You don't have zero knowledge implemented yet.

What do you have then? You have a ring signature token system that uses the same signature system as cryptonote. It's true that it is a new implementation. However, there is this cumbersome condition: "The ring signature consists of the public key of the token being spent, plus the public keys from 3 to 200 other tokens of the same value as the token being spent."

So to spend a given amount of shadow coin as shadow token, you have to find in the blockchain 3 - 200 tokens of the same size that you want to spend.

I can think of a way to tokenize shadow where you can spend in any denomination:
1. Send shadowcoin to an exchange
2. Trade it for XMR or BBR (latter is better)
3. Spend the BBR in any denomination

In this method, you use the exact same ring signature technology without worrying about whether tokens are available in the denomination you want to spend. You also don't have to worry about not getting your change back.

It's a step backwards. At best it's interesting, but practically, it's worse.

The zero-knowledge aspect is not implemented and will take a trusted setup. The "trustless" aspect you refer to is the ring signature system that operates just like cryptonote.

Cryptonote uses a different curve, different libraries, and a whole different underlying core.
We used ring signatures to spend Shadow, which is created by sending SDC as an anonymous output.
Our scheme is quite a bit different, in that we borrow concepts from zerocoin, with the minting and spending, and use ring signatures to make the inputs untraceable from the outputs.. We're also using PoS instead of PoW.
Its a completely unique scheme and implementation

Not to mention, Shadow's anonymity is much more lightweight and flexible than XMR / cryptonote solutions.  And SDC is not restricted to any type of signatures... SDC can swap it out with any better zero knowledge systems should they ever come along, and SDC will always be able to improve on it.

Your scheme needs a trusted setup. How do you provide such a trust ?

Thank you for this! I will go look now

Tree for exchanges to build the daemon: https://github.com/SDCDev/shadowcoin/tree/anon


https://github.com/SDCDev/shadowcoin/commit/94bfb03903d5fadfc7e975fa0ace749187279703

That's enough to verify, but not to spend.

Shadow is not doing so bad,  surely does not have the attention it deserves at the moment, but it stable and will get better for sure.

Im sorry man, im not a trader. I never sell my Blackcoins, im never on the exchanges. I dont go on Bitcointalk. Really, i work hard as hell.

David, dd you not know who Bobsurplus is before you got involved with this coin? I dont know why anyone would have expected a different outcome than this, if you partner with Bobsurplus in making a coin.


EDIT: I see you say you didnt know who he was.

how the fuck did you work with these psychos, those chats are fucking insane? i hope you and steven and lin try to fix what they shit on if it can even be mended at this point.. all i can say is wow, i couldn't imagine dealing with people like that

White paper also means FINAL PRODUCT as they said they would be released together, if I rember correctly

Tell me at least one thing that has not been delivered in the past by Shadow developers. That never was. They always achieve their plans and high results in the work

Awesome work!




This is gonna be a huge marketplace

I normally stay well clear of these debates, for obvious reasons, but I do get frustrated when I see well-articulated responses from people who are clearly intelligent advocating this obviously broken architecture, mostly through much hand-waving and placating each other.

Masternodes have to be available and connected to in real time in order to be used. Mixing is based entirely on their availability. Thus, in order to control a substantial number of masternodes one merely has to own a handful, and make the rest of the masternode network unreachable.

For even a script-kiddie-level attacker these techniques and funds are easily found.

Need to render 1100 masternodes unreachable? No problem - SNMP amplification attacks will let you use a handful of boxes to amplify the bandwidth under your control. When a datacenter sees a clear flood of traffic for a particular IP address at the datacenter their response is always automatic and the same - their upstream data provider blackholes that IP address at the upstream bordergate. This means that you can use SNMP or DNS amplification attacks to render a dedicated machine (never mind a VPS) inoperable and unreachable to the outside world.

The most critical take away for you today is that this problem is unsolvable at the userland level. In other words, no matter how much dev worship there is there isn't a magical line of code that can be written that can prevent amplification attacks from devices and servers that are unrelated to and unconnected to the Darkcoin network. It is something that cannot be controlled or influenced.

The solution would literally be for Darkcoin to scrap masternodes and go back to the proverbial drawing board to find an architecture that uses passive blockchain mixing or similar, but I suspect it is too late and there are too many stubborn heads for that.

Such news,many article .... or maybe just one, from me?

Clicky!

Thanks to Soepkip for letting me know

Round two testing has begun for version 2! We've setup a testing thread that contains links to the new build as well as instructions on how to participate: http://shadowtalk.org/topic/265/public-testing-for-zk-shadow-round-2

Testing channel is #shadowtest on freenode IRC

If you any feedback or bugs related to testing, please post them on the test thread via sdtalk. It makes it easier for the team to track issues and provides a knowledge base for new users.

Thanks everyone.