Topic: Supercoin is fundamentally broken - read why inside and save yourself money (Read 3632 times)

This all was actually started by one guy, and to be honest I haven't seen him in Supercoin or Mammothcoin thread ever so i have no idea why. Too bad his scheme actually worked and bullets were being fired from both sides. I don't really see the point in keeping this up though in the end we are all working towards the same goal.

Thanks for the insightful posts fluffy.

For the unaware, fluffy is one of the Monero devs and as you can tell from his messages, he knows crypto extremely well.

I agree that FUD is immature, the thread came off as a personal attack more than just common FUD. I think that is what really added fuel to the fire. I dont condone to FUD and I think it puts a bad reputation on communities in general. Our XC community is for the most part very sensible and down to earth, but I guess if you push even the nicest people they will respond an equal push back.

Well some individuals deserved this, I must say. It's unfortunate it got an impact on the whole SUPER community while only few persons fudded (and honestly I believe it was mainly people from mammoth and no 'real' community members of SUPER). Supercointeam, me and others asked these people to stop the fud several times because it was basically immature the way they did this, and they were damaging our reputation aswell. None of us ever supported them, let that be clear. But since no community is able to decide who invests in its coin we can not have full control over them.

Not sure why some XC investors took the same path as them and started a counter-fud, instead of just opening a thread of their own with answers. But I truely hope 'our' fudders learned their lesson.

Supercoin Q&A by the supercoindev has been posted.
Hopefully it'll clear up some technical misunderstandings.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8426652

this thread was started because you have idiots in your community that picked a stupid fight against the XC community (which is 10x larger than Super's) and spread FUD about our coin and  this thread was more of a retaliation. Our community is usually very good and for such a large community, we have relatively few people that like to go around and stir the pot. However, the self-moderated thread about XC made by a Supercoin investor was pathetic with most of XC's posts being deleted only leaving FUD comments for the entire community to see. On top of that,  the MAMM dev accused our dev of cheating, we had Supercoin investors come in and call XC a scam, a cheat, liars....pretty much anything to defame XC. After a few days of arguing, and dealing with constant bullshit in the self moderated thread (and it was obvious Supercoin investors was trying to skew the story by looking like we didn't have any legitimate responses to their inquiries, however we did and they were constantly deleted), many XC investors were aggravated beyond belief and one opened this thread, just to sort of 'balance the bullshit'.

So in order to send $1000 you first need to have $2000 available AND it needs to be tied up until this transaction is complete?

I'm going to guess, but I may be reaching, that this will never have any sort of longevity:-P

Some little words about first beta-test made with supercoindev today on irc:

[21:49] This is normal, this is what happened:
[21:50] you send 2.987754 to me
[21:50] 1st thing is that you send 2.987754 x2 + fee (0.5 coin) = 6.475 to multisig address
[21:50] this is the escrow
[21:51] then mixer and guarantor will deposit 2.987754 to escrow
[21:51] then mixer will send 2.987754 to the destination (me)
[21:51] after sender (you) verifies the money indeed sent to the destination
[21:52] it will return one 2.987754 to you
[21:52] one 2.987544 to mixer (because he sent it to destination)
[21:52] and send service fees to mixer/guarator
[21:53] then return the deposit amnount of mixer / guarator to them
[21:53] ok why so complcated process?
[21:53] because this is a trustless system
[21:53] the sender can not trust anyone
[21:53] so he only put money in escrow
[21:54] if mixer said he sent to destination, but did not actually do it
[21:54] the sender will get all his money back from escrow

A malleability attack doesn't stop the transaction from going through, it just mostly goes through with a different tx ID to the one kicked back by your wallet. Your coins won't disappear, the recipient address will still receive them, and nothing can be stolen. Malleability does not and cannot change the validity of the transaction, the destination, the amount, the p2sh hash (if there is one), the inputs, the outputs, or anything else. The only thing it changes is the transaction ID.

Therefore, if you made a payment to your friend, and sent him the transaction ID, he may not be able to match that with his address history by payment ID. He will still be able to match it based on where it came from and the amount. Bitcoin is still vulnerable to this, as pointed out in the link you reference, and Eligius and other pools will still gladly mine valid transactions that fail isStandard() tests.

Are you all afraid that supercoin could kill 99% of altcoins and make a new standar in crypto world or what?

You're a denigrating a coin where price is between 1-3k and market volume is one of the lowest ever regarding anon coin.
So, why all this posts again a coin that is at bottom of most altcoin?

There are coins on bittrex like Eutopium,solecoin,quantum2,shadowcoin etc etc that got 20 times more value and volume market that supercoin, and all is focusing only on supercoin.

So,you're fudding a coin at 2k. I can understand if this coin were quoted 80k-140k....but at this prices...this really make no sense at all.

Supercoin got a daily volume of about 0.8btc a day x exchange(pump and dump period apart).
So,why posting all this stuff about a little coin as supercoin?

FYI - New update using Supercoin's real network has been also posted today by the dev.

Those are the screenshots from alpha testing on Mammoth wallet done by Mammothdev, Superdev and a bunch of testers, there's also video's if interested.

Or you could apply as a beta tester if you have doubts, at least you'll be the first to know if there's something wrong.

I recommend newcomers to read through supercoindev's previous posts before making assumptions.
He has always been professional with zero condescending remarks. He's a genuine coder at heart.
Please don't confuse "supercointeam" with "supercoindev" account. They are 2 different people.




More here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/supercoindev-341100

No, if it is that vulnerable, why is Bitcoin not compromised so far?

Go there, explain to them that they are "doomed", cause panic, and get rich in two ways: cheap bitcoin, and bitcoin gained by modifying tx...

They will laugh in your face, sir...Come on, steal BTC, and pump your coins with it...

How will you change tx id of every transaction, between all senders and receivers sir? If this is possible, somebody would destroy Bitcoin long time ago.

More people lost more BTC on LTC, DRK, SYS, VRC, VIA, VOOT and even XC due to whales & P/D.
When a coin & its devs are not a scam, people losing BTC due to bad trades are not coin's fault.

I also hate self-moderated threads. I also hate threads with a feeling of religion/cult group. (so many)
But there is no need to attack other coins unless they really are a scam. That's not the case here.

His last comment:

"Also there are several ways the tx verification can be done (not always need txid) as pointed out by strasboug."

No need to clutch on straws. He seems to know exactly what he is doing unlike us.
So my argument still stands. Code isn't finished & public beta test hasn't started.
Just wait until it's released before making accusations based on assumptions.

SUPER and MAMM are apparently the same team (devs), once a time I had some MAMM, dev 100% delusional, saying nonsenses since begining like saving animals rights, they keep flooding their own thread to gain attention, it´s kinda funny: of 10 posts in SUPER thread ,4 are hot girls pics with superman uniform hahah.... I almost get a lost on MAMM...altcoins nevermore, learned the lesson, from now on just BTC matters, enough PnD shit.

MAMM dev now deleting 90% of the posts, saying his under FUD attack, both coins are unreliable since day one.

See: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/warning-mammothcoin-dev-deleting-users-posts-and-attacking-other-coins-737468

Tks for the explanation, will help others to do not loose their precious BTC into a broken tech.

I will admit that I am not a pro coin coder.  I've just recently started looking into how some of this works.  I have a logical question...

"Firstly, not all possible malleability vectors are "fixed" in 0.9, so transactions are still quite malleable and the transaction ID can still change."

If I understand what you are saying here, TX IDs can be changed or fudged to cause issues with tracking that transaction.  I assume this can cause coins to get lost or stolen.  So my question is, assuming my previous two assumptions are correct, if this is a real issue AND is easy to do, why aren't you forging btc transactions and stealing BTC all day long?  The problem that you say Super has should be a problem that every coin out there has. 

It's trivially easy. Maybe 20 lines of python code that use libbitcoin bindings - all I have to do is watch for transactions broadcast that match a certain spec, and then I can rebroadcast hundreds of the same transaction with just the slightest thing changed so that each of those transactions has a different tx id, and voila: the transaction will be included in a block, but with a different transaction ID from the one expected by the automated system.


Yes, Bitcoin has its own special set of vulnerabilities all with various levels of likelihood or ease of attack. One would hope that a system based on Bitcoin would at least try to not introduce more vulnerabilities than Bitcoin already has.

I'm not making accusations, I'm pointing out where the design is fundamentally flawed. The tx id malleability is the least of my concerns, so don't conflate the two. The system is fundamentally flawed, and it should be dropped in favour of a system that has provable and verifiable cryptography and mathematics behind it.

In fact, the coin itself is not flawed, all the developer needs to do is dump the flawed system, come up with a new one that isn't broken, publish a whitepaper on it that express (mathematically) the underpinnings of the system, and then open it up for debate and discussion. But he won't. Just like every other altcoin "developer", he'll push out diagrams and walls of text meant to demonstrate technical ability, and then write and release shoddy code that embodies a broken design. No mathematics. No cryptography (who needs that in a cryptocurrency, after all). No research. No discussion among clever people that can make a good design even better. Because who needs all that stuff when you can have a diagram hastily shoved together in PowerPoint!

/rant

The foundation is built on tx id's so it doesn't matter what else is in place.

The fact is, the Supercoin dev said don't worry about transaction malleability, it's fixed in bitcoin 0.9... except it's not fixed and the transaction ID can still change. So the OP of this topic is still valid.