IMPORTANT FOR ALL ASSET HOLDERS!Please check your counterwallets ASAP as i just experienced their bug and all my/our addresses was gone... ASSET holders, PM me your status, balance as expected or balance issues. I have successfully recovered ALL addresses and balances, but this task was a bit complicated and not something everyone will be able to do. Check your addys and balances, this issue seems "normal" for counterparty. THIS is the tool i used: https://counterpartytalk.org/t/is-it-possible-to-create-the-list-of-addresses-from-counterwallet-pass-phrase/1223It finds your privkeys from your password.. Originally there was going out a revenue sharing today, but this bug/error made me unsure on if i should processed it or not. IW What is the difference in investing in XQNPOSFUND and XQN the coin itself? Also what is stake rate for XQN? |
|
|
|
any input or thoughts from the XMR camp? Does this mean Eclipse is cryptograhically anonymous?
They seem to have at least tried to fix the one identified flaw in SDC. Whether SDC has other flaws they didn't fix or whether their fix is even correct is not something anyone can answer without spending a lot of time reviewing it all, which probably won't ever happen. Valid points, I am hoping they will be able to get their 'fix' properly reviewed. Assuming the fix is indeed correct, would that mean that it is then truly anonymous? In other words: if recently exposed flaw in SDC anonymity was fixed, does it make SDC as/more anonymous as XMR? or is SDC still inferior to XMR for anonymity? What about the other 99.999% of SDC, developed by the same people who made a basic math/crypto error, and which no one has ever reviewed? Shen found that one flaw effectively by accident, while working on something else. If SDC were comprehensively reviewed, then one could make claims about it. At this point, I would not. Thank you for your replies, this must mean that the premise behind SDC anonymity must be somewhat sound/reasonable (?) although yet to be reviewed. If the premise behind SDC anonymity was completely ridiculous or unreasonable there would have been mention of it from somewhere at the least. I am curious as to what the differences between SDCs proposed anonymity and XMRs anonymity is... I will look into it unless you can point me in the right direction. That would save me much time and be greatly appreciated  |
|
|
|
that is cool, I was expecting just another shitcoin but this looks like it might have some actual potential.
you have caught my interest. I am hoping that you will be able to bring more to the table than just the fix in shadowcash.
It's not "just a fix". You actually have to know what you are doing and be able to do it correctly. It's not like we fixed a typo somewhere. Shadowcash didn't know what they were doing and got completely de-anoned. They are still trying to figure out the correct way to do it. I did not mean to underplay your fix for shadowcash, apologies if I have offended. Just wanted to say I hope you will continue to improve eclipse in ways other than fixing the anonymity flaw in shadowcash because there is potential for eclipse. Suggestion: if the fix is indeed correct, having it verified somehow will bring much more credibility and attention to eclipse. I am not capable of verifying it otherwise I would gladly volunteer. We hope to offer Shen Noether a bounty for a review of our method. Great idea Shen providing a review would be great for Eclipse. I was getting the opinion of others on SDC/Eclipse and a good point was brought up. any input or thoughts from the XMR camp? Does this mean Eclipse is cryptograhically anonymous?
They seem to have at least tried to fix the one identified flaw in SDC. Whether SDC has other flaws they didn't fix or whether their fix is even correct is not something anyone can answer without spending a lot of time reviewing it all, which probably won't ever happen. Valid points, I am hoping they will be able to get their 'fix' properly reviewed. Assuming the fix is indeed correct, would that mean that it is then truly anonymous? In other words: if recently exposed flaw in SDC anonymity was fixed, does it make SDC as/more anonymous as XMR? or is SDC still inferior to XMR for anonymity? What about the other 99.999% of SDC, developed by the same people who made a basic math/crypto error, and which no one has ever reviewed? Shen found that one flaw effectively by accident, while working on something else. If SDC were comprehensively reviewed, then one could make claims about it. At this point, I would not. Have you considered the possibility of this? Is there a reason why you chose shadowcash method of anonymity over other ways of anonymity? |
|
|
|
|
This coin looks promising but supply/inflation is rather high... a change in max supply and inflation rates would guarantee moon.
|
|
|
|
i'm already a fan.. the new bitcoin .12, 10x the supply, larger blocks, brand new.
you are funny. there is absolutely 0 reason to currently think that this is different than any other shitcoin. only thing worth noting currently is 2MB block size but even that is not a big deal. Well aren't you just a peach. This coin just raises many red flags for me starting with the very vague 'helix' nonsense. Also a coin that aims to become more centralized with no sure model is definitely a warning sign of failure in the long term. Centralization poses many risks already but centralization with no model or proper plan is even bigger danger. Eliminates The Bitcoin Blockchain Problem.
C-bit is a parallel Bitcoin to the original blockchain. This new blockchain can develop independently to Bitcoin — becoming, in a managed way, more centralized — while allowing the original Bitcoin to return to its decentralized vision.
anyways, like I said before, I am waiting to see delivery of actual things besides changing block size to 2MB because even you have to admit, it is not a noteworthy accomplishment at all. |
|
|
|
i'm already a fan.. the new bitcoin .12, 10x the supply, larger blocks, brand new.
you are funny. there is absolutely 0 reason to currently think that this is different than any other shitcoin. only thing worth noting currently is 2MB block size but even that is not a big deal. |
|
|
|
any input or thoughts from the XMR camp? Does this mean Eclipse is cryptograhically anonymous?
They seem to have at least tried to fix the one identified flaw in SDC. Whether SDC has other flaws they didn't fix or whether their fix is even correct is not something anyone can answer without spending a lot of time reviewing it all, which probably won't ever happen. Valid points, I am hoping they will be able to get their 'fix' properly reviewed. Assuming the fix is indeed correct, would that mean that it is then truly anonymous? In other words: if recently exposed flaw in SDC anonymity was fixed, does it make SDC as/more anonymous as XMR? or is SDC still inferior to XMR for anonymity? |
|
|
|
that is cool, I was expecting just another shitcoin but this looks like it might have some actual potential.
you have caught my interest. I am hoping that you will be able to bring more to the table than just the fix in shadowcash.
It's not "just a fix". You actually have to know what you are doing and be able to do it correctly. It's not like we fixed a typo somewhere. Shadowcash didn't know what they were doing and got completely de-anoned. They are still trying to figure out the correct way to do it. I did not mean to underplay your fix for shadowcash, apologies if I have offended. Just wanted to say I hope you will continue to improve eclipse in ways other than fixing the anonymity flaw in shadowcash because there is potential for eclipse. Suggestion: if the fix is indeed correct, having it verified somehow will bring much more credibility and attention to eclipse. I am not capable of verifying it otherwise I would gladly volunteer. |
|
|
|
After shadowcash flaw was uncovered, there is new forked coin which has supposedly solved the problem (?) what is the purpose of this coin?
To hell with it, here comes the cat out of the bag. Eclipse is the first truly cryptographically anonymous coin based on the bitcoin protocol.It is forked from shadowcash, which was completely de-anoned. See here: https://shnoe.wordpress.com/2016/02/11/de-anonymizing-shadowcash-and-oz-coin/You will see from Shen Noether's write-up that they used a cryptographically insecure hashToEC function. Here, we replaced their hashToEC with a cryptographically secure variant. Right now shadowcash is still not anonymous. Eclipse is anonymous.The writeup linked above describes how the shadowcash hashToEC is broken, so I won't go into it here. We use what is known as "try-and-increment hashing to an elliptic curve". It is a simple algorithm that is used in several cryptosystems. Key image with our algo goes like this: 1. take a scalar hash (e.g. SHA256d) of the public key (k) and map it to x on the secp256k1 discrete field 2. determine whether this x is a quadratic residue of secp256k1 3. if x is not a quadratic residue, set x = x+1 and go to 2 4. else x is a quadratic residue so keep the point x, y, where y is the positive solution to x for secp256k1, let's call this point p 5. multiply the point p = (x,y) by the scalar representing the private key x, such that key image I = xp You can verify this is our algo by looking at secp256k1_hash_to_ec_xy_bytes() in our source tree at src/secp256k1/secp256k1/src/secp256k1.c. Rather than re-invent the wheel, we used bitcoin's secp256k1 library to determine the suitability of x and to find it's root to map point x,y. Happy mining! Edit: I forgot to add that anyone who investigates may come across a caveat about try-and-increment where it is subject to "timing attack". Timing attack is absolutely not relevant to ring signatures though, because everyone already knows what a timing attack might reveal: the curve, the input k, and the scalar hash algorithm used. Going back to the original cryptonote white paper, the private key x is protected by discrete logarithm hardness. Edit: We have a whitepaper coming that goes into more detail and summarizes Shen's work. any input or thoughts from the XMR camp? Does this mean Eclipse is cryptograhically anonymous? |
|
|
|
Oh ok I think I understand. You are saying the 10 minute block time is necessary in order for C-Bit to be "Compatible With All Bitcoin-based Technology" as intended. Is that correct?
False. 10 minute block is not necessary to be compatible with bitcoin. You just need proper coding skills. Hi we talked about the C-bit release on our altcoin show last night and we had a couple questions. The first we were wondering why 10 minute blocks? Is there some reasoning behind this decision? Also, aside from larger blocks are there any other things C-bit is going to attempt? You can listen to the boradcast at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1379730.msg14041973#msg14041973 if you are interested in hearing C-bit mentioned. C-bit is discussed at 22:59:00 If you have any information we can share with our listeners next week about c-bit or if anyone from the community or team would like to talk on the show please let us know. Thanks and good luck with your project! We wanted the block time to equal Bitcoin so that when the time came to synchronize the two networks with the Helix technology, they would be compatible, time wise. You can't have blocks being connected if you have blocks being formed at different times and in different amounts. You can still make them work if you have proper dev skills.
So why not everything BTC? Well if you ever are waiting for a trade to go through, you know that waiting even a minute is a long time. Try waiting 10 minutes. Just not a good experience. So I will make a hybrid system combining the speed of BTCD 1 minute blocks with BTC for long term storage. Trading against BTC should really be a requirement, but not sure if all passport enable blockchains will be able to do this, so it would probably need to be a strong recommendation.
iguana unites all the bitcoin compatibles using technology.
James is going to make BTCD 1 minute block work with BTC 10 minute block. doing, until its DONE, is TRUE. That wasnt DONE yet. Until then... please dont be so certain, thank you If it was obviously impossible like they are saying, why would people be trying otherwise? And not just anyone but a talented coder? Is he stupid to waste his time? He is building something that is possible not trying to build something that is impossible. Know the difference. Everything is possible... but most of the times just the fact that we want to do something dont make it real, or achievable. Some may succeed, but most of the time projects are droped. I would be happy if such thing was accomplished. I think it would open some big doors to crypto future... I think everyone needs to go to the website and read the Helix Technology explanation to understand what I am talking about when I say the two networks need to have synchronized blocks. I will wait to see what you bring... Seems more like smoke and mirrors to me but please prove me wrong. Will be watching. |
|
|
|
what is the purpose of this coin?
To hell with it, here comes the cat out of the bag. Eclipse is the first truly cryptographically anonymous coin based on the bitcoin protocol.It is forked from shadowcash, which was completely de-anoned. See here: https://shnoe.wordpress.com/2016/02/11/de-anonymizing-shadowcash-and-oz-coin/You will see from Shen Noether's write-up that they used a cryptographically insecure hashToEC function. Here, we replaced their hashToEC with a cryptographically secure variant. Right now shadowcash is still not anonymous. Eclipse is anonymous.The writeup linked above describes how the shadowcash hashToEC is broken, so I won't go into it here. We use what is known as "try-and-increment hashing to an elliptic curve". It is a simple algorithm that is used in several cryptosystems. Key image with our algo goes like this: 1. take a scalar hash (e.g. SHA256d) of the public key (k) and map it to x on the secp256k1 discrete field 2. determine whether this x is a quadratic residue of secp256k1 3. if x is not a quadratic residue, set x = x+1 and go to 2 4. else x is a quadratic residue so keep the point x, y, where y is the positive solution to x for secp256k1, let's call this point p 5. multiply the point p = (x,y) by the scalar representing the private key x, such that key image I = xp You can verify this is our algo by looking at secp256k1_hash_to_ec_xy_bytes() in our source tree at src/secp256k1/secp256k1/src/secp256k1.c. Rather than re-invent the wheel, we used bitcoin's secp256k1 library to determine the suitability of x and to find it's root to map point x,y. Happy mining! Edit: I forgot to add that anyone who investigates may come across a caveat about try-and-increment where it is subject to "timing attack". Timing attack is absolutely not relevant to ring signatures though, because everyone already knows what a timing attack might reveal: the curve, the input k, and the scalar hash algorithm used. Going back to the original cryptonote white paper, the private key x is protected by discrete logarithm hardness. Edit: We have a whitepaper coming that goes into more detail and summarizes Shen's work. that is cool, I was expecting just another shitcoin but this looks like it might have some actual potential. you have caught my interest. I am hoping that you will be able to bring more to the table than just the fix in shadowcash. |
|
|
|
For anyone who thinks Mining a block is too hard the 5 year old crappy laptop hit 2 block last night. My desktop 2x times faster 2 x the threads nothing. old hp lappy hits 2 overnight this shit should go in the newspapers. Anyway Miners keep your chin up it happens. Happy day.
you are mining using wallet? |
|
|
|
I don't think you're sounding harsh... With that said we are very aware of what's going on out there, but we are not focusing on what other projects are doing. Our main focus is our code, security and stability comes first. I've been around crypto for a very long time and it never ceases to amaze me the many errors in code, that are in many of these projects. As I've said before we had to tackle 2 things, it has been a major overhaul of code and a new wallet. Now that we are on the final stretch, getting the api calls done in our new wallet, this new coding and testing environment proved to be a huge challenge for the team.
We had DIONS code ready June of last year, then we had the wallet 80% done by early November, then we moved to the api call integration and lastly we will go to testing. We had to incorporate in the new html5 wallet some of the qt features, including a debug console. While this was going on we went on to hire developers to come in and help. We had to vet these devs and after passing very thorough interviews at the end they could not and I repeat could not figure out what to do. All the ones we brought in 3 or 4, were not able to understand how to even get our code to work with our wallet system. So we had to make an executive decision to get Derek to stop work on Chameleon and finish the wallet or we were just going to be stuck. After some proposals by Pat, Derek then proceeded to do the api integration with some of Pat's code suggestions.
This is where we are at. It's a bit frustrating because we would've loved to be way done by now, but we are just not done. On a personal Level, I have moved on to sell my business to go full over time into IOC. I was also hoping we had our platform ready to go by now. I hope that by the time I complete my business hand over, Derek completes the api calls, we test and I can come in full over time.
I will leave you all with this, Throughout this entire period there hasn't been a day we have not worked. We are always working, thinking and or coding. I'm going to make it very clear, No matter how long it takes I'm not going anywhere. This is what we are working on and once DIONS is ready and out we will make an assessment as to what we will need to leap forward and have chameleon bring in features that will be of use and important to our entire ecosystem. Make no mistake speed, features don't necessarily = stability and full proof security of the blockchain. Projects have to be vetted, time and stress test will have to be sustainable for these projects to really survive in a highly demanding environment. Many are rushing into blockchain environments without truly understanding all possible aspects of having it be reliable and secure, only time will tell. Just look at what bitcoin is going through is not a pretty scene and now they are worth billions and making changes could be catastrophic.
If what you are saying is true (I am not accusing you otherwise) then I am sure the value of IOC will follow. Keep up the hard work. |
|
|
|
Cool! That was fast! Also everyone don't forget, we have an active Slack community at http://slack.hodlcoin.comDrop by to talk. The chat is mostly about our nuts and how Winter is Coming. cool project, i am thinking of jumping on board. is this a long term project for you? What do you hope to do with this project? |
|
|
|
|
what is the purpose of this coin?
|
|
|
|
Oh ok I think I understand. You are saying the 10 minute block time is necessary in order for C-Bit to be "Compatible With All Bitcoin-based Technology" as intended. Is that correct?
False. 10 minute block is not necessary to be compatible with bitcoin. You just need proper coding skills. Hi we talked about the C-bit release on our altcoin show last night and we had a couple questions. The first we were wondering why 10 minute blocks? Is there some reasoning behind this decision? Also, aside from larger blocks are there any other things C-bit is going to attempt? You can listen to the boradcast at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1379730.msg14041973#msg14041973 if you are interested in hearing C-bit mentioned. C-bit is discussed at 22:59:00 If you have any information we can share with our listeners next week about c-bit or if anyone from the community or team would like to talk on the show please let us know. Thanks and good luck with your project! We wanted the block time to equal Bitcoin so that when the time came to synchronize the two networks with the Helix technology, they would be compatible, time wise. You can't have blocks being connected if you have blocks being formed at different times and in different amounts. You can still make them work if you have proper dev skills.
So why not everything BTC? Well if you ever are waiting for a trade to go through, you know that waiting even a minute is a long time. Try waiting 10 minutes. Just not a good experience. So I will make a hybrid system combining the speed of BTCD 1 minute blocks with BTC for long term storage. Trading against BTC should really be a requirement, but not sure if all passport enable blockchains will be able to do this, so it would probably need to be a strong recommendation.
iguana unites all the bitcoin compatibles using technology.
James is going to make BTCD 1 minute block work with BTC 10 minute block. doing, until its DONE, is TRUE. That wasnt DONE yet. Until then... please dont be so certain, thank you If it was obviously impossible like they are saying, why would people be trying otherwise? And not just anyone but a talented coder? Is he stupid to waste his time? He is building something that is possible not trying to build something that is impossible. Know the difference. |
|
|
|
Oh ok I think I understand. You are saying the 10 minute block time is necessary in order for C-Bit to be "Compatible With All Bitcoin-based Technology" as intended. Is that correct?
False. 10 minute block is not necessary to be compatible with bitcoin. You just need proper coding skills. Hi we talked about the C-bit release on our altcoin show last night and we had a couple questions. The first we were wondering why 10 minute blocks? Is there some reasoning behind this decision? Also, aside from larger blocks are there any other things C-bit is going to attempt? You can listen to the boradcast at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1379730.msg14041973#msg14041973 if you are interested in hearing C-bit mentioned. C-bit is discussed at 22:59:00 If you have any information we can share with our listeners next week about c-bit or if anyone from the community or team would like to talk on the show please let us know. Thanks and good luck with your project! We wanted the block time to equal Bitcoin so that when the time came to synchronize the two networks with the Helix technology, they would be compatible, time wise. You can't have blocks being connected if you have blocks being formed at different times and in different amounts. You can still make them work if you have proper dev skills.
So why not everything BTC? Well if you ever are waiting for a trade to go through, you know that waiting even a minute is a long time. Try waiting 10 minutes. Just not a good experience. So I will make a hybrid system combining the speed of BTCD 1 minute blocks with BTC for long term storage. Trading against BTC should really be a requirement, but not sure if all passport enable blockchains will be able to do this, so it would probably need to be a strong recommendation.
iguana unites all the bitcoin compatibles using technology.
James is going to make BTCD 1 minute block work with BTC 10 minute block. |
|
|
|
Hi we talked about the C-bit release on our altcoin show last night and we had a couple questions. The first we were wondering why 10 minute blocks? Is there some reasoning behind this decision? Also, aside from larger blocks are there any other things C-bit is going to attempt? You can listen to the boradcast at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1379730.msg14041973#msg14041973 if you are interested in hearing C-bit mentioned. C-bit is discussed at 22:59:00 If you have any information we can share with our listeners next week about c-bit or if anyone from the community or team would like to talk on the show please let us know. Thanks and good luck with your project! We wanted the block time to equal Bitcoin so that when the time came to synchronize the two networks with the Helix technology, they would be compatible, time wise. You can't have blocks being connected if you have blocks being formed at different times and in different amounts. You can still make them work if you have proper dev skills.
So why not everything BTC? Well if you ever are waiting for a trade to go through, you know that waiting even a minute is a long time. Try waiting 10 minutes. Just not a good experience. So I will make a hybrid system combining the speed of BTCD 1 minute blocks with BTC for long term storage. Trading against BTC should really be a requirement, but not sure if all passport enable blockchains will be able to do this, so it would probably need to be a strong recommendation.
iguana unites all the bitcoin compatibles using technology.
James is going to make BTCD 1 minute block work with BTC 10 minute block. |
|
|
|
This thing is still failling to compile for me:
./configure: line 12320: SECP_64BIT_ASM_CHECK: command not found
./configure: line 12349: SECP_INT128_CHECK: command not found
./configure: line 12377: SECP_INT128_CHECK: command not found
./configure: line 12402: SECP_GMP_CHECK: command not found
./configure: line 12508: SECP_OPENSSL_CHECK: command not found
./configure: line 12526: AX_JNI_INCLUDE_DIR: command not found
Seems that secp is somehow broken, I downloaded with --recursive already and manually tried to compile secp first - no luck.
Secp is not broken itself. The autoconf includes are. This is indeed a bug with the build scripts. It looks like we tested fresh builds from the private repo at bitbucket, but somehow the repository did not fully transfer correctly to github, where we did a fresh git init. We are making and testing a repo fix now. It really would have been better for someone to post the error message sooner. We can't test under every possible condition, and testing does not always find the bugs. It's obvious in hindsight that we should have done build testing from the public repo. We did many build tests from the private. So there was no (working) source available since launch and you could mine all the blocks yourself until you release the working version.. nice.. There has been pool for some time now it's up on superninjapool.tk now. There was something funky with validating the daemon address for pool payout. I imagine it has to do with stealth, but I think it's all set. |
|
|
|
covertress I have some questions I'd like to be answered, and please don't take them as intended to be malicious toward you or KR, they are only for the sake of clarification. You've said that you'll use some ICO funds to travel to BTC conferences to tell people about KR. What I want to know is, what is your selling point? What is it that you are going to promote about KR to get people interested? People knowledgable about crypto are going to immediately ask you what sets KR apart from ETH, and I feel like its a legitimate question.
Good question. Why should anyone choose krypton over ethereum? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
