Topic: Pros and Cons to Anon coins, Including Darkcoin / Cloakcoin, lets discuss them. - page 5. (Read 8787 times)

Then you don't understood why we made this thread in the first place....

Then you don't understood why we made this thread in the first place....

This is not a discuses anyone more ... everyone is just throwing his coin in here and trying to advertise so their coin gets pumped how pathetic is this really... Please stay on the topic and let us only focus on DARKCOIN and CLOAKCOIN. Can we do this ? Thank you

Why reinvent the wheel? Just use Electrum (open source!) or SPV.

Some mobile devices will run with a full node. They'll stake and everything.

Other devices (say, dumbphones) that can't run a node will end up using PoBC. The basic idea is:
- dumbphone node contacts other nodes
- provably establishes that the other nodes' blockchains are legit
- thereby proves that a given tx is legit


Why would you say that this is ill-advised? In my view mobile-friendliness is absolutely critical to mainstream adoption.

How can you tell which nodes are good and which nodes are spying? You can't.

I don't get it but ok I guess. 

I'm confused, are you suggesting that mobile devices will run a full node? That seems ill-advised for XC or Monero or any other cryptocurrency.

I don't have deep enough understanding so I'm just throwing ideas around here. But there must be a way to distribute the count of the running nodes in trustless manner (similar to how the blockchain is distributed) without every wallet having to go and ping every masternode. This would obviously mean that the implementation wouldn't be so straightforward anymore. And, the count is needed only before doing the denomination, which could be once a day, or once a week for most users.

How can you tell which nodes are good and which nodes are spying? You can't.

This is not a discuses anyone more ... everyone is just throwing his coin in here and trying to advertise so their coin gets pumped how pathetic is this really... Please stay on the topic and let us only focus on DARKCOIN and CLOAKCOIN. Can we do this ? Thank you

There'll be absolutely masses of running nodes on XC's network.

Because of XChat:

http://i.imgur.com/D57dl0F.jpg

Again, since transactions are fragmented into small pieces and then sent through the network, this attack would not be effective.  The attacker could try to spy the network, but the truth of the matter is that the remaining good nodes are still going to end up handling the transactions, however few they may be.  But again, since every single wallet is a node, I just don't see this attack being feasible.

I'm confused, are you suggesting that mobile devices will run a full node? That seems ill-advised for XC or Monero or any other cryptocurrency.

The "monitoring the state of the network" thing is then a huge security risk AND a massive drain. This means that every single one of the (potentially tens or hundreds of thousands) have to reach out every single one of the (potentially several hundred) masternodes. This is a massive traffic burden, but it also means that a bad actor can setup (or compromise) just a single masternode in order to identify the IP address of every single node.

You are right that every coin has to use nodes, but bear in mind that 50% of nodes becoming unavailable in most cryptocurrencies isn't a showstopper. The rest will continue to operate and maintain consensus, and when those 50% come back online they'll just catch up to the network state.

You're right about Cryptonote coins. I should've worded my statement more carefully.

My opinion of Cryptonote is that it causes an unworkable degree of blockchain bloat - so much so that it's unlikely to scale even on PCs, never mind on mobile phones. Boolberry have made hotly disputed claims about being able to reduce bloat, but to my knowledge this has not been implemented yet.

If a coin bloats, then in my opinion it should not be considered "workable", since it simply can't scale to mainstream (or even sizeable niche) adoption.

So although there's a clear sense in which Cryptonote coins are "working", there's also a clear sense in which they're not workable solutions.


XC, on the other hand, is designed from the ground up for mobile. It's eminently scalable.

Disagree. Not every XC user will run their wallet 24/7 - how many nodes are there right now? There are 800+ DRK masternodes running 24/7 atm.

Even though some people are running DRK masternodes in their home computers behind adsl or cable connections, most of them are still on dedicated servers or clouds that have gigabit connections. I would imagine it is completely opposite in XC's case. It doesn't take much to ddos someones laptop running on dsl or 3g phone.

Obviously this is not easily quantifiable, but the bolded part is just not true imo.

XC does also, in that every single wallet is a node.  Thus, there's no central point that can be targeted for a ddos.

It's the same thing. XC node that participates in anonymization requires an open incoming TCP port, and the attacker can ddos those nodes just as well as drk masternodes.

In addition, transactions are multisig so they require several parties to sign before they are processed.  If a bad node alters a transaction to steal funds, or refuses to sign, the transaction won't be processed, so you can't lose funds.  Also, since there are redundant connections between nodes that provide multiple pathways for funds, if a node fails to sign a transaction there are others ready to take its place.  Pretty cool stuff, really.

The goal when ddos'ing nodes is to first set up many nodes yourself, then ddos the other nodes, so you can then have a control of big enough percentage of the nodes so you can spy the transactions with good enough success.

All of the CryptoNote coins do (Monero, Boolberry, Bytecoin (BCN) etc.) They have working anonymity from their launch. If you take Bytecoin's claim at face value (it's pretty clear it's bullshit) they have been around for 2 years. Even knowing that it's likely a false claim meant to cover up their 82% premine, you still come face-to-face with an indisputable fact: Bytecoin's first commit to github was on 15 November 2013, and already then the code worked and provided cryptographically untraceable and unlinkable transactions. Monero, too, was launched (fairly) on 18 April 2014, before XC even came into existence.

As much as I think Bytecoin is a fail because of their premine, they are the ONLY ones that can lay claim to having the FIRST "working anonymity". Monero and the all the other CryptoNote coins can lay claim to being the ONLY cryptocurrencies that currently have a 100% working solution to cryptographically untraceable and unlinkable transactions.

If you don't believe me, pick any transaction on the Monero blockchain (eg. http://monerochain.info/tx/49ee290a4e65bc554382089d778c1ac26b20a5b6044d3fa4b1767780e2617546) and try figure out the address of the person that sent the coins, the address of the person they were sending to, and they amount. I'll gladly even setup two wallets and transfer between them and give you the transaction ID to give it a try. Oh and these transactions are instantaneous, no waiting for a mixing hop to finish or anything.