Bitcoin Forum

Wow, those two who did the interviewing (specially the one wearing the "top" hat), sure did a bad job at it :


* Constantly interrupting those who they interviewed
* Making an interview from the toilet (wtf?)
* Throwing a lot of Monero based assumptions about Dash into the face of the person they interviewed

and thats just from watching the first 5 minutes.

To sum it all up in a few words : a very amateurish low quality Monero biased interview
Well, at least Dash got some free publicity out of it .. and any publicity is good publicity i have been told  ;D

In the end the only thing that got destroyed was the reputation of those two interviewers, if they had any reputation to begin with.



 

I thought about responding to OP's last comment, but then i remembered this :

Good luck with your thread, may the gods be with you  ::)

Edit : oh my .. turns out OP is a Monero fan after all. Well that certainly explains a few things.
I guess Spoetnik was right after all..
 

- they will know you are mixing because prior to mixing they can watch your coins, and say "oh it became obfuscated therefore it was mixed"..

- and they also know that your coins came from wallet mixing because it wasn't generated by mining pools and POS masternodes...

that's a huge security hole for your privacy  :P

This is another lie (a lie you like to repeat again and again). I know because I was there.

Anyone can read the Dash thread from day one to check.

In reply to: http://www.reddit.com/r/DRKCoin/comments/1yit1a/using_coinjoin_for_anonymity_is_errorprone/

I'm posting this here, for everyone's benefit. Thanks!


First off, these are fantastic questions. The answer to implementing this in such a way where it is very difficulty to exploit is by adding cost and verification.

Here’s the gist of how I envision DarkSend to work in the long run. Some of what I’m going to mention is done, some of it I’m working on currently. I’d love some ideas on possible attack vectors on my implementation, so we can make it as bulletproof as possible.

Pools

DarkSend adds various extensions to the Bitcoin protocol for implementing transaction pooling. Like normal Coinjoin the pools take transactions in stages. The stages currently are:

POOL_STATUS_IDLE
POOL_STATUS_ACCEPTING_INPUTS
POOL_STATUS_ACCEPTING_OUTPUTS
POOL_STATUS_SIGNING
POOL_STATUS_TRANSMISSION

So the users relay these items throughout the network as the stages happen. After all items are gathered into the pool, the transactions are merged together into one, remotely signed and then broadcasted.

Masters

To defeat propagation problems, master nodes are elected each new block. They are responsible for being the authority of what goes into the joined transaction each session. This is done in a tamperproof way, but I think it’s not important to the discussion.

So what is the cost?

There must be a cost to using this anonymous network, otherwise like you say there will be issues with millions of accounts popping up. I’m not dead set on which solution(s) to implement, but here’s a couple ideas:

Burnt Identities

Higher difficulty shares to the current block would be mined and then stored in the blockchain permanently. Multiple of these would be used for each transaction and would be “burnt” when misused, causing the attacker to have to mine them again.  

Verification?

To use the pools it will require unique unspend outputs, someone that wants to mess with the system would have to have a large pool of funds in many addresses. So to attack a pool with 100 slots, you would require funds dispersed to 99 addresses, on 99 nodes working in common.

Other possible fee-less solutions?

There is interesting research on protecting against sybil attacks that lends itself really well to a decentralized ledger, such as this paper:

http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/Workshops/InformationSecurity/slides/gamesandreputation.pdf

The idea is to build a social graph of the inputs and outputs of each entry and they should all know different people. If 99 of them all have the same “friends” that they associate with, then they’ll have to enter a different pool. Which will ensure the pool is not full of the nodes belonging to the attacker.

An application for machine learning?

I’m been making models for trading equities for over 7 years now. I ran a financial firm that sold the signals for a few years and I have experience with natural language processing using classifiers. So, I could make a classifier and actually embed it into Darkcoin to determine which pool a node should use, to separate out nodes that seem to be in common.

Other ideas?

I’m open to ideas on how to provide the best security to the network. I would love to hear what people have in mind.

I’ve been working on DarkSend about a month and we’ve already fixed the decentralization and propagation issues, this is just another bridge to cross in the future.

Thanks!