Huge buy walls on cryptsy and mintpal  Nethash >50GH, block reward 9.  |
|
|
|
Later on, A sends out 500 coins, which the client sends 492 coins from wallet A and 8 coins from wallet C.
Someone now sees that wallet A and C belong to the same person.
Gotcha. But this could be solved by simply moving (via darksend) anything in the change address back into the "main" address before sending? |
|
|
|
I think the thelonecrouton understands what you guys are saying, but what he means is that since the conclusion comes from adding the values that is a very good indication of who sent the money but the user still has plausible deniability, so the person that obtained the information couldnt enforce anything like in a court of law or something. At least thats how I am reading it, basically the numbers may add but that officially doesnt prove anything.
Yes, thank you. |
|
|
|
>1. C did not receive 8 coins from E
>2. C did not send E 2 coins.
By looking at the blockchain you can easily determine that either 1) or 2) is true.
>3. Nothing links back to A anyway
It doesn't matter if nothing links to A, C and E are linked - so the coins are dirty.
>as the muxing is off-chain and no record is kept of it.
The mixing is off-chain but the inputs and outputs are all on the blockchain for everyone to see.
>By looking at the blockchain you can easily determine that either 1) or 2) is true. But neither 1 nor 2 is true. Maybe you got your letters mixed up? >It doesn't matter if nothing links to A, C and E are linked - so the coins are dirty. If C is traceable directly from E then you're right, although that still proves nothing, but I thought C received whatever change from a mix, not directly from E in the clear? >The mixing is off-chain but the inputs and outputs are all on the blockchain for everyone to see. Someone sent some DRK somewhere. But we don't know where. Not seeing a problem there, except the timing analysis one. |
|
|
|
Lets break this down to improve clarity:
A wants to send 2 coins to E
B wants to send 3 coins to F
A sends the masternode 10 coins, and address C (C is the change address)
B sends the masternode 10 coins, and address D (D is the change address)
The masternode will mix the coins and output:
2 coins to E
8 coins to C
3 coins to F
7 coins to D
It will be impossible to tell whether A sent coins to E&C or F&D. It is possible however to say that whoever holds address C sent 2 coins to E. Now if user A wants to buy something on amazon with DRK, and uses the coins at address C, amazon (or anyone who has compromised amazon's servers) can determine with 100% certainty that user A sent 2 coins to E in the earlier darksend transaction. If the coins are darksent to amazon then there wouldn't be a problem I guess. Really the coins at address C should be automatically washed after the transaction to maintain anonymity in case the user non-darksends them later on.
Still not seeing any provable link between amount of change received by C and initial transaction between A and E. At least not without full access to the wallet that holds A and C, at which point all else is moot. Must be going blonde... 2+8=10 This proves that whoever holds coins at C darksent 2 coins to E. No, 2+8=10 proves 2+8=10. Doesn't prove anything else at all. Please describe the flaw in my logic  C and E are linked on the block explorer because 8+2=10, one is the change address one is the receiving address. If C lightsends DRK to any vendor compromised by law enforcement, they will know that either: C recieved 8 coins from whoever holds change address E or C sent E 2 coins 1. C did not receive 8 coins from E 2. C did not send E 2 coins. 3. Nothing links back to A anyway, as the muxing is off-chain and no record is kept of it. |
|
|
|
Lets break this down to improve clarity:
A wants to send 2 coins to E
B wants to send 3 coins to F
A sends the masternode 10 coins, and address C (C is the change address)
B sends the masternode 10 coins, and address D (D is the change address)
The masternode will mix the coins and output:
2 coins to E
8 coins to C
3 coins to F
7 coins to D
It will be impossible to tell whether A sent coins to E&C or F&D. It is possible however to say that whoever holds address C sent 2 coins to E. Now if user A wants to buy something on amazon with DRK, and uses the coins at address C, amazon (or anyone who has compromised amazon's servers) can determine with 100% certainty that user A sent 2 coins to E in the earlier darksend transaction. If the coins are darksent to amazon then there wouldn't be a problem I guess. Really the coins at address C should be automatically washed after the transaction to maintain anonymity in case the user non-darksends them later on.
Still not seeing any provable link between amount of change received by C and initial transaction between A and E. At least not without full access to the wallet that holds A and C, at which point all else is moot. Must be going blonde... 2+8=10 This proves that whoever holds coins at C darksent 2 coins to E. No, 2+8=10 proves 2+8=10. Doesn't prove anything else at all. |
|
|
|
|
Regardless, the wallet should be passphrase protected at startup for anyone to see anything at all.
|
|
|
|
Lets break this down to improve clarity:
A wants to send 2 coins to E
B wants to send 3 coins to F
A sends the masternode 10 coins, and address C (C is the change address)
B sends the masternode 10 coins, and address D (D is the change address)
The masternode will mix the coins and output:
2 coins to E
8 coins to C
3 coins to F
7 coins to D
It will be impossible to tell whether A sent coins to E&C or F&D. It is possible however to say that whoever holds address C sent 2 coins to E. Now if user A wants to buy something on amazon with DRK, and uses the coins at address C, amazon (or anyone who has compromised amazon's servers) can determine with 100% certainty that user A sent 2 coins to E in the earlier darksend transaction. If the coins are darksent to amazon then there wouldn't be a problem I guess. Really the coins at address C should be automatically washed after the transaction to maintain anonymity in case the user non-darksends them later on.
Still not seeing any provable link between amount of change received by C and initial transaction between A and E. At least not without full access to the wallet that holds A and C, at which point all else is moot. Must be going blonde... |
|
|
|
There is no link to wallet address A, but there IS a link to the change address (let's call that address C).
After darksend is complete, if the user purchased goods with address C on a site that contained personal information - he would be outing himself as the user who performed the darksend transaction to user B (above). The change address needs to be sent back through a second wash to remove the link between C and B.
He would only be outed if the attacker was in possession of his unencrypted wallet, with both the sending address and the receiving change address providing that information. Can't see how change address C is linkable to sending address A by inspecting the blockchain? If it is, then you're right of course, I'm often a dunce.  |
|
|
|
Where is the discoverable link between user A sending DRK to user B and user A receiving change in a new wallet address? I thought that bit was off-chain?
The link is math. You wouldn't know who received 7.28 and who received 2.72, but those two added together would be 10 DRK, meaning they were from the same original address. But in order to put that math together, you would already have to know sent amount, who it was sent to and where it was sent from. At that point user(s) A/B is/are already chained up in a dark concrete room having a very unpleasant day. |
|
|
|
It then compares the changes that occurred in those addresses in the last 2.5min [from its previous check] and knows exactly who transferred coins to whom.
Because it doesn't know who had them in the first place. It doesn't know if it's the same person sending to self. Darksend moves in blocks of fixed size and provides change back on new addresses. The blockchain keeps track of all of that anyway, why does a person have to be NSA? It's all in the blockchain... Why monitor? I don't get it. I think you just have a fundamental lack of understanding in how any crypto coin works. I'm not even sure where to start in trying to help you understand. Not an insult... You just don't have enough basic knowledge to have this conversation. That's kind of condescending. You could have just said, "an attacker can query the blockchain rather than constantly monitoring balances", and then answered his question. I thought it was a good question -- how does darksend protect against a timing analysis? I think the answer is in making similar-sized payments (denomination of XX DRK) + using a time delay for batching multiple transactions together. A third party will see accounts being reduced and increased by similar sizes. For example 100 people will be losing 10 DRKs and 100 people will be gaining 10 DRKs. So you don't really know who sent to who. Right, but I can Darksend 7.289375 DRK to you, and I will get 2.710625 DRK change, and both of those amounts will be recorded in the blockchain. A timing analysis could trivially link the two addresses sending/receiving those two amounts that add to 10 DRK. Short explanation is that your wallet will receive the change, but not in the same address that was used to send it. Yes but that means that the extra "change" is dirty (ie can be linked to the original darksend transaction) - and therefore should be cleaned a second time right? Where is the discoverable link between user A sending DRK to user B and user A receiving change in a new wallet address? I thought that bit was off-chain? |
|
|
|
I'm a geek, not a trader. Someone please explain this like I'm 5 yrs old please? Whats the strategy, and how on earth can on put in those orders that quick? API trading bot?
Yep, bot trying to drive the price down. There's no real volume below 0.004+ but a lot of people will just scan the latest sell price and mistakenly conclude there's a downturn. |
|
|
|
Well that pretty much summed up the usual conversation in the Polo trollbox. |
|
|
|
What do we need individual addresses for? All we need to know, is what our individual share of the total DRK in existence is, and a private key allowing us access to that amount. New public key is generated when transaction occurs and balances change. Total DRK and new coins generated remain p2p verified like it is now. Wallets become a list of your public keys for whatever fractions of the total DRK you hold. Unlock with private key. Modify blockchain so it doesn't display amounts, just your updated public key.Good luck tracing anything. No, I'm not stoned. And I'm sure there are hundreds of things wrong with the above. |
|
|
|
Anybody have teamviewer willing to help me get my oldwallet n sync with new wallet I have over 200 coins in wallet stuck I tried to send my coins from old to new but the wallet never synced?
this small venture is paid of course, reasonable offers please If you tell us what you've done so far someone can probably help you for free...  well ive downloaded the new wallet just now, doesn't show the darkcoin that was in the old xcoin wallet. About a month ago I tried to send my darkcoin from my old xcoin wallet into the new darkcoin wallet that I downloaded at the time, after the new wallet synced and didn't show the coin in it. Ive asked a few times here on this thread and had gotten the same answer to find the appdata file which ive finally found today.(LOL) Now I don't remember what to do with it, as well as not knowing which appdata darkcoin file this is, the old or the new? Can you see your balance in the blockchain if you enter either address? http://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/No nothing for either(old xcoin wallet stuck at 10 weeks behind) can only see what was received from pools when I was mining with cpu on old wallet. they in the old address though? Does it (the blockchain explorer) show them leaving for somewhere? |
|
|
|
The market does need some liquidity, it's all good. |
|
|
|
I have some more wallet questions. Apologies in advance if this is very newbie-ish, as I'm used to just downloading a wallet, unzipping... and that's it. I first tried the mac wallet, but it can't find the blocksource. I tried it a second time after re-installing, and it then kept crashing on startup for me. So I am trying the win wallet now. I tried to find http://www.darkcoin.io/downloads/rc/darkcoinqt. exe listed on the front page pdf, but it leads nowhere. So instead just downloaded what is on the 1st page of the coin's website, which seems to at least be starting to sync properly. It's 9.1.2 beta wallet. So it'll be fine if I just use this one, and is it an old one, or newer version? Is this the wallet I should be using? If I want to get coins from an ancient wallet moved over, I just need to replace the dat from my backup I previously made, right? And with the wallet closed, I assume. Yes that should be fine mate. Bit of wallet version confusion at the moment as DarkSend is in testing, but if the 9.1.2 version is syncing it should work OK. |
|
|
|
Anybody have teamviewer willing to help me get my oldwallet n sync with new wallet I have over 200 coins in wallet stuck I tried to send my coins from old to new but the wallet never synced?
this small venture is paid of course, reasonable offers please If you tell us what you've done so far someone can probably help you for free... well ive downloaded the new wallet just now, doesn't show the darkcoin that was in the old xcoin wallet. About a month ago I tried to send my darkcoin from my old xcoin wallet into the new darkcoin wallet that I downloaded at the time, after the new wallet synced and didn't show the coin in it. Ive asked a few times here on this thread and had gotten the same answer to find the appdata file which ive finally found today.(LOL) Now I don't remember what to do with it, as well as not knowing which appdata darkcoin file this is, the old or the new? Can you see your balance in the blockchain if you enter either address? http://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/ |
|
|
|
Ok, I have verified it works.
Start darkcoind on remote machine.
On your local machine specify the IP at launch with -masternodeaddr=YOUR_SERVER_IP
Unlock your local machine wallet with your passphrase.
On your local machine, ./darkcoind masternode start
Slickness indeed.
So you have to keep it running on another machine, presumably your home machine, with the wallet unlocked? You don't have to keep your local machine's wallet unlocked permanently, or even open. Once the remote machine master node starts you can close the local machine's wallet and hide it away for safe keeping. Ok, and nobody can sell those coins, or withdraw? They system will know? It's no different than them just sitting there in your open qt wallet. If you have an encrypted Darkcoin wallet it must be unencrypted for a short time while you are starting the master node. All coins remain on the local machine's wallet and do not move. Your local machine has to get the private keys, sign a message with them, send it to the server, and then have the server broadcast it proving you own them in order to start a masternode, which is why it must be unencrypted (btw I'm guessing that's what he's doing). If Evan didn't do this, a single 1000 DRK wallet could be copied to infinite machines to run master nodes. I'd love for Evan to set this up so once the machine that doesn't hold the wallet gets verified we could shut down the wallet machine and have the code check the block chain to see if the coins have moved from that account. It would be great to have your wallet in cold storage and still be running a master. +1, mothernode can read the blockchain, see the DRK in the right place, so should be fine this way? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
