Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1532. (Read 4670972 times)

What unique features does it have that is not trumped by other coins?

I think I can safely say that XC holds a lot of "promise".

I'm just a bit concerned that this is a brand of margarine.

EDIT:  I should have held my peace perhaps, but I find my own jokes too amusing sometimes.

I'm guessing you're missing about 20% of the log-weighted mass on the tail due to under-reporting by small holders.

Normal for the time being, yes. These are transactions floating around in the network that miners reject because the old client's fee is too low. It's the recent stopgap patch at work.

Is it normal to see such kind of errors?

I sincerely hope you don't quit your day job to become a detective. It's just not your thing.

If your costs are low it is profitable.

It isn't extremely profitable or anything, but I'm told nothing is now, so you take what you can get.

Is still profitable to mine?

Difficulty follows price

How does the XC anonymity feature trump the one of XMR?

Update:

Survey Link:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/10FFq_viVaY_THsToPNEwgTxrBSGVxW1EzeYPHX_2nuQ/viewform?usp=send_form

Count     119
Average   7,935
Median   2,080

Very impressed with the swift action from the dev team. You win my respect more for every day, and I will donate after new missive is released.

Also, Bytecoin number 97 in the coinmarketcap volume today. Have our friendly competition given up?

any idea why the difficulty is up so much ?!

2014/08/24 Monero Blockchain Spam Attack - Post Mortem

Part II

As you know from yesterday's Part I of the post-mortem, the net-effect of the attack was an addition of 22mb of data to the blockchain. Because of the unnaturally sharp increase in transaction volume, some transactions experienced delays, mostly several minutes but a few up to an hour, during the heat of the attack. The total duration of the attack was around 13 hours.

The attack started on 2014-08-23 at 15:06:59 UTC with the three transactions in block 186102. It ended on 2014-08-24 at 03:56:07. There were a handful of transactions (15 of them) mined as part of a second attempted attack 12 hours later (starting at 16:51:16 on 2014-08-24). By the time this second attack started, however, the network was already mostly upgraded, and it would appear that the attacker had no desire to repeat the attack with a 0.1 XMR fee.

In total, 1361 malicious transactions were confirmed and mined, although there were several hundred transactions that fell out the mempool as the network upgraded and pool operators started with a clean mempool. Every malicious transaction used a fee of 0.01 XMR, presumably to stay ahead of fee hikes or to have some sort of priority for the transactions, resulting in a total cost to the attacker of 13.61 XMR. Whilst this is not much of a cost, it's important to consider that the 13.61 XMR actualised cost only resulted in 22mb of additional blockchain data, so it's a fair trade-off. If the attacker wanted to repeat the exercise it would cost him 10x as much right now.



You can see the attack plummet to 0 as most of the network and the major pools switch over, effectively cutting off the attackers supply of cheap transactions.

Timeline Summary

2014-08-23, 15:06:59 UTC - attack starts
2014-08-23, 16:12:07 UTC - core team begins to notice oddities
2014-08-23, 16:23:56 UTC - attack confirmed, mitigation begins
2014-08-23, 20:43:13 UTC - fee bump pushed to my (fluffypony) repo after internal testing, pools begin upgrading off that repo
2014-08-23, 21:12:39 UTC - fee bump merged into master
2014-08-24, 12:51:26 UTC - OS X binaries pushed to monero.cc and announced
2014-08-24, 01:10:05 UTC - Windows binaries pushed to monero.cc and announced
2014-08-24, 01:25:20 UTC - Linux binaries pushed to monero.cc and announced
2014-08-24, 03:56:07 UTC - attack ceases to function as the network soft-forks to the new fee

Thank you for your patience and support during this process. Work is underway to fix this permanently by switching to per-kb fees, and we expect to have this fully tested and deployed within the next 2-3 weeks, after which time transaction fees will go back to "normal"

Most certainly, if they want to hear what exposed BCN shills have to say about XMR. It is quite amusing.

EDIT: At least you aren't posting your lame trolling attempts in our thread any more. That's an improvement.





I found this one, does that count:

Ah yes, didn't think of that. Funny to consider that doing it "purely" would then actually raise the required fee as it would increase the transaction size.

Honest XMR users should probably take a look: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/unveiling-the-truth-over-the-major-monero-scam-755840

Thanks for the info (smooth as well). Nice reads and informative.

What is interesting (and pretty self evident I believe), is that a "bad" attack actually makes the currency stronger. We have heard the Napster analogy many times with reference to Bitcoin, in how the music industry attacked Napster which then led to torrent, which, quite clearly is connected to these cryptos. They truly are anti-fragile (with our help). So, these attacks on Monero, etc., if not properly done (and barring selfish motives to acquire), just make us stronger, which ironically enough, is needed. It is sort of like how companies pay hackers to attack their networks to find vulnerabilities. But in this case, some of the attacks are genuine and coming from competitors (e.g. Dark).

IAS

I agree it is stupid for bitcoin. However, (more) exact fees work worse for Monero than Bitcoin because it would create more dust (either small digit-denominated outputs that take up a lot of space or undenominated outputs that aren't mixable). We will still need to calculate fees in some increment.

I'm not sure I understand that last part, as the mining pool payouts are done in bulk. So, they are not charged .1 XMR for each individual payout but rather are charged .1 XMR for the bulk payout to all recipients. (I think I see your point anyway though, for if the mining pools were not being efficient here with their payouts they were forced to be.) The mining pools made out well with this change. BTW - If you didn't know that you can do bulk payouts, it is a great and easy way to send coins to different paper wallets at the same time as you are charged once, and not for each individual transaction. If you are curious here is how to do it with BTC and Electrum wallet - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4982576

IAS