Topic: Want to know about Provably fair... (Read 2434 times)
I understood the grid example. But, I wonder how a dice game can be provably fair, because we may verify SHA256 of the amount that will come after roll beforehand. But, how to know, that this amount is itself not rigged, i.e. while playing a high roller where the amount needs to be more than 75, if the system takes the amount as 67, player will always lose. Am I missing something ?
I see some gambling sites mention that they are provably fair. They provide some seed and ask to check some hash or whatever. My question is, can this fairness really be checked from outside ? Where are they twisting to make sure the house's win ?
Yes, it can.
.....
P.S. This's only principle, and can be used in various way. You should check description on particular site.
Thanks wusolini, you explained very well, I also always thought how probably fair work.
You're welcome.
I see some gambling sites mention that they are provably fair. They provide some seed and ask to check some hash or whatever. My question is, can this fairness really be checked from outside ? Where are they twisting to make sure the house's win ?
Yes, it can.
.....
That is an awesome explanation. I wonder how the house make sure that they win in the long term ? Do they really gamble with the user choice ?
I'm glad you understand, I've tried to make it in simple.
there is always a some formula, that guarantees long time profit to operator. And if not, it can be just adapted
. So don't worry, casinos will never bankrupt (as long as they have active players)So, do u mean, the program inside is rigged for the long run that make sure the house will always win ?
Not rigged, but calculated. It's all about math and likelihood
something like: unlikely you win , even more unlikely you win a jackpot and likely you loose, but most likely the game wins.
But it's a different story, the game is still provably (you can check it) fair (result is random or known ahead or ... )
well calculated game don't need to cheat, just need to sustain as long and get as much players as possible
So don't worry, casinos will never bankrupt (as long as they have active players)
The house edge would bring profits to the house in the long term, but the house could lose in the short term.
And so casinos need to set the max win correctly (for example, using Kelly formula).
Thanks for pointing out Kelly formula ... it's all about math
So don't worry, casinos will never bankrupt (as long as they have active players)
The house edge would bring profits to the house in the long term, but the house could lose in the short term.
And so casinos need to set the max win correctly (for example, using Kelly formula).
I see some gambling sites mention that they are provably fair. They provide some seed and ask to check some hash or whatever. My question is, can this fairness really be checked from outside ? Where are they twisting to make sure the house's win ?
Yes, it can.
.....
P.S. This's only principle, and can be used in various way. You should check description on particular site.
Thanks wusolini, you explained very well, I also always thought how probably fair work.
You're welcome.
I see some gambling sites mention that they are provably fair. They provide some seed and ask to check some hash or whatever. My question is, can this fairness really be checked from outside ? Where are they twisting to make sure the house's win ?
Yes, it can.
.....
That is an awesome explanation. I wonder how the house make sure that they win in the long term ? Do they really gamble with the user choice ?
I'm glad you understand, I've tried to make it in simple.
there is always a some formula, that guarantees long time profit to operator. And if not, it can be just adapted
. So don't worry, casinos will never bankrupt (as long as they have active players)So, do u mean, the program inside is rigged for the long run that make sure the house will always win ?
I see some gambling sites mention that they are provably fair. They provide some seed and ask to check some hash or whatever. My question is, can this fairness really be checked from outside ? Where are they twisting to make sure the house's win ?
Yes, it can.
.....
P.S. This's only principle, and can be used in various way. You should check description on particular site.
Thanks wusolini, you explained very well, I also always thought how probably fair work.
You're welcome.
I see some gambling sites mention that they are provably fair. They provide some seed and ask to check some hash or whatever. My question is, can this fairness really be checked from outside ? Where are they twisting to make sure the house's win ?
Yes, it can.
.....
That is an awesome explanation. I wonder how the house make sure that they win in the long term ? Do they really gamble with the user choice ?
I'm glad you understand, I've tried to make it in simple.
there is always a some formula, that guarantees long time profit to operator. And if not, it can be just adapted
. So don't worry, casinos will never bankrupt (as long as they have active players)So, do u mean, the program inside is rigged for the long run that make sure the house will always win ?
Gambling sucks, you will lose in the long run due to house edge.
But thats the thing with gambling, u gotta know when to stop.
I see some gambling sites mention that they are provably fair. They provide some seed and ask to check some hash or whatever. My question is, can this fairness really be checked from outside ? Where are they twisting to make sure the house's win ?
Yes, it can.
.....
P.S. This's only principle, and can be used in various way. You should check description on particular site.
Thanks wusolini, you explained very well, I also always thought how probably fair work.
You're welcome.
I see some gambling sites mention that they are provably fair. They provide some seed and ask to check some hash or whatever. My question is, can this fairness really be checked from outside ? Where are they twisting to make sure the house's win ?
Yes, it can.
.....
That is an awesome explanation. I wonder how the house make sure that they win in the long term ? Do they really gamble with the user choice ?
I'm glad you understand, I've tried to make it in simple.
there is always a some formula, that guarantees long time profit to operator. And if not, it can be just adapted
. So don't worry, casinos will never bankrupt (as long as they have active players)As i can see in the algo, there is no backdoor as such. Then why it is said time & again that NSA may have a backdoor to decode SHA-256 ?
If you can prove there is no backdoor, then you either a) know something very mathematically powerful that nobody else knows yet, or b) are misguided as to what a backdoor is.
Nobody has been able to mathematically rule out a backdoor so far, even in an "open-source" algorithm. Remember heartbleed? That was a backdoor in an open-source cryptosystem, that may have been known by some organizations, that may have been able to use it before others even knew about it.
A backdoor is not something that is plainly evident when looking at the code; in fact it should not be evident at all. However, some organization may have knowledge of some mathematical procedure that they can use to reverse a hash, find a collision, or otherwise do things that a cryptosystem assumes they cannot do.
Ok... then it is my ignorance. By backdoor, I meant, some secret code/lib used the o/p of which is only known to NSA. Or at least the i/p and a function by which the secret code is generated, e.g. MS's PRNG, where MS does not know the o/p, but given the correct i/p variables, they can calculate the o/p as the function is known to them.
As i can see in the algo, there is no backdoor as such. Then why it is said time & again that NSA may have a backdoor to decode SHA-256 ?
If you can prove there is no backdoor, then you either a) know something very mathematically powerful that nobody else knows yet, or b) are misguided as to what a backdoor is.
Nobody has been able to mathematically rule out a backdoor so far, even in an "open-source" algorithm. Remember heartbleed? That was a backdoor in an open-source cryptosystem, that may have been known by some organizations, that may have been able to use it before others even knew about it.
A backdoor is not something that is plainly evident when looking at the code; in fact it should not be evident at all. However, some organization may have knowledge of some mathematical procedure that they can use to reverse a hash, find a collision, or otherwise do things that a cryptosystem assumes they cannot do.
But, the person above me is claiming every cryptography has a backdoor. Is not there an open source cryptography where we can see what is really happening inside ? In an opensource project like Bitcoin, why a closed source SHA has been implemented, if the probability of having backdoor cant be verified ?
Don't believe everything you read on the internet. What makes you think SHA-2 is "closed source". The algorithm is publicly available.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-2#Pseudocode
That is a cornerstone of any strong cryptography. The algorithm is still secure even if the attacker knows everything except the secret. If a system needs to keep the algorithm secret in order to remain secure then it is nothing more than feel good security and will be broken wide open relatively quickly. There are no widely used cryptographic system where the algorithm is a secret. All the algorithms of the cryptographic primitives used in Bitcoin are public knowledge.
As i can see in the algo, there is no backdoor as such. Then why it is said time & again that NSA may have a backdoor to decode SHA-256 ?
But, the person above me is claiming every cryptography has a backdoor. Is not there an open source cryptography where we can see what is really happening inside ? In an opensource project like Bitcoin, why a closed source SHA has been implemented, if the probability of having backdoor cant be verified ?
Don't believe everything you read on the internet. What makes you think SHA-2 is "closed source". The algorithm is publicly available.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-2#Pseudocode
That is a cornerstone of any strong cryptography. The algorithm is still secure even if the attacker knows everything except the secret. If a system needs to keep the algorithm secret in order to remain secure then it is nothing more than feel good security and will be broken wide open relatively quickly. There are no widely used cryptographic system where the algorithm is a secret. All the algorithms of the cryptographic primitives used in Bitcoin are public knowledge.
I think by NSI u mean NSA. But what r u saying afterwards ? There are backdoors to SHA-256. Then, NSA can calculate the private key from a bitcoin address ?
I doubt that the NSA would be trying to scam you out of an extra few percent of your gaming rewards. That being said, SHA being broken is not sufficient to get private keys out. ECDSA would need to be broken (either through solution of discrete log problem, or some more creative way) before private keys can be obtained.
But, the person above me is claiming every cryptography has a backdoor. Is not there an open source cryptography where we can see what is really happening inside ? In an opensource project like Bitcoin, why a closed source SHA has been implemented, if the probability of having backdoor cant be verified ?
I think by NSI u mean NSA. But what r u saying afterwards ? There are backdoors to SHA-256. Then, NSA can calculate the private key from a bitcoin address ?
I doubt that the NSA would be trying to scam you out of an extra few percent of your gaming rewards. That being said, SHA being broken is not sufficient to get private keys out. ECDSA would need to be broken (either through solution of discrete log problem, or some more creative way) before private keys can be obtained.
Better don't bet or only bet on live casinos, if you do.
I don't trust the provably fair allegances.
I don't trust the provably fair allegances.
The point of provably random sites is that you can verify the randomness using cryptography.
Not everyone understand crypto, so not everyone can verify without blind trusting someone else
And even if crypto theory is perfect, there are still flaws that the implementation can have, so there is aways some room to your inner paranoid bothers you, even if you are expert(after all, NSI managed to put backdoors in most of the major internet cryptography)
I think by NSI u mean NSA. But what r u saying afterwards ? There are backdoors to SHA-256. Then, NSA can calculate the private key from a bitcoin address ?
Better don't bet or only bet on live casinos, if you do.
I don't trust the provably fair allegances.
I don't trust the provably fair allegances.
The point of provably random sites is that you can verify the randomness using cryptography.
Not everyone understand crypto, so not everyone can verify without blind trusting someone else
And even if crypto theory is perfect, there are still flaws that the implementation can have, so there is aways some room to your inner paranoid bothers you, even if you are expert(after all, NSI managed to put backdoors in most of the major internet cryptography)
Better don't bet or only bet on live casinos, if you do.
I don't trust the provably fair allegances.
I don't trust the provably fair allegances.
The point of provably random sites is that you can verify the randomness using cryptography.
Better don't bet or only bet on live casinos, if you do.
I don't trust the provably fair allegances.
I don't trust the provably fair allegances.
I own a gambling website, so if anyone has any questions about provably fair ask me.
What is the URL of your gambling website ?
i don't know how to check if a game is provably fair, and if it is fair at all, but i did play at many many sites that say ''provably fair''. I wagered quite a lot at some of them and i didn't notice they were cheating, so i don't think that any of them are cheating. They don't even have no need to cheat, most of those sites are very profitable anyways.
I own a gambling website, so if anyone has any questions about provably fair ask me.
Jump to: