederacy of exchanges/pools. Maybe have some way of all nodes voting to accept the message? Currently a low number of nodes with large hash power have a big impact on what gets accepted on the network. It'd be nice to be able to move this to all nodes somehow.

ixcoins and i0coins could be worthless - that should not be a surprise to anyone, it is a high risk area to play in and no one should be upset over the loss (or perceived loss).  I have some coins, even some SC 1.0's and namecoins sitting around somewhere, and will probably never do anything with them. 

DoubleC isn't forcing anyone to withdraw their coins, and if someone wanted to pay his costs of keeping the exchange open (but not trading), then the coins could sit there, but that doesn't make sense.

My initial thoughts:

It should be a new blockchain if it is tried out.  It would be preferable to somehow have it be a confederacy of exchanges and/or maybe pools so it is not totally dependent on one site.

Do that and you fix one problem at the cost of no longer having a peer-2-peer currency. The exchanges should not be trusted any more than anyone else.

Where did all my i0coins go from i0exchange.bitparking.com?

What are thoughts on this possible fix for the issues of having an exchange safely operate in a low hash rate system. Centralize the block chain around the exchange.

The exchange can broadcast a message, signed by a private key, that contains the latest checkpoint that the exchange wants to lock in. It broadcasts this message whenever it confirms a deposit (ie. a deposit reaches the number of confirmation blocks the exchange requires).  Nodes then automatically get updated with the block chain the exchange is using and refuse reorganizations beyond this check point.

This doesn't work in the presence of a >51% attacker either. This is one example of how an attack works:

1) Start mining from the current block but don't publish the blocks to the network.
2) Make a deposit.
3) Don't include your deposit transaction in the fork you are mining in (1) but include all others.
4) When the deposit clears trade for bitcoins.
5) Withdraw bitcoins.
6) When the bitcoin withdraw succeeds, publish your forked chain.
7) Since the new fork doesn't include your deposit you can repeat from (1) re-using the coins in the transaction you didn't include in the fork.

It doesn't matter how long I delay the withdrawal in (5) since they can wait as long as needed before doing (6). The only thing that upsets their plans is if the network hash rate increases and their fork is no longer the winning fork. But that's still no loss to them since they still have the bitcoins. They can buy more alternate coins and repeat until they succeed. This attack can easily be automated.

This is difficult to spot for exchanges unless they're monitoring chain reorg's and then check all transactions in the new chain. Even then it's too late and the bitcoins are gone and can't be recovered. If the exchange doesn't notice then at some point they run out of bitcoins and wonder why. The I0Coin exchange was monitoring chain reorg's but unfortunately I didn't catch on to what was happening until the 4th attempt or so due to me traveling and not being able to analyze it in detail.

Tying an exchange user to a verified identity would help since then the exchange user has to come up with verified identities to keep cheating the system, assuming the exchange bans accounts when it notices missing transactions after a chain reorg.

I think DoubleC doesn't stay up 24/7...

Doublec I thought of something, What if you make it; that if someone wants to do a transaction over 10BTC you manually check yourself; not everyone does this; so it wouldn't be as much work.

And if someone spams 5btc or something then you can check that and halt it.
Just a thought; so next time when this double spending attack occurs;
it will be only 10btc or so; and not 192BTC.

For any withdraws over 10BTC you check yourself.
It will cut like 95% of work. And it should be possible.

And a 48 hour withdraw as well; make that automatic, and over 10btc manual;
And if someone spams, you should be easily able to see yourself; and 48 hours is reasonable.

Maybe this will work?

I still have 5btc donation offer; if you get the i0coin bitparking exchange back up.


Or make a daily withdrawal limit; like 10BTC and if i go over it; you manually check yourself to see if its legit or a attack.

More like a $100 check and a five cent fee.

I agree. But you could if you wanted to. If you were helping the community, it's entirely possible the community would be willing to help you in return. But you can't make your customers cover your losses -- I hope you agree with that.

Except their circumstances don't require them to withdraw, *yours* do. My argument is since it's your circumstances that are compelling them to withdraw, you should cover the fee.

Right, but you are forcing them to terminate early. Otherwise, for example, they may have changed the Bitcoins to Ixcoins and avoided the withdrawal fee. It is your action that is making them incur the fee.

I agree. I'm not sure what I said that implied that you were charging a fee to recoup losses. (I think it may have been places where I was refuting arguments that you did not make, and likely would not agree with, for example when someone suggested that you opened the exchange to help the community and therefore it's okay to compel individuals to help you in return.)

Let me try another analogy. Say you and I had made a deal to exchange a $100 cashier's check for a bicycle. I get the cashier's check, costing myself $5. When I go to buy the bicycle, you say you changed your mind and are no longer willing to sell it. Should you reimburse me the $5?

I grant that the $5 is not a fee you are charging, it's a fee my bank charged for the cashier's check. But your promise induced me to incur that fee, and it is you who are defaulting on that promise.

Now, to be clear, I am not saying this is a big deal and you are a cheater or scammer if you don't make withdrawals free. It's a very small deal, and I realize that reasonable people can differ. But my opinion is that those fees are part of your losses, and you should not pass them on to your customers. You forced the customers to incur those charges by compelling them to withdraw when otherwise they may not have done so. It is equivalent to a fee for terminating an agreement early where you are compelling them to terminate early.

That's my opinion, you are free to disagree.

Then put a 10% fee or something, make it really high.

hmm, well i guess i0coin is dead.
I don't think there is a way around this

Yes, this is the issue with IP banning. I used to IP ban people with suspicious activity but they just moved to TOR. The people who did the double spend used TOR.

Read up on TOR, brother.

maybe increase the fee to like 1.5% on both sides; i would still use it.

But yeah you do have good points on that.
And manual check ups with denying of btc for suspicious activity
would lead to been hammered on fourms.

You do have to note; that a lot of people are trolls.
I would just ignore it and get it back up.

Things i would put in
-------------------
-1.5% fee both sides
-72 hour manual check up(less work then 24)
-500 confirmation blocks
-Ban any IP for suspicious activity; the ones who stole 192BTC permanently ban them, If you do
this to all of the small amount of people who does this, then they will be eliminated.


You do have the power to ban anyone; you are the host of it; you are in complete control; just put
stricter harsher rules. And ignore the trolls on the fourm


My 5btc offer is still up.


You do have to note, that this is a very few amount of people, with these fees, i am sure you can pull a profit
And stricter rules; and perhaps my 5btc will help you get there a little faster.
As soon as i see it up; i will donate to you.

I have 3 giga hash, so once this is back up i can throw my rigs on to i0coins, making the hashing network even more powerful.
Should help a bit.



 

This won't work if someone has the majority of hash power. They can always rewrite the chain, they just need to wait. The higher confirmation just makes it harder for someone with less than 50% of the hash rate. i0/ixcoin make it even easier due to the time travel exploit not being fixed and the lack of an active developer/maintainer to set checkpoints regularly.


This would be a significant manual effort and not something I want to do. It'll also raise complaints if I refuse a withdraw due to suspicious activity and then get hammered for it on the forums.

I didn't want to close the exchange. But I had to given the existing situation. What i0/ixcoin needs for exchanges to safely operate are:

* More hash power
* An active maintainer of the software
* Fix the time travel exploit
* Regular checkpoints added to the software

I have an idea; why not set the confirmation limit to a 1000, i know it would be insane, but i perfer to have to up running; with 10 days to deposit; then having it shutdown.

And if a double spending attack occurs; you can prevent it giving you enough time, please give some thought.

I don't want to see i0coin die completely.

If its not enough, put 2000; for everyone using it you still make money, from the fee.
So you shouldn't completely kill it.

Why not make the bitcoin withdraws all manual checks from you?
Some do that; and manually check, make it a 24 hour withdraw on bitcoins,
Make it take 24 hours.

Or something.

Just some ideas, please consider it. Thanks

If you do get it back up with these; i will donate 5BTC...