Topic: rpietila Altcoin Observer - page 186. (Read 387493 times)

If you're referring to payment id's, you do know that that's a massive security risk right? Try reading your own damn thread! This is ridiculous.

Theres no waittime in Monero and CN in general, stop your bullshit, especially with 1 Minute blocktimes it doesnt matter if its included in the first or second block, you have no idea how mining works in general it seems, pools can include whatever tx they want.

Why the hell should someone run/use masternodes if u can archive way better anonymity without them. Theres simply no reason and will never be. Your argument is just so umbelievable stupid - people should run masternode servers (and they currently need around 7000 USD for that!) but cant store a 700 MB blockchain on their desktop pc - haha?! Does Darkcoin have Blockchain pruning? NO.

PS: You mention that Masternodes never know the sender and receiver? yeah? How the hell will YOU proof you made a Payment then? Tell me - fail by design. In Monero/CN you can do that. This basically means you Darkcoin is impractical for a lot of things, including e-commerce.

I've listed the Flaws of Darkcoin and Monero.

Darkcoin's Flaws:

1) Darkcoin has a 50% instamine by it's own developers during launch, as the block reward was set to 500, and there was no windows wallets/miners. Evan, the developer, and Internetape, the other developer, instamined over 1million Darkcoin's within 24 hours.

2) Darkcoin's name itself, Darkcoin, will always be affiliated with illegal activity like the Darkweb, Drugs, etc, and the name itself ensures that Darkcoin will never reach anything close to mainstream acceptance.

3) Darkcoin's "anonymity" is based on coinjoin, it simply mixes users coins around, making it harder to track it. However, if even the slightest taint if found when mixing the coins, an investigator will be able to deduce who sent what and who received what. The maker of coinjoin, Gmaxwell, deeply criticized Darkcoin since it's coinjoin based "anonymity" is basically a joke.

4) Darkcoin's mixing system/coinjoin relies on something called Masternodes, Masternodes are nodes that are set up by people, anyone can set one up, and Masternodes are the things that mix the coin around. Masternodes also present many risks besides giving trivial "anonymity", if all masternodes are owned by one individual, he will be able to "de-anonymize" Darkcoin and see all transactions clearly.

5) Darkcoin's Masternode Payment system has forked the network many times, and has failed Twice in the effort to pay the owners of Masternodes.

6) Darkcoin's Masternode/Darksend system is closed source, so that means the developers could be stealing coins, or doing any other malicious things, and it will remain unnoticed

7) The Masternodes can always be DDOSed, effectively shutting them down, if the majority of Masternodes were taken offline(they are mostly hosted on Amazon servers), then Darkcoin's trivial anonymity will completely shut off

There are many many other flaws, it will take up too much space to list, so I've listed the main ones.

Monero's Flaws:

1) Monero's bloating/scaling is an issue, where the blockchain itself takes up a lot of space on someone's computer, however, there have solutions to this, as shown by Crypto_Zoidberg, after he fixed this issue with his own coin. The issue has pretty much been fixed anyway, since bloating was caused by dust payments from pools, and with a recent update, those dust payments have been taken off. But because I think it will look to unfair compared to Darkcoin's 101 flaws, I had to list a "flaw" for Monero

2) That's it.

CryptoNote doesn't hide the amount and the payer is mixed with a limited number of numerous other potential payers, so the IP correlation can be used to narrow the possibilities statistically and home in on identity, by observing patterns across all users. Thus the lack of IP address obfuscation in CryptoNote (assuming Tor is really a honey pots, and or most users fail to employ Tor) reduces the anonymity. -gmaxwell


While it may not be able to scale at Bitcoin levels, Monero's chain atm is twice Bitcoins, which is very reasonable considering it gives the highest level of anonymity there is for cryptocoins right now. He also doesn't say Anything about it being impossible to reduce, why you may ask? Because Crypto_Zoidber already reduced it for his own coin and reduced bloat by 50%-70%, and Monero also reduced the majority of the bloat, which was caused by dust transactions. Again, BrilliantRocket, it's either you greatly misinterpret information given to you, or you lie and try to manipulate others with selective wording

_______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________

CoinJoin’s algorithm suffers from not being atomic and thus it can be repeatedly jammed by an adversary, i.e. denial-of-service. This is because first the inputs have to be collected, then the outputs have to blind signed with a group signature, and then finally all inputs have to signed. If any one of the participant senders fails to complete all the steps, the transaction is jammed and the process must start again. All proposals for throttling or blacklisting adversaries was argued to be ineffective and intractable. Darkcoin innovated CoinJoin by adding a collateral payment which is forfeited by participants who fail to complete all steps. This requires a random master node to break the unlinkability as it knows the matching output of each input. It is assumed that not all master nodes will be adversaries and thus sending multiple times through different master nodes will provide a probablistic level of unlinkability. The master nodes are purchased and it isn’t clear that a sufficiently powerful adversary couldn't sufficiently Sybil attack by acquiring a larger percentage of the master nodes. There is also concern this might also enable the adversary to steal collateral payments. Also the master nodes aren’t untraceable and thus could perhaps be held liable by governments for breaking AML and KYC laws. CoinJoin and Darkcoin suffer from the simultaneity timing problem that other spenders need to send spends of the same amount simultaneously. -gmaxwell

Gmaxwell also shows that while Darkcoin have "advanced" coinjoin, it still suffers from the same issues, not to mention the Masternode centralization problem.

Darkcoin's anonymity is simply put, Trivial and Inferior to Cryptonote anonymity.

. Running a node for Bitcoin/Monero is cheap, Much Much cheaper than running a Masternode for Darkcoin(which costs $7,000 at todays price btw)

. Darkcoin's trivial anonymity is an "advanced" version of coinjoin, is simply mixes users coins around and hopes for the best.

Yes it's possible.  No, the way he would do it wouldn't cause a lot of bloat.  Nor would it complicate the UI.

Fixed that for you. Until I don't read about "wait for your transaction to be included guys, everything is fine!". Until it doesn't take an exorbitant amount of space to run a node. Darksend has had some big changes recently. There is never a point where a single masternode knows both the sender and recipient. By using multiple nodes, the practicality of node collusion can be eliminated.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. At no point are the masternodes given your private keys. It is impossible for them to steal coins. That's XC you're thinking of.

OK 5 years? DRK security issues are much more urgent

What people prefers:

+ XMR or BBR's blockchain is bloated. It is larger than Bitcoin's
+ DRK is insecure. Its technology is obsolete

But if you use "special" nodes for special tasks with closed source software all hosted at amazon, ovh and digital ocean...its hardly decentralized, i am just waiting for the first reports of abused and confiscated mixing nodes and people losing their money...

Certainly not right now. In 5 or more years, who can say.

Sorry, but where the f*ck do you have this sh*t from with "only pool otpimizations" from?
We have multiple devs working fulltime on it: fluffypony, tewinget, mikezackles, tacotime (50%) and th rest of the team is putting every second of their free time into the project. That's a bit more than just one guy.

Fixed that for you. Until I don't read about "wait for your transaction to be included guys, everything is fine!". Until it doesn't take an exorbitant amount of space to run a node. Darksend has had some big changes recently. There is never a point where a single masternode knows both the sender and recipient. By using multiple nodes, the practicality of node collusion can be eliminated.

Monero supporters are almost as bad as the religious cuckoos that deny evolution.

English as a second language or cognitive deficiency? Hmm, hard to tell. Either way, the idea behind a discussion board is for posts to be coherent.

Any non-morons want to criticize Darkcoin? I'm waiting.

How would it become exceedingly difficult? AFAIK right now it can be done by any masternode.

Even if it's impossible, the Darksend privacy is still fundamentally flawed, see http://www.scribd.com/doc/227369807/Bitcoin-Coinjoin-Not-Anonymous-v01 and http://www.coinjoinsudoku.com/advisory/.

Monero has impractical working anonymity now.

Just wait for your transaction to be included guys. LOL That'll go over well with the real world.

"There is also concern this might also enable the adversary to steal collateral payments"
Badly behaving nodes are banned by the network.

"master nodes aren’t untraceable"
Doesn't monero have nodes? Yes? Are they untraceable?

"other spenders need to send spends of the same amount simultaneously"
It's all automatic, users don't have to worry about that. User clicks send, and Darksend will wait until there are sufficient sends in the pool. And after the Darksend becomes mandatory (or default option) this won't be a problem as there will be a lot of people actually using the coin and creating transactions, as the coin can actually handle > 5 transactions per block.

"Masternode centralization problem"
Doesn't monero have nodes? Yes? => "centralization problem"

Getting things done takes time. I know you're used to coins that just copy and paste, make some insignificant changes , and then claim legitimacy. Masternodes are paid directly from the block reward. Just a little bit more difficult than pool optimization, no? Also, last I checked, your lead dev isn't even full time! That sure inspires trust in the project.

See you then. Meanwhile, Darkcoin will become the go to privacy-centric in several months. There are already solid ideas on how to make unmasking transactions through node collusion exceedingly difficult. Impractical even for an entity that controls half the nodes. So once that is done, what exactly does CN have to offer?

In regards to Anonymint, when he speaks I would pay attention. He is at genius / near genius levels when it comes to cryptography and math. If he says it cannot scale, it cannot scale. The blockchain CANNOT be pruned anywhere near enough for it to be a practical, anonymous currency.

CoinJoin’s algorithm suffers from not being atomic and thus it can be repeatedly jammed by an adversary, i.e. denial-of-service. This is because first the inputs have to be collected, then the outputs have to blind signed with a group signature, and then finally all inputs have to signed. If any one of the participant senders fails to complete all the steps, the transaction is jammed and the process must start again. All proposals for throttling or blacklisting adversaries was argued to be ineffective and intractable. Darkcoin innovated CoinJoin by adding a collateral payment which is forfeited by participants who fail to complete all steps. This requires a random master node to break the unlinkability as it knows the matching output of each input. It is assumed that not all master nodes will be adversaries and thus sending multiple times through different master nodes will provide a probablistic level of unlinkability. The master nodes are purchased and it isn’t clear that a sufficiently powerful adversary couldn't sufficiently Sybil attack by acquiring a larger percentage of the master nodes. There is also concern this might also enable the adversary to steal collateral payments. Also the master nodes aren’t untraceable and thus could perhaps be held liable by governments for breaking AML and KYC laws. CoinJoin and Darkcoin suffer from the simultaneity timing problem that other spenders need to send spends of the same amount simultaneously. -gmaxwell

Gmaxwell also shows that while Darkcoin have "advanced" coinjoin, it still suffers from the same issues, not to mention the Masternode centralization problem.

Darkcoin's anonymity is simply put, Trivial and Inferior to Cryptonote anonymity.