Pages:
Author

Topic: Supercoin is fundamentally broken - read why inside and save yourself money - page 3. (Read 3632 times)

full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
They are even deleting normal responses that don't agree with them and provide good arguments..

not only that, but along with posting stuff like this

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8386280

How can you leave a post like this up and remove other ones. I had about 10 posts deleted so far, its clear that they are trying to paint a picture that is skewed in their favor and making it seems like we cannot come up with a legitimate response even though we have multiple times. Utterly pathetic, I wish the worst for Supercoin and its future.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
They are even deleting normal responses that don't agree with them and provide good arguments..
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
SUPERCOIN BACKFIRE IMMINENT Grin


Even though I dont usually partake in these types of threads, this is well deserved
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
Would have said exactly this a lot sooner... it's just that the kids at Super & Mammoth seemed so happy these days, I just couldn't be the one to break the bad news to them.
legendary
Activity: 1190
Merit: 1000
To commodify ethicality is to ethicise the market
Read this comment on Supercoin by fluffypony, one of the Monero devs, who explains why n-of-m multisig is not safe:

"The "guarantor" is being trusted to do arbitration between the sender and the mixer. Therefore, given the nature of 2-of-3 multisig transactions, the guarantor and the mixer can sign the transaction, and then refuse to sign the cancellation transaction, leaving the sender out of luck and out of funds."

Also, read this, why using the txid to mixing is not safe:

"Even worse - the workflow is based on the txid and verifying the txid. Have we not learnt by now that the txid can change? How do you people not understand that this was the very thing that mtgox blamed for their destruction?

The issue here is relying on the txid, when malleability has shown that the txid can change. This so-called "trustless system" relies on txid's to confirm transactions in an automated fashion. That is bad, stupid, and fundamentally broken."


Be careful not to fall for new shady coins promising the earth and screaming FUD at more established coins.




It certainly beats me how trusted third parties - "escrow" services, a very pre-Bitcoin thing - are presented as either trustless or anonymous.

m-of-n multisig was not designed for trustless anonymous payments.

legendary
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1001
Read this comment on Supercoin by fluffypony, one of the Monero devs, who explains why n-of-m multisig used in Supercoin is not safe:

"The "guarantor" is being trusted to do arbitration between the sender and the mixer. Therefore, given the nature of 2-of-3 multisig transactions, the guarantor and the mixer can sign the transaction, and then refuse to sign the cancellation transaction, leaving the sender out of luck and out of funds."

Also, read this, why using the txid to do mixing in Supercoin is not safe:

"Even worse - the workflow is based on the txid and verifying the txid. Have we not learnt by now that the txid can change? How do you people not understand that this was the very thing that mtgox blamed for their destruction?

The issue here is relying on the txid, when malleability has shown that the txid can change. This so-called "trustless system" relies on txid's to confirm transactions in an automated fashion. That is bad, stupid, and fundamentally broken."


Be careful not to fall for new shady coins promising the earth and screaming FUD at more established coins.


Pages:
Jump to: