Yes, these are good points.
The contracts to design the system are not finished yet. There will need to be mechanisms to disincentivize whales from doing this, along with moderator roles.
This isn't too different from Steem / Steemit where people wrote bots and tried to game the reward systems. Sometimes it worked for a while, and then the rules changed. WhaleCoin will have to change, learn, and adapt as well.
I hope that you are willing to help review some of the test whale/follower contracts when we have them ready and participate in trying to break it so we can see how it evolves.
See? It wasn't that hard. I prefer this answer of yours acknowledging the flaw and describing your future plans to attempt to fix it. I'm willing to review. |
|
|
|
Ok, and Proof of Work is also "flawed" by your definition because 51% mining attacks exist.
Unlike a 51% PoW attack, the attack I described against WhaleCoin is practical, cheap, easy to pull off: any dummy knows how to split 10k coins in 10 accounts of 1k coins each, and get 10x the voting power. Trying to deny this flaw exist makes you look very silly... The only sensible and wise response should be for you to acknowledge it, and then explain how it will be fixed (moderator role?) |
|
|
|
This is not a flaw and we are well aware of this type of attack.
The mere fact you are "aware of this type of attack" implies it is a flaw. If there was no flaw, the attack wouldn't exist. |
|
|
|
There is a gigantic flaw in WhaleCoin: it supposedly limits the upvote power to the same amount for any whale with more than 1000 coins. However nothing prevents a whale from splitting their coins into multiple accounts with 1000 coins each. |
|
|
|
I feel like people are completely missing the point of Zcoin when they say things like you just did, basically: "MTP is all that matters for Zcoin"
That's completely untrue. I get that it has been marketed heavily as 'revolutionizing mining' etc, and sure, if it can fulfill its promises of putting CPUs and GPUs on comparable if not equal footing
I'll repeat myself: MTP heavily favors GPU. (Not that it's a problem, I think a PoW should favor GPU to avoid botnets mining.) That depends on the parameters no? Sure, but you would need very unusual parameters to favor CPUs. For example if Argon2 memory was 8-16 MB instead of 2 GB, it would fit in the CPU L2 cache and likely run better than on GPU. |
|
|
|
I feel like people are completely missing the point of Zcoin when they say things like you just did, basically: "MTP is all that matters for Zcoin"
That's completely untrue. I get that it has been marketed heavily as 'revolutionizing mining' etc, and sure, if it can fulfill its promises of putting CPUs and GPUs on comparable if not equal footing
I'll repeat myself: MTP heavily favors GPU. (Not that it's a problem, I think a PoW should favor GPU to avoid botnets mining.) |
|
|
|
Found yet another attack: Attack 4: Time-memory trade-off with 1/16th the memory, 2.88× the timeI see people talking about GPU vs CPU. In my opinion MTP clearly favors GPU. Initial implementations might put CPU at almost equal footing with GPU, but given enough time to optimize miners, GPUs will end up being clearly faster and more cost-effective than mining with CPUs. |
|
|
|
@mrb, curious, why you're negative on the things while dev team are trying to make improvements, instead of offering constructive suggestions?? I would turn to something else if I don't like this rather than wasting time.
Not negative. I was just teasing hidetoshi, hence the smiley  |
|
|
|
MTP exists on testnet though and the testnet was redeployed again due to improvements on with a reduction of proof size on MTP ...
Great! So you will encode merkle paths in binary instead of hexadecimal? And you will remove X⟦i⟧ from the proof? We also have been given a draft copy of a research paper provided by @hidetoshi that touches on MTP that we have agreed to not release until they have finalized their research and we are assessing its impact. They're also waiting for MTP's authors to reply. Our dev team has been very busy in looking into this.
Strange, hidetoshi was complaining Zcoin wasn't making my MTP findings public at the time, but now he is the one asking to keep his research under wraps? |
|
|
|
I think it's incredibly disturbing that the zcoin devs are embargoing these discoveries when MTP has not been deployed yet. There is no risk of an exploit since the exploitable code has not yet been deployed. And it sounds like mrb's second discovery is more than the horridly-maintained codebase containing magic numbers like "4034". But we have no way to know.
Shame on you, zcoin, for bribing researchers into silence.
I don't have a strong opinion about this. Whether vulnerabilities are published today or in a bit less than 2 months (when the contests end) doesn't really matter IMHO... However it would make more sense to have the miner contest end after the audit and implementation contests. Right now the miner contest ends on August 9th and the audit and implementation contests end on August 30th. |
|
|
|
Bounty for MTP Audit ($10,000) and MTP Implementation ($2,500) We are announcing bounties for MTP audit and MTP implementation. [...] I submitted a first—critically exploitable—bug last night. SHA256 of the description of the bug at https://twitter.com/zorinaq/status/888644581926944768 Thank you for organizing this! Submission is accepted! Thanks for this! Keep them coming! The bounty is divided between each bug found so the more you find the bigger the share of the bounty you get! The bug happened when increasing the number of blocks required without adjusting this parameter. Good spot! Thanks. Oh and I submitted a 2nd attack, this time a flaw in the MTP algorithm itself. https://twitter.com/zorinaq/status/889990807519870979 |
|
|
|
Bounty for MTP Audit ($10,000) and MTP Implementation ($2,500)We are announcing bounties for MTP audit and MTP implementation. [...] I submitted a first—critically exploitable—bug last night. SHA256 of the description of the bug at https://twitter.com/zorinaq/status/888644581926944768 Thank you for organizing this! |
|
|
|
If somebody forget's its password.
Can you retreive it using your Private Key you have been sent on the PDF?
Thank you
No, there is no way that you can retrieve your tezzies if you loose your password. The wallet id and the seed is not enough!! What? Typically the see is the private key and that is all you need. Tezos is different mate if you lose your password you lose all your coins simple. An important reminder about passwords Dear Tezos supporters, The Tezos fundraiser is currently ongoing and has been a massive success so far. If you have contributed, or are planning to contribute, we would like to remind you of the importance of backing up your password. The password you select on the fundraiser page is used to protect your key in case of theft of your paper wallet. The 15-word mnemonic you see in your wallet cannot alone let you access your XTZ allocation. We do not have your password and cannot help you recover it. We recommend that you pick a strong password, one you haven't used anywhere else. Committing passwords to memory is difficult, therefore we strongly recommend you write it down on a piece of paper and place it in a secure location. Keep it secret, keep it safe. As always, whenever you access the Tezos website, please type in the full address, manually, in your browser: https://www.tezos.comSincerely, The Tezos team Thanks for the details, hope the PW I wrote down is the correct one! =? good question... how to check if I have/remember/write down my correct password? That's what i am worried now i hope i can remember the password . If any one know how to check please post it. As a Tezos investor & InfoSec engineer, I too wanted to double-check my password and to check that their wallet generation mechanism was not flawed... So here is a secure way to do it: 1. Open https://crowdfund.tezos.com (the only official site that you should trust) then download & open the offline version on Chrome in incognito mode (ctrl-shift-n) on an offline computer. If you don't have an offline computer, at the very least disconnect from your network. I highly recommend to go offline. The steps below, if slightly modified, could be used to steal your wallet password+seed. If you are offline, it should be fine. 2. Open Chrome's dev console (ctrl-shift-j) and type the following command. Again make sure you are in incognito mode (if not, the dev console command history will be saved to disk and leak your passwd). Replace "x@x.x" with your email address, "testtest" with your password, "word1 word2 word3 ... word15" with your secret key): module.getKeypair('x@x.x'+'testtest', 'word1 word2 word3 ... word15')(In general you should never type a piece of code you don't understand in the Chrome dev console. But because you are doing this offline, in incognito mode, and will close Chrome before going back online, it is safe.) 3. It should print, for example: Object {mnemonic: "scene claim process view journey snack cement lens avoid iron dove slam game chronic hazard",
entropy: Uint8Array(40),
pkh: Uint8Array(20),
pkh_b58: "tz1YFBpy8SvFZhk91rnik1Czx5NsYEaurTn6",
verif_code: 35399}4. Verify that pkh_b58 matches your publish key hash. If it does, then your password and email were correct. That's it. 5. If you had to use an online computer temporarily disconnected from the network, then close the Chrome incognito session, and only then it is safe to reconnect to the network. Technical details:For the curious and those who can read the js code, the module.getKeypair() function is defined in the Tezos page and simply computes a Tezos keypair from an email, password, and secret key. They use the standard BIP39 passphrase-protection mechanism to generate a seed from a 160-bit mnemonic (15 words). The BIP39 passphrase is the email address concatenated with the Tezos password. The verif_code is just the first 2 bytes of the public key hash (pkh[0] * 256 + pkh[1]). It is possible that some people typed a random email (not willing to reveal their real email) and it seems the Tezos devs didn't think about this. IMHO they should display a big warning to explain that both the password as well as the email need to be remembered in order to access the wallet, since the email is used to build the BIP39 passphrase. |
|
|
|
Fastpow: actually it's because they are processing withdrawals manually. They emailed me back saying "Withdrawals should be done today sir. Thanks for your patience and sorry for inconvenience"
Well a few days later and the withdrawal of the HMQ tokens has still not been processed. This time I was told: Hello. HMQ withdrawals are currently on maintenance due to the global issues on ETH network.
As soon as ETH service operation is be restored, transactions will be back on track. We will keep you updated.
Humaniq support
Lee
|
|
|
|
|
Fastpow: actually it's because they are processing withdrawals manually. They emailed me back saying "Withdrawals should be done today sir. Thanks for your patience and sorry for inconvenience"
|
|
|
|
|
Is anyone experiencing delays withdrawing their HMQ from the humaniq.co website? I did it yesterday, and 12 hours later the withdrawal is still not completed and still shows as "Processing..." on their website.
|
|
|
|
Right now though, Argon2d IS CPU-only. The algo also IS gpu-resistant; we didn't say that a GPU miner CANNOT be developed; but it should be difficult and also should not provide much advantage over CPU. Of course, you are welcome to create a GPU miner, but the way Argon2d works, it should not have much advantage over CPU. But you are welcome to prove us wrong!
My beef with your statement is that it is misleading. Your mining code is currently CPU-only, but the algorithm is not. Nothing in Argon2D, not even the 64-bit operations make it "difficult" to implement on GPU. It will be ported to GPU, will provide a significant advantage (even if only 2×, which is significant), and a point in time will come where mining CRDS on CPU will be worthless and everyone will be on GPUs. Also, I stated that GPU miners can be developed, but Argon2d should provide a good mining progression from CPU->GPU. The efficiency mining on a CPU per hash is better than that of GPU.
No it's not. I guarantee you GPUs will provide higher energy efficiency than CPUs. I know Argon2D. You guys are making the same mistake as Charlie Lee who thought scrypt would prevent Litecoin GPU mining, because he read some vague claims about scrypt online. The reality is that Argon2D is designed to minimize the advantage of GPUs over CPUs, but the advantage still exists. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
