mgburks77 - CryptoRush had a stupid implementation of the accounting system which is a feature in every wallet client. Basically their accounts were able to withdraw more than their balance was. That's how coins got "stolen" from CR. Nothing to do with BC itself.
stormia - BC makes no claims whatsoever. It's a coin without promises.
mr_random - Let's not hijack any threads hehe =P
I never said that, you should not falsely quote people. I am a freaking supporter of blackcoin what is wrong with people on this thread? Please provide the link to me saying that. Here is a link to mr_random hijacking the mint thread today: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=450381.new#newI can dig up him hijacking the thread many, many times in the past if you would like me to. |
|
|
|
anyone here wil 10 million MINT or more?
who has the most here?
Well the dev premined 3% of MINT so I would imagine he most of it. But wasn't there talk of him dumping it all on the market? That would explain why he wasn't able to tell us what he spent any of it on? Ah yes, glad to see you are back mr_random. Proving you are a shill once again. How come you never mention the fact that the entirety of blackcoin was mined in 1 week? Thats 100% of blackcoin that was distributed to a few early adopters/miners versus the 1% premine that you are always bashing on. Thats a huge difference in distribution that favors mintcoin. How come you never mention all the infrastructure that has been built with the Mint premine and will continue to be built with it? |
|
|
|
What is all the arguing about lol? I thought we are creating crypto currencies in defiance of the current crappy economic systems that are enslaving us. Anyway I am holding my BCs and hoping that also Cryptorush will do the right thing to and return my stolen coins. I am surprised they have not shut down the accounts of all the thieves who took our coins?  +1. Dreaming of the day cryptos can work together. Looks far off based on the attitudes I see everywhere on this forum. Constructive criticism and bipartisanism are instantly rejected in a fury of self-defensive slurs and name calling. |
|
|
|
What is all the arguing about lol? I thought we are creating crypto currencies in defiance of the current crappy economic systems that are enslaving us. Anyway I am holding my BCs and hoping that also Cryptorush will do the right thing to and return my stolen coins. I am surprised they have not shut down the accounts of all the thieves who took our coins? The reason you are asking is because you think you missed that train and you are trolling on this thread. I don't know if you missed it or not, but your attitude is pathetic. I think you quoted the wrong person... |
|
|
|
LMAO MINT is pure PoS. Mintcoin (code: MINT), also known as MintCoin, is a peer-to-peer cryptocurrency that uses both proof-of-stake (PoS) and proof-of-work (PoW) systems. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mintcoinit's hybrid, so it avoids the known blackcoin security weakness Lol Blackcoin has no known vulnerabilities. Quote your source which lists a vulnerability of Blackcoin. There are none. It's based on the latest peercoin code whose POS code has no known vulnerabilities.The MINT coiners are getting desperate spreading lies about Blackcoin in this topic trying to pump up their tiny market cap. And here is a quote from your OWN mintcoin topic created by the MINTCOIN DEVELOPER: "MintCoin is an innovative, secure and energy efficient PoW/PoS coin. It uses a faster PoW distribution mechanism to distribute the initial coins, then after 5 weeks the coin is basically transferred to a pure PoS coin, where the generation of the coin is mainly through the PoS interests." (front page of the official topic - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=450381.0) So either your Developer is so good he can't be bothered to update the main source of information of Mintcoin or he has indeed made the coin so it's not PoS only (I am guessing he wasn't able to work out how to make a PoS coin?). If it's the latter that also makes Blackcoin even more energy efficient than Mintcoin  Once again you are a fool and an ass and you are demonstrating it. "MintCoin is an innovative, secure and energy efficient PoW/PoS coin. It uses a faster PoW distribution mechanism to distribute the initial coins, then after 5 weeks the coin is basically transferred to a pure PoS coin"
it says basically because the PoW blocks only generate 1 coin/block. You can see the PoW blocks are still being generated so there is really no way to dispute the fact that Mint is PoS/PoW hybrid...
Let me compare the quotes for you my child: I said: "LMAO MINT is pure PoS."Official topic written by the MINT dev says: then after 5 weeks the coin is basically transferred to a pure PoS coinEither way it makes Blackcoin the more energy efficient coin That's your main marketing slogan being energy efficient. Another win for Blackcoin. Let me restate what I just said... since apparently you missed it the first time: "MintCoin is an innovative, secure and energy efficient PoW/PoS coin. It uses a faster PoW distribution mechanism to distribute the initial coins, then after 5 weeks the coin is basically transferred to a pure PoS coin" it says basically because the PoW blocks only generate 1 coin/block. You can see the PoW blocks are still being generated so there is really no way to dispute the fact that Mint is PoS/PoW hybrid... Wow yeah, so much more energy efficient... how much more energy intensive do you really think maintaing a hashrate of nearly 0 is? I think it's worth the added level of security. Also, BC destroyed any claim to "energy efficiency" that it or any PoS coin can make since the advent of the multipool. http://www.cryptostatz.com/coins/Mintcoin_hashrate.php |
|
|
|
It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money.
Fyrstikken (cryptorush) would call it a commodity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9DvydzAsYQuote: "Bitcoin worshipers will never go to heaven " LOL Price trending to the cost of mining it. Use of malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.Frystikken is an idiot. But that doesnt disprove my point. Its simply plain logic, that a hard cap coin can not be a currency. It IS a ponzi and risky investment. Money works totally different from Bitcoins. As said, it is not wrong to invest in bitcoins, but what's wrong is to confuse gold and money. So gold is a ponzi scheme? I'm confused. I'm also confused about what happened here. Auroracoin is dead now? Was it actually a scam or did somebody just destroy it for kicks and giggles or for their own personal motives? Also, how was it so easy to kill the coin? Doesn't this mean every other low hashrate scrypt coin is vulnerable? What about scrypt-N and PoS coins? Thanks in advance for helpful replies, I'm just looking for information and trying to understand how things are shaping up in this dark world of cryptocurrencies. Reposting, hoping for a reply. |
|
|
|
LMAO MINT is pure PoS. Mintcoin (code: MINT), also known as MintCoin, is a peer-to-peer cryptocurrency that uses both proof-of-stake (PoS) and proof-of-work (PoW) systems. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mintcoinit's hybrid, so it avoids the known blackcoin security weakness Lol Blackcoin has no known vulnerabilities. Quote your source which lists a vulnerability of Blackcoin. There are none. It's based on the latest peercoin code whose POS code has no known vulnerabilities.The MINT coiners are getting desperate spreading lies about Blackcoin in this topic trying to pump up their tiny market cap. And here is a quote from your OWN mintcoin topic created by the MINTCOIN DEVELOPER: "MintCoin is an innovative, secure and energy efficient PoW/PoS coin. It uses a faster PoW distribution mechanism to distribute the initial coins, then after 5 weeks the coin is basically transferred to a pure PoS coin, where the generation of the coin is mainly through the PoS interests." (front page of the official topic - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=450381.0) So either your Developer is so good he can't be bothered to update the main source of information of Mintcoin or he has indeed made the coin so it's not PoS only (I am guessing he wasn't able to work out how to make a PoS coin?). If it's the latter that also makes Blackcoin even more energy efficient than Mintcoin Once again you are a fool and an ass and you are demonstrating it. "MintCoin is an innovative, secure and energy efficient PoW/PoS coin. It uses a faster PoW distribution mechanism to distribute the initial coins, then after 5 weeks the coin is basically transferred to a pure PoS coin"
it says basically because the PoW blocks only generate 1 coin/block. You can see the PoW blocks are still being generated so there is really no way to dispute the fact that Mint is PoS/PoW hybrid... |
|
|
|
Is it possible the balances in the blockchain and in the wallet are not the same? The wallet has only one address.
The wallet will not have only one address if you are staking, right? the minted coins are put into a new address, i thought. |
|
|
|
I have an honest question.
To an investor in wall street how can i explain in a single powerpoint slide why Blackcoin has bigger Market Cap than Mintcoin, they have same features. Mint was released 10 days before and is hybrid POW/POS, to an outsider they are practicaly the same
Im conducting investing rounds, i now FAST/POS is the future and i need your side of the story, for an possible investment.
Thanks.
Assuming this is indeed an honest question and not just an intentional ball-toss to Mint-promoters who relentlessly try to fud this thread because they see BC as a direct threat and competitor: The two coins are very different, most notably in with respect to inflation as has been pointed out. We don't have all the facts about the Mint premine and where it went and probably never will, so I'll leave that aside. As far as 'the security risks', if you read a couple pages back you'll see that I and a couple of other informed people posted regarding Sunny King's rewrite of PoS earlier this year, which resolved the flaw, as confirmed by the person who first identified it and extensive peer-review. At this point that crap is all just FUD, almost invariably from Mint enthusiasts, and is growing tiresome. Also, just bear in mind that people will tend to talk up the coin they are most heavily invested in. Any idiot should be able to see through that. I will refrain from talking up the 'awesomeness' of BC. Do your own due diligence. Taking a poll on a bitcointalk thread hardly qualifies as research, if that is your sincere intention. Silly Mint faggots just won't stop haha. You are showing your weakness, and your fear. Do you think you are accomplishing anything here? I suggest you learn to live with your losses and move on. You just showed how awful of a person you are by using a pejorative term for homosexuals, congrats! |
|
|
|
I have an honest question.
To an investor in wall street how can i explain in a single powerpoint slide why Blackcoin has bigger Market Cap than Mintcoin, they have same features. Mint was released 10 days before and is hybrid POW/POS, to an outsider they are practicaly the same
Im conducting investing rounds, i now FAST/POS is the future and i need your side of the story, for an possible investment.
Thanks.
1. Mintcoin is pre-mined by the developer. Roughly 3% of the total money supply he gave to himself. The crypto community tends not to like such schemes. 2. Mintcoin dev launched the coin saying the pre-mined coins would be spent on bounties etc but weeks later he refuses to list what he spent the coins on. 3. Mintcoin has 20% rate of interest compared with Blackcoin 1% rate of interest. The higher the rate of interest the great the dampening/suppressive effect it has on price as some of those new coins will get dumped on the market. 4. Blackcoin has a great developer. He's responded very quickly to any issues that have arisen. 5. The community has pioneered innovative concepts eg the blackconimultipool, a pool to boost blackcoin price whilst decrease the price of competing alt coins. Encouraging for the future. 6. Community and trading volume. Mintcoin trading volume is tiny. Very few people are buying and selling it on exchanges which suggests to me a lot of the activity in the mintcoin community is sockpuppets (one person with multiple accounts). Those are specific reasons. There's lots of general reasons why two clones with identical features (seemingly) have different values. Feathercoin is a clone of Litecoin with 4 times as many coins and it has been out for 9 months and is nowhere near Litecoin's price. Community support is a huge factor in a coins success (see dogecoin for example). MINT is PoW/PoS hybrid so it doesn't have blackcoin security flaws I have an honest question.
To an investor in wall street how can i explain in a single powerpoint slide why Blackcoin has bigger Market Cap than Mintcoin, they have same features. Mint was released 10 days before and is hybrid POW/POS, to an outsider they are practicaly the same
Im conducting investing rounds, i now FAST/POS is the future and i need your side of the story, for an possible investment.
Thanks.
1. Mintcoin is pre-mined by the developer. Roughly 3% of the total money supply he gave to himself. The crypto community tends not to like such schemes. 2. Mintcoin dev launched the coin saying the pre-mined coins would be spent on bounties etc but weeks later he refuses to list what he spent the coins on. 3. Mintcoin has 20% rate of interest compared with Blackcoin 1% rate of interest. The higher the rate of interest the great the dampening/suppressive effect it has on price as some of those new coins will get dumped on the market. 4. Blackcoin has a great developer. He's responded very quickly to any issues that have arisen. 5. The community has pioneered innovative concepts eg the blackconimultipool, a pool to boost blackcoin price whilst decrease the price of competing alt coins. Encouraging for the future. 6. Community and trading volume. Mintcoin trading volume is tiny. Very few people are buying and selling it on exchanges which suggests to me a lot of the activity in the mintcoin community is sockpuppets (one person with multiple accounts). Those are specific reasons. There's lots of general reasons why two clones with identical features (seemingly) have different values. Feathercoin is a clone of Litecoin with 4 times as many coins and it has been out for 9 months and is nowhere near Litecoin's price. Community support is a huge factor in a coins success (see dogecoin for example). MINT is PoW/PoS hybrid so it doesn't have blackcoin security flaws +1. Pure PoS is new, which is exciting and has great potential, but its security has also not been as tried and tested. LMAO MINT is pure PoS. Don't you clowns even know about the coin you are shilling? It was pow/pos initially, like Blackcoin was too. But they are now both pure proof of stake. And lol at anyone who calls me a shill. I've been a member here for a year and have 400+ activity. Unlike a new account created to support Mint. And as for mint being on more exchanges that strengthens my point. Even with the support of Cryptsy MINT still has a pathetically small trading volume. Some days less than 20 BTC traded on Mintpal for MINT compared to daily 400+ BTC blackcoin days for over a week. Still waiting for that list on what all the MINT premine was spent on. Blackcoin has no premine and has brought more innovation to the table with the blackcoin multipool that mintcoin has then tried to unsuccessfully rip off. So funny seeing all the mintcoin bagholders rush into the blackcoin topic to try and spread FUD. How do you think that looks to outsiders viewing this topic? You are a fool and just proved it. Mint is not pure PoS. My lord.... mr_random I would say you are the worst PR there is for this coin. "Some days less than 20 BTC traded on Mintpal for MINT compared to daily 400+ BTC blackcoin days for over a week" You forgot to total up the volume of all 23 exchanges MINT is on and then compare that number to the total volume of BC on all its exchange. I assume MINT will still be lower volume than BC overall, but the fact that you try to sell it as being much, much lower than it is just points towards your motives.. |
|
|
|
I have an honest question.
To an investor in wall street how can i explain in a single powerpoint slide why Blackcoin has bigger Market Cap than Mintcoin, they have same features. Mint was released 10 days before and is hybrid POW/POS, to an outsider they are practicaly the same
Im conducting investing rounds, i now FAST/POS is the future and i need your side of the story, for an possible investment.
Thanks.
1. Mintcoin is pre-mined by the developer. Roughly 3% of the total money supply he gave to himself. The crypto community tends not to like such schemes. 2. Mintcoin dev launched the coin saying the pre-mined coins would be spent on bounties etc but weeks later he refuses to list what he spent the coins on. 3. Mintcoin has 20% rate of interest compared with Blackcoin 1% rate of interest. The higher the rate of interest the great the dampening/suppressive effect it has on price as some of those new coins will get dumped on the market. 4. Blackcoin has a great developer. He's responded very quickly to any issues that have arisen. 5. The community has pioneered innovative concepts eg the blackconimultipool, a pool to boost blackcoin price whilst decrease the price of competing alt coins. Encouraging for the future. 6. Community and trading volume. Mintcoin trading volume is tiny. Very few people are buying and selling it on exchanges which suggests to me a lot of the activity in the mintcoin community is sockpuppets (one person with multiple accounts). Those are specific reasons. There's lots of general reasons why two clones with identical features (seemingly) have different values. Feathercoin is a clone of Litecoin with 4 times as many coins and it has been out for 9 months and is nowhere near Litecoin's price. Community support is a huge factor in a coins success (see dogecoin for example). MINT is PoW/PoS hybrid so it doesn't have blackcoin security flaws +1. Pure PoS is new, which is exciting and has great potential, but its security has also not been as tried and tested. Plus people really need to get over Mintcoins premine. It IS being used to build infrastructure, hence mintcoin is on 23 exchanges and already has 34 merchants accepting it, the Mintcoin Foundation is in the making, other developments surely on the way. We need to find better selling points for BC other than the fact that it has no premine- especially considering the PoW phase was only 1 week long and anybody with any sense of what that means understands that that is essentially an insta-mine. Sorry, I am a supported of both Mint and Blackcoin but I like Mint more in the long term even though I've made more money off of Blackcoin (that should say something). point #6 from mr_random is a joke. mintcoin is on way more exchanges than blackcoin so of course its volume on any given exchange will be lower. Also, if anything, blackcoin is the one being manipulated by sockpuppets- the community is much smaller and just pay attention to the market and you can see people selling to themselves/buying from themselves (this has been pointed out many times by other people on this thread who also support BC). Please don't listen to mr_random, there are much more unbiased people on this thread who support BC and will give you more honest answers which don't rely on bashing another coin (I'm not saying listen to me, I have conflicting interests too although I honestly want both mint and bc to succeed and dont see why they cant, but don't listen to mr_random as he has demonstrated many times in the past that he is little more than a shill for BC). |
|
|
|
It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money.
Fyrstikken (cryptorush) would call it a commodity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9DvydzAsYQuote: "Bitcoin worshipers will never go to heaven " LOL Price trending to the cost of mining it. Use of malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.Frystikken is an idiot. But that doesnt disprove my point. Its simply plain logic, that a hard cap coin can not be a currency. It IS a ponzi and risky investment. Money works totally different from Bitcoins. As said, it is not wrong to invest in bitcoins, but what's wrong is to confuse gold and money. So gold is a ponzi scheme? I'm confused. I'm also confused about what happened here. Auroracoin is dead now? Was it actually a scam or did somebody just destroy it for kicks and giggles or for their own personal motives? Also, how was it so easy to kill the coin? Doesn't this mean every other low hashrate scrypt coin is vulnerable? What about scrypt-N and PoS coins? Thanks in advance for helpful replies, I'm just looking for information and trying to understand how things are shaping up in this dark world of cryptocurrencies. |
|
|
|
HOW MUCH MINT DO YOU HAVE IN YOUR WALLET?
and plan on keeping it inthere
I want to keep a list.
I'll start
1 omahapoker 1.1 million
is there a site that tells how many MINT are in wallets?
thanks
mintcoinrichlist.com seems to be down atm though, on my end at least |
|
|
|
Did the thunderclap happen yet?
Yup, it posed to my facebook about 4 hours ago |
|
|
|
so pray that a whale, with bad intentions, does not get 51% That would cost the attacker about $750,000. Is it really worth it to attack? I mean they are spending 750K to destroy their own money, who would do that? double spend? there will be other flaws... but currently double spend is most likely to occur with a stake of 51% or more. pure pos is untested. we will see what future will bring. i am into mint now as well. ps. it would cost bitcoins. that is why "there is nothing at stake". an early adopter of bitcoin can do this. also the marketcap.. is at highest buy/lowest sell. marketcap only takes highest buy price and multiplies that by coins available. it wouldnt take 750k usd. not even close. so coinmarketcap is not even close to real value. simple math. Luckily mint isn't a pure PoS. I'm glad to see you are into mint again, welcome back based on your posts on this forum you are clearly a very critical thinker and that is great because we need people who are willing and able to scrutinize the coin in a constructive manner. Likewise, I am thankful for anonymousg64's efforts to pin down any possible security flaws in the PoS system- I'm just not sure I like how he is broadcasting it to the public as though it is fact before there is any certainty to it. I still think any security flaws that do arise should be brought up to the devs of the coins directly and privately so that they can deal with them before they become a problem (telling the general public only informs people how to exploit a security flaw if it does exist, and if it doesn't actually exist then it just spreads fear and uncertainty). |
|
|
|
so pray that a whale, with bad intentions, does not get 51% That would cost the attacker about $750,000. Is it really worth it to attack? I mean they are spending 750K to destroy their own money, who would do that? double spend? there will be other flaws... but currently double spend is most likely to occur with a stake of 51% or more. If they control 51% of the wealth and try to double spend all of it or a significant portion of it they would be spending nearly 100% of the market cap- there is no way anywhere near 100% of the market cap is going to be spent in two transactions. Meaning if they want to double spend they will have to double spend significantly less than their 51% of the wealth, meaning they jeopardize the remaining part of their wealth. no? Unless they can effectively double spend more than 25.5% (thereby "spending" more than 51% of the wealth they actually control) they would be better off just spending their 51% of the wealth since whatever value is left over after the double spend will be destroyed. |
|
|
|
Also the attack described would not work. Coins are not staked only on coinage, it is only one factor. So even if you made a lot of transactions so all your coins were separated by a small interval, there is no guarantee they will stake at each interval - in fact splitting them into small amounts to make these intervals will make them less likely to stake. You would have to have a very large amount of coins at each interval to even have a chance of producing 2 consecutive blocks. This attack is completely unrealistic.
|
|
|
|
"this flaw was addressed by the author of PoS, Sunny King, earlier this year: Official release build is now available http://www.ppcoin.org/ (via sourceforge) What's in 0.3.0 release: Stake generation protocol upgrade (protocol switch March 20th) Qt UI support Fix compatibility with vanitygen (note: private keys dumped in v0.2 is no longer importable into v0.3.0, must dump again from v0.3.0 client) Miscellaneous bug fixes and improvements The protocol upgrade in 0.3.0 includes a new algorithm to derive proof-of-stake hash modifier, the entity that scrambles computation for stake owners, which replaces the current proof-of-stake difficulty used as modifier in 0.2 protocol. The design was started late September last year, when I first began to realize the issues with using difficulty as modifier. Honorary mention also goes to Jutarul, who independently discovered and verified an issue with using difficulty as modifier and published on bitcointalk in December last year, while successfully executed a demo attack on the block chain. Other changes in the protocol include starting hash weight from 0 at the 30-day mininum age, and requirement that coinstake timestamp must equal block timestamp. Overall 0.3 protocol should significantly strengthen the proof-of-stake protection and resolve the current known vulnerabilities. My sincere appreciation to co-contributors of 0.3.0 release: Robert VanHazinga of Hartland PC (dreamwatcher) for the vanitygen compatibility fix Jutarul for demonstrating stake generation vulnerability EskimoBob for reporting issue fixed in 0.3.0" |
|
|
|
if i were right, PoW would be useless in the event of an attack, because the high rate of PoS blocks would cause difficulty to jump into unminable levels
 As you can see here, the PoW blocks have a different and independent difficulty algorithm than PoS blocks. If you start getting a lot of PoS blocks in a row, the chance of PoW block generation increases in order to achieve the PoW target; so after each PoS block is generated the likely-hood of generating a PoW block as the next block goes up, and after every PoW block, the chance of generating a PoS block goes up. They are both integrated with block targets and difficulties that are independent of one another; so one cannot perpetually overpower the other. This is why PoS/PoW hybrid is more secure vs just PoS only. And, it is also worth noting that over time, the Mintcoin networks actually will get more secure with age, whereas a PoW only coin has the potential to get less secure due to centralized mining processes. Mintcoin is protected from PoW overpowering, as well as PoS overpowering. You cannot know for certain the future of the Mintcion blockchain (at least very far). With Pure PoS, you know the future will always be a PoS block next, and with PoW you know that the future will always be PoW blocks next, but you cannot know the future with hybrid PoW/PoS like Mintcoin. Makes a lot of sense! Way to boss that explanation coolbeans. looking at the code, there doesn't seem to be any difference for PoS when it comes to target calculation and difficulty calculation they are not independent look at the times in the image you posted, you will see why the difficulty is at 22 on that block and the others are much lower The time before the last PoS block and the PoW block is 5 seconds.. |
|
|
|
im still on the fence can someone explain how this stops someone from generating lots of PoS blocks 20 days in the future from a bunch of TX's with small interval, whether through one or multiple wallets ss << nStakeModifier;
ss << nTimeBlockFrom << nTxPrevOffset << txPrev.nTime << prevout.n << nTimeTx;
hashProofOfStake = Hash(ss.begin(), ss.end());
if(CBigNum(hashProofOfStake) > bnCoinDayWeight * bnTargetPerCoinDay)
return false;
im not well enough versed with the code to know what these variable names imply i have discovered a flaw with current PoS implementation you can easily do a 51% attack with PoS blocks without needing large holdings since PoS blocks are generated on a coin age basis, you could create TXO's delayed by a time offset at the minimum TXO cost for a future attack period so after creating 10000 TXO of 1 MINT separated by 0.5 seconds to make sure 60 consecutive blocks are generated at repeated interval by your wallet 20 days in the future, the attack would last 1 hour and 40 minutes enough to put the security and function of a coin in question couple that with the fact the difficulty calculation includes PoS blocks, that would mean difficulty would jump to stratospheric levels making it impossible to mine PoW blocks are people really not concerned about this? YOU CAN 51% ATTACK ANY POS COIN WITHOUT THE NEED FOR 51% OF SUPPLY OR ANY PoW HASHRATE AT ALLHi all. Just thought I'd share some of the joy we've been dealing with on the Mintcoin thread. Have a good night. Check our code i'd say No explanation? I'm not computer savvy enough to get the answer from the code myself so I was hoping somebody who knows the blackcoin code could explain. It seems that this type of attack is prevented by hybrid PoW/PoS since the PoW blocks have a different and independent difficulty algorithm from the PoS blocks, and you cannot predict with any certainty what the next block in the chain will be (trying to build x consecutive PoS blocks to form an attack with would be interrupted by the generation of a valid PoW block). If that is true, I still don't understand how a pure PoS coin would deal with this. I've got a lot of money invested in this coin and other PoS coins so I would like to know my money is safe, and I would appreciate a concrete answer other than "your money is safe" or "we've figured out how to prevent that" because I'm the type of person that only trusts something if I understand why. This flaw was addressed by the author of PoS, Sunny King, earlier this year: Official release build is now available http://www.ppcoin.org/ (via sourceforge) What's in 0.3.0 release: Stake generation protocol upgrade (protocol switch March 20th) Qt UI support Fix compatibility with vanitygen (note: private keys dumped in v0.2 is no longer importable into v0.3.0, must dump again from v0.3.0 client) Miscellaneous bug fixes and improvements The protocol upgrade in 0.3.0 includes a new algorithm to derive proof-of-stake hash modifier, the entity that scrambles computation for stake owners, which replaces the current proof-of-stake difficulty used as modifier in 0.2 protocol. The design was started late September last year, when I first began to realize the issues with using difficulty as modifier. Honorary mention also goes to Jutarul, who independently discovered and verified an issue with using difficulty as modifier and published on bitcointalk in December last year, while successfully executed a demo attack on the block chain. Other changes in the protocol include starting hash weight from 0 at the 30-day mininum age, and requirement that coinstake timestamp must equal block timestamp. Overall 0.3 protocol should significantly strengthen the proof-of-stake protection and resolve the current known vulnerabilities. My sincere appreciation to co-contributors of 0.3.0 release: Robert VanHazinga of Hartland PC (dreamwatcher) for the vanitygen compatibility fix Jutarul for demonstrating stake generation vulnerability EskimoBob for reporting issue fixed in 0.3.0 And just to make it absolutely clear Blackcoin uses 0.3.0 POS protocol. Also the attack described would not work. Coins are not staked only on coinage, it is only one factor. So even if you made a lot of transactions so all your coins were separated by a small interval, there is no guarantee they will stake at each interval - in fact splitting them into small amounts to make these intervals will make them less likely to stake. You would have to have a very large amount of coins at each interval to even have a chance of producing 2 consecutive blocks. This attack is completely unrealistic. Thank you both, my fears have been quelled and I've learned some new stuff:) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
