 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
|
Wait, did he had 89XMR of dust?  I saw he had only including unlocked dust: 1.442914014341I had the more or less the same amount of dust and around 280 xmr all collected in small and even tiny inputs and managed to send out all of them, but wallet had to split to 11 transactions, the fees were about 5XMR though. I used transfer_new, btw. I guess he was in the same boat. The remaining dust I successfully swiped out in the newest 0.9.4 wallet so we may consider this problem solved, hurray!  5 XMR to retrieve 1.44, you are 3.56 in the hole, did you mean .5? Can you explain how you transferred this with transfer_new? I had a little dust and tried to sweep_dust, didn't work, now with 0.9.4 I tried the new sweep_unmixable and it errors and didn't do anything I can't see my dust amount anymore. Is there something you have to do to split it, or does simplewallet do it when you run the command? Is there anything I can do? It was only .05 XMR, so no big loss but I guess it would be good to sweep it, even if I only get a small bit after fees, It only makes sense. |
|
|
|
on my wallet i tried sweep_dust and transfer 100xmr all failed.
There is a known issue with sweep_dust sometimes not working. That is being addressed in a future update. As far as the other, we're taking a look at your log file, but GingerAle's suggestion about going on IRC is a good one. Sometimes it is best to be able to ask questions and try things in real time. I have a wallet that has been around for a long time and have synced every once in a while. I received an error when I first ran the bc_height command, but the second time I tried it, it ran and went through all the blocks and that was good to see. But now I have the dust fee problem. I tried to sweep a small bit of dust from my wallet, it seems that it did not go through, so now there is a 0.02 fee that is stuck in outgoing. Is there a way to remove it or will it go away? I also tried to sweep it again because it showed dust still there, but it errored. Does it even matter? It's just there in outgoing now for hours. Also the 0.9.3 doesn't refresh automatically or in the background that I could see, but typing refresh does it. Can it auto refresh? kind of a good thing, like it did before with previous versions it is good to see it sync and then check your balance. As far as I know 0.9.3 should auto refresh. As far as asking a bunch of specific questions about your wallet the best bet is to jump onto freenode IRC #monero and ask on there. There are definitely some known issues with sweep dust. In most cases, I would suggest waiting for an update. This board is available to search and documents the answers, so why ask to go to #monero? 0.9.3 doesn't refresh, so why is that? This could be a problem where your coins are stolen and since it doesn't refresh, you may think they are still there, right? Is there a bug or is there a problem with my wallet? I can live with the dust problem. Can someone answer my question about the stuck fee for dust? Will this fix it? Sometimes, your funds will become stuck - you will have some locked funds that never become unlocked. This is how you fix it. Load your wallet in simplewallet. Type seed into the command prompt. Write down your 25 word seed, if you haven't already. This is the best way to make sure you don't loose access to your funds. Close simplewallet by typing exit Backup all of your wallet related files. These include: yourwalletname.bin yourwalletname.bin.keys yourwalletname.bin.address.txt This can be done by copying the files to a new folder. Sometimes, when creating your wallet, you might have named it something without the .bin part. In that case, the wallet file will be called yourwalletname without the .bin at the end. Delete yourwallet.bin Load simplewallet, type in the name of the wallet you just deleted Enter password. The wallet will now refresh and hopefully your locked funds will now become unlocked. Like I said, the bug was introduced in 9.1 and subsequently patched in 9.3. However, if you incurred the bug in 9.1 it will still be present in 9.3, because the daemon will still think some of the key images are already spent and therefore you cannot spend the funds. This requires a rescan to fix. I am not sure why we need documentary for this. Bear in mind that most of the people working on Monero are volunteers and in my personal opinion the time that would be needed for this could be spend better. Regarding refresh, autorefresh should work in 9.3. However, in case it doesn't work what is wrong with just typing refresh? In trying to find out about what happened in my sweep_dust, I did a rescan and everything in my wallet appears good. I have made a note to run the refresh every time I open my wallet now, an auto refresh would be nice, not a big deal. I don't open the 'ol wallet too much I'm going to hold and pray it hits out of the solar system, I have a feeling secure money is smart money. |
|
|
|
Concerning sweep_dust errors, it can be due to tiny inputs for which there is no enough inputs to mixin with. Trying to sweep_dust, daemon says: Tx <...> has too low mixin (0), and more than one mixable input with unmixable inputs. For example, when I am trying to send some xmr that left on my hot wallet, most of which consists of dust gives me an error: Error: not enough outputs for specified mixin_count = 4:
output amount = 0.003811120000, found outputs to mix = 1
output amount = 0.007507490000, found outputs to mix = 1
output amount = 0.007723640000, found outputs to mix = 1
output amount = 0.003594340000, found outputs to mix = 2
output amount = 0.003064900000, found outputs to mix = 1
........ and so on....
Ok thanks for the information. I thought my fee of 0.02 was stuck, but it appears it went through. Looking further into what was being displayed in the command show_transfers, it appears that I incurred a 0.02 transfer fee for the attempt to sweep_dust, but my dust did not get swept, because I had too little. I thought it was stuck or maybe would return to my wallet since the sweep didn't work, but show_transfers displays the in and out of your wallet. With all the mixing it appears that my dust was too low and couldn't be done and I still got charged the fee. Oh well, I guess I should just make a note to leave the dust alone until it builds up quite a bit so it can make the transfer. Chalk it up as a part of the cost of the security that is in Monero. |
|
|
|
on my wallet i tried sweep_dust and transfer 100xmr all failed.
There is a known issue with sweep_dust sometimes not working. That is being addressed in a future update. As far as the other, we're taking a look at your log file, but GingerAle's suggestion about going on IRC is a good one. Sometimes it is best to be able to ask questions and try things in real time. I have a wallet that has been around for a long time and have synced every once in a while. I received an error when I first ran the bc_height command, but the second time I tried it, it ran and went through all the blocks and that was good to see. But now I have the dust fee problem. I tried to sweep a small bit of dust from my wallet, it seems that it did not go through, so now there is a 0.02 fee that is stuck in outgoing. Is there a way to remove it or will it go away? I also tried to sweep it again because it showed dust still there, but it errored. Does it even matter? It's just there in outgoing now for hours. Also the 0.9.3 doesn't refresh automatically or in the background that I could see, but typing refresh does it. Can it auto refresh? kind of a good thing, like it did before with previous versions it is good to see it sync and then check your balance. As far as I know 0.9.3 should auto refresh. As far as asking a bunch of specific questions about your wallet the best bet is to jump onto freenode IRC #monero and ask on there. There are definitely some known issues with sweep dust. In most cases, I would suggest waiting for an update. This board is available to search and documents the answers, so why ask to go to #monero? 0.9.3 doesn't refresh, so why is that? This could be a problem where your coins are stolen and since it doesn't refresh, you may think they are still there, right? Is there a bug or is there a problem with my wallet? I can live with the dust problem. Can someone answer my question about the stuck fee for dust? Will this fix it? Sometimes, your funds will become stuck - you will have some locked funds that never become unlocked. This is how you fix it. Load your wallet in simplewallet. Type seed into the command prompt. Write down your 25 word seed, if you haven't already. This is the best way to make sure you don't loose access to your funds. Close simplewallet by typing exit Backup all of your wallet related files. These include: yourwalletname.bin yourwalletname.bin.keys yourwalletname.bin.address.txt This can be done by copying the files to a new folder. Sometimes, when creating your wallet, you might have named it something without the .bin part. In that case, the wallet file will be called yourwalletname without the .bin at the end. Delete yourwallet.bin Load simplewallet, type in the name of the wallet you just deleted Enter password. The wallet will now refresh and hopefully your locked funds will now become unlocked. |
|
|
|
on my wallet i tried sweep_dust and transfer 100xmr all failed.
There is a known issue with sweep_dust sometimes not working. That is being addressed in a future update. As far as the other, we're taking a look at your log file, but GingerAle's suggestion about going on IRC is a good one. Sometimes it is best to be able to ask questions and try things in real time. I have a wallet that has been around for a long time and have synced every once in a while. I received an error when I first ran the bc_height command, but the second time I tried it, it ran and went through all the blocks and that was good to see. But now I have the dust fee problem. I tried to sweep a small bit of dust from my wallet, it seems that it did not go through, so now there is a 0.02 fee that is stuck in outgoing. Is there a way to remove it or will it go away? I also tried to sweep it again because it showed dust still there, but it errored. Does it even matter? It's just there in outgoing now for hours. Also the 0.9.3 doesn't refresh automatically or in the background that I could see, but typing refresh does it. Can it auto refresh? kind of a good thing, like it did before with previous versions it is good to see it sync and then check your balance. |
|
|
|
Changing the mixin hasn't helped. Still getting the same error. Could there be another issue?
Can you set your daemon log level to 1 and try again? It should give more details. Thanks. According to the log the tx has "used already spent key images". I'm going to follow the steps set out here (assuming they are still valid):
1. Delete poolstate.bin and restart node (also move/rename wallet .bin file again)
2. Make sure you have the current version
3. Make sure you are connected to the network with print_cn (daemon command)
4. Wait 24 hours and try again
Ok, so you may need to run "rescan_spent" in simplewallet as well as the above steps. Yes to clarify a bit the above "try again" had some context which included rescanning the wallet. Great thanks this worked. Only I refreshed the wallet, rather than rescanned. Didn't wait 24hrs though (life's too short). This is good that there is a process for fixing these issues, please make an effort to have a place for Monero owners to find out how to fix problems like this. Yes, I know it is on bitcointalk.org message board now in this post, but shouldn't it have been somewhere for someone to find before now? Quick question also: When I ran simplewallet on earlier versions, it went through a process after synching the daemon, where it would go through the blocks. Mine doesn't do that anymore on the latest version. My balance does show ok. Is this normal? It's hard to tell if everything is working ok if you don't send monero very often. The scanning is in the background now. You don't have to wait for it, but newly received coins won't appear right away, until the scan reaches them. This is good to know. I know you guys are really busy coding and everything, sorry to be a bit of a nag on the documentation, I like to know how to do something, before I know I need to know how to do something. The bug is inherent to the 9.1 version of Hydrogen Helix and is patched in 9.3 already. Therefore, I think it's a bit redundant to include it in the documentation. Ok, I thought this was just the new way the simplewallet worked, I didn't know it was a bug that was fixed, so you are right. I need to upgrade to 9.3. |
|
|
|
I believe this is because some malware integrates that code and mines when users don't want it to, so it is marked malware. I've been running miners for a couple of years and had no problem, just make sure to download from a trusted place, github.com is a good one, try not to download from just any site, try to always check around first and find out the best place to download from. |
|
|
|
Changing the mixin hasn't helped. Still getting the same error. Could there be another issue?
Can you set your daemon log level to 1 and try again? It should give more details. Thanks. According to the log the tx has "used already spent key images". I'm going to follow the steps set out here (assuming they are still valid):
1. Delete poolstate.bin and restart node (also move/rename wallet .bin file again)
2. Make sure you have the current version
3. Make sure you are connected to the network with print_cn (daemon command)
4. Wait 24 hours and try again
Ok, so you may need to run "rescan_spent" in simplewallet as well as the above steps. Yes to clarify a bit the above "try again" had some context which included rescanning the wallet. Great thanks this worked. Only I refreshed the wallet, rather than rescanned. Didn't wait 24hrs though (life's too short). This is good that there is a process for fixing these issues, please make an effort to have a place for Monero owners to find out how to fix problems like this. Yes, I know it is on bitcointalk.org message board now in this post, but shouldn't it have been somewhere for someone to find before now? Quick question also: When I ran simplewallet on earlier versions, it went through a process after synching the daemon, where it would go through the blocks. Mine doesn't do that anymore on the latest version. My balance does show ok. Is this normal? It's hard to tell if everything is working ok if you don't send monero very often. The scanning is in the background now. You don't have to wait for it, but newly received coins won't appear right away, until the scan reaches them. This is good to know. I know you guys are really busy coding and everything, sorry to be a bit of a nag on the documentation, I like to know how to do something, before I know I need to know how to do something. |
|
|
|
Changing the mixin hasn't helped. Still getting the same error. Could there be another issue?
Can you set your daemon log level to 1 and try again? It should give more details. Thanks. According to the log the tx has "used already spent key images". I'm going to follow the steps set out here (assuming they are still valid):
1. Delete poolstate.bin and restart node (also move/rename wallet .bin file again)
2. Make sure you have the current version
3. Make sure you are connected to the network with print_cn (daemon command)
4. Wait 24 hours and try again
Ok, so you may need to run "rescan_spent" in simplewallet as well as the above steps. Yes to clarify a bit the above "try again" had some context which included rescanning the wallet. Great thanks this worked. Only I refreshed the wallet, rather than rescanned. Didn't wait 24hrs though (life's too short). This is good that there is a process for fixing these issues, please make an effort to have a place for Monero owners to find out how to fix problems like this. Yes, I know it is on bitcointalk.org message board now in this post, but shouldn't it have been somewhere for someone to find before now? Quick question also: When I ran simplewallet on earlier versions, it went through a process after synching the daemon, where it would go through the blocks. Mine doesn't do that anymore on the latest version. My balance does show ok. Is this normal? It's hard to tell if everything is working ok if you don't send monero very often. |
|
|
|
Changing the mixin hasn't helped. Still getting the same error. Could there be another issue?
Can you set your daemon log level to 1 and try again? It should give more details. Thanks. According to the log the tx has "used already spent key images". I'm going to follow the steps set out here (assuming they are still valid):
1. Delete poolstate.bin and restart node (also move/rename wallet .bin file again)
2. Make sure you have the current version
3. Make sure you are connected to the network with print_cn (daemon command)
4. Wait 24 hours and try again
This is nearly as bad as if you find out some douchebag lawyer or government goon has put a hold on your bank account. I would like to request that Monero include this information in an easy to find place, say in a readme file with the client download, or prominently displayed in the first post of this thread. Also, it would be nice to know what if anything a person that has in a wallet for the previous version needs to do or doesn't need to do to make their wallet work with the new version. A couple of times it seemed ridiculous to even find anything telling you anything. Also it seems that the daemon does not want to close sometimes. If you are synching and trying to close before the synching finishes, it hangs there and you don't have a clue what is going on. If you type exit again it takes a while and does close. Also, it would be nice to know that your coins are good without having to send them to another wallet or some other strange way to just see if the new code has destroyed your coins. Some of us don't like to have to babysit the coins in a way that you have to do it just to see if you could even send them. I hope monero goes to $20,000 per coin so I can be rich. Just my .02 Moneros. |
|
|
|
After this attack (14 months ago) the Monero core devs refocused their efforts to strengthening the Monero protocol. Now we are close to reaping the full benefits of this in the 0.9 release, and anyone can compile the source now and see how much better it is.
Bitcoin also endured many attacks in its infancy, far worse than this one, it serves to make the network stronger. If you don't like it, that's fine. This is not something to invest in, it's an experiment. I find it to be a fun open source project with a great community that I like participating in and contributing my skills.
You all may turn me to the dark side (monero side?) after all Really, we need more than one secure, private coin, right? We need a pepsi for the coke. Think of me like that mean ol school marm, I just want you to succeed and grow like a purty flower  |
|
|
|
edit to add: i remember when this attack happened, nobody lost any coins. so while there was an attack, this statement is untrue. one more thing: are you familiar with these research papers? https://lab.getmonero.org/Actually his link even though not supporting his trollish lies does show how well the community and Devs responded. It appears the articles states "Fortunately, the large majority of the Monero network had remained on the chain A, which helped to avoid larger negative consequences for the currency." That proves that at least there were some negative consequences, and they could have been larger. |
|
|
|
The scope of this attack clearly makes it an organized effort. While it is possible that some lone guy is figuring out the flaw and how to take advantage of it, the fact we are needing more than one skillset and resources more indicates a team is involved.
Theoretically if you guys didnt notice the strange stuff on the blockchain and polo went on a fork, could they have just made many small withdraws over a week and drained the polo acct? The timeframe and resources required for this doesnt seem like some statment attack to cause a fork and go "ha ha", but where financial gain is involved.
If so, the list if suspects as being involved in this would be polo accts that were involved in accumulating recently (which I remember seeing talked about) and probably these were also trying to do the double spend while on the fork.
So, maybe the attack was against polo?
James
Nope - bear in mind that basically without any action from us the "bad" fork died after 35 minutes. It still exists, it's just stuck at block 202647 and won't proceed. This would have happened even if we hadn't noticed it, so there's little they could have done to have any long-lived attack. So no coins were mined in this 35 minutes on the "bad" fork? Really? |
|
|
|
By the way, at the moment DASH has a market cap of $16.3 million and monero is $4.7. Seems quite a few people agree with me.
While I think some sort of security audit surely would not hurt, I disagree that this is the only reason for the disparity in marketcap. Why? There are currently 3,441 DASH masternodes visibly removing 3,441,000 DASH from the existing money supply. If i'm not mistaken that's ~55% of the current emission! Less supply = higher price = easier to maintain a 'bigger marketcap'. Do you disagree? edit to add: i remember when this attack happened, nobody lost any coins. so while there was an attack, this statement is untrue. Well, the fact that this did happen does make one wonder about the security of the coin going forward. I still find it a bit hard to believe that no miner was working on a block and then when the problem was fixed no coins were lost. quote from article: The attacker had likely sent the transactions of the block 202612-B to mining pools on the sub-network A. These transactions had been included in the blockchain on height 202614 by one of the pools.
The sub-network A daemons accepted that block since they didn't have the 2a58f802202db09cbd1377630ae73becff1eaff52e8969980672496dc39a5f6f and 57ce3aab446d75726221c908a4bf6ac2f67485cab80a2e2bedfe5519cabd8848 transactions on the blockchain.
The sub-network B deamons rejected the block since those transactions had already been included in block 202612-B. Accepting these transactions a second time would imply double-spending.
Therefore, the network had been split on height 202614 when the two sub-networks turned into two different chains. Fortunately, the large majority of the Monero network had remained on the chain A, which helped to avoid larger negative consequences for the currency.I agree somewhat with your masternode comments. It is an effect of the design to have people "buy in" to the technology by buying and setting up masternodes, thus removing coins from the supply. Relatively speaking, if the technology is not supported by users, they will dump the masternodes and flood the supply. But anytime anything implodes, that happens anyway doesn't it? Another way to look at it is this: By having coins in the masternodes is actually good for sellers and bad for buyers, so that should be considered. Another point is the masternodes do supply a service, and make money for the owner. It's a design decision, but at this point as a coin holder, it's better for them right? It's kind of a way to reduce supply because the coin is popular and being used in a masternode, and popular items always cost more, right? I am a tad angry that there are possible bad actors writing the monero code. That is why you see some ire in my posts. |
|
|
|
"...me and a few of my fellow researchers looked at ..." They did not look at a 5th-grade English grammar text. Credibility broken. Do you think their native tongue is maybe another language than English? Also one small error does not invalidate all their claims. As I have said many times already, get someone to review the code, and prove it doesn't have backdoors. Stop grasping at anything you can to defend monero. When that is done, I'll agree it is secure. Until then, I'll continue to question, as any intelligent human would. If it is secure, then prove it. DASH has been audited by experts, and has been shown to have a good security model. HAHAHA, you just lost all credibility with this post. By the way, at the moment DASH has a market cap of $16.3 million and monero is $4.7. Seems quite a few people agree with me. XMR is a project in early development with real value and innovative technology backing it - whatever DASH may be, it focuses one HELL of a lot more on marketing itself than any actual development. I applaud your work in crytominers. On this particular subject, I have to respectfully disagree. Monero needs a security audit. Until an audit gets funded and completed, the coin will have a serious disadvantage. Currently this is showing in 1/4 the market cap of DASH. Just answer my challenge of auditing it, and I go away. Your choice. Have a good 'un. I agree it needs auditing! I disagree that's the reason for the difference in marketcap, however. Ok, here is my logic. People research. They find this thread where I ask for an audit and am told give us the money and we'll do it. No one steps up. Looks bad for monero. Market cap can't grow and will probably erode. I gave all you monero supporters a way to defeat me, and you don't use it. We will see how this turns out. I am out to spread light, truth, and expose lies. Nothing can hide in the dark forever. Anyone that does research will find out about the security problems. Here's mine: XMR is in its infancy - it didn't inherit a nice, well-functioning codebase to work from. It's far from production ready - and while audits need to happen - they should happen in due time, on a product that resembles what it should be. No point in auditing a half-done system. Now, about saying we don't use the audit as a way to shut you up - they tend to cost money for experienced people to do it. Doing it for the sole purpose of satisfying critics would be wasteful - why not do it when it's actually done and ready to be presented? Well, then it is architected wrong and people should run screaming. Your argument is like saying "This car will totally be done and safe at some point in the future, but for now go ahead and drive it, hope you don't die." I don't run around saying XMR should be considered absolutely safe right now - it's a work in progress! It needs review, and more importantly, time - like any cryptographic system. Only time will tell - you don't fault early BTC users for using BTC, do you? One flaw in your logic, anyone that researches knows bitcoin is not even attempting to say it's secure. Buyer beware. |
|
|
|
"...me and a few of my fellow researchers looked at ..." They did not look at a 5th-grade English grammar text. Credibility broken. Do you think their native tongue is maybe another language than English? Also one small error does not invalidate all their claims. As I have said many times already, get someone to review the code, and prove it doesn't have backdoors. Stop grasping at anything you can to defend monero. When that is done, I'll agree it is secure. Until then, I'll continue to question, as any intelligent human would. If it is secure, then prove it. DASH has been audited by experts, and has been shown to have a good security model. HAHAHA, you just lost all credibility with this post. By the way, at the moment DASH has a market cap of $16.3 million and monero is $4.7. Seems quite a few people agree with me. XMR is a project in early development with real value and innovative technology backing it - whatever DASH may be, it focuses one HELL of a lot more on marketing itself than any actual development. I applaud your work in crytominers. On this particular subject, I have to respectfully disagree. Monero needs a security audit. Until an audit gets funded and completed, the coin will have a serious disadvantage. Currently this is showing in 1/4 the market cap of DASH. Just answer my challenge of auditing it, and I go away. Your choice. Have a good 'un. I agree it needs auditing! I disagree that's the reason for the difference in marketcap, however. Ok, here is my logic. People research. They find this thread where I ask for an audit and am told give us the money and we'll do it. No one steps up. Looks bad for monero. Market cap can't grow and will probably erode. I gave all you monero supporters a way to defeat me, and you don't use it. We will see how this turns out. I am out to spread light, truth, and expose lies. Nothing can hide in the dark forever. Anyone that does research will find out about the security problems. Here's mine: XMR is in its infancy - it didn't inherit a nice, well-functioning codebase to work from. It's far from production ready - and while audits need to happen - they should happen in due time, on a product that resembles what it should be. No point in auditing a half-done system. Now, about saying we don't use the audit as a way to shut you up - they tend to cost money for experienced people to do it. Doing it for the sole purpose of satisfying critics would be wasteful - why not do it when it's actually done and ready to be presented? Well, then it is architected wrong and people should run screaming. Your argument is like saying "This car will totally be done and safe at some point in the future, but for now go ahead and drive it, hope you don't die." By the way, with you saying everything is just fine, and it will be audited and super secure at some point leaves out the fact that the coin has been compromised and many people lost coins due to a security vulnerability already. Read about it here: https://forum.cryptonote.org/viewtopic.php?p=909 |
|
|
|
"...me and a few of my fellow researchers looked at ..." They did not look at a 5th-grade English grammar text. Credibility broken. Do you think their native tongue is maybe another language than English? Also one small error does not invalidate all their claims. As I have said many times already, get someone to review the code, and prove it doesn't have backdoors. Stop grasping at anything you can to defend monero. When that is done, I'll agree it is secure. Until then, I'll continue to question, as any intelligent human would. If it is secure, then prove it. DASH has been audited by experts, and has been shown to have a good security model. HAHAHA, you just lost all credibility with this post. By the way, at the moment DASH has a market cap of $16.3 million and monero is $4.7. Seems quite a few people agree with me. XMR is a project in early development with real value and innovative technology backing it - whatever DASH may be, it focuses one HELL of a lot more on marketing itself than any actual development. I applaud your work in crytominers. On this particular subject, I have to respectfully disagree. Monero needs a security audit. Until an audit gets funded and completed, the coin will have a serious disadvantage. Currently this is showing in 1/4 the market cap of DASH. Just answer my challenge of auditing it, and I go away. Your choice. Have a good 'un. I agree it needs auditing! I disagree that's the reason for the difference in marketcap, however. Ok, here is my logic. People research. They find this thread where I ask for an audit and am told give us the money and we'll do it. No one steps up. Looks bad for monero. Market cap can't grow and will probably erode. I gave all you monero supporters a way to defeat me, and you don't use it. We will see how this turns out. I am out to spread light, truth, and expose lies. Nothing can hide in the dark forever. Anyone that does research will find out about the security problems. Here's mine: XMR is in its infancy - it didn't inherit a nice, well-functioning codebase to work from. It's far from production ready - and while audits need to happen - they should happen in due time, on a product that resembles what it should be. No point in auditing a half-done system. Now, about saying we don't use the audit as a way to shut you up - they tend to cost money for experienced people to do it. Doing it for the sole purpose of satisfying critics would be wasteful - why not do it when it's actually done and ready to be presented? Well, then it is architected wrong and people should run screaming. Your argument is like saying "This car will totally be done and safe at some point in the future, but for now go ahead and drive it, hope you don't die." |
|
|
|
"...me and a few of my fellow researchers looked at ..." They did not look at a 5th-grade English grammar text. Credibility broken. Do you think their native tongue is maybe another language than English? Also one small error does not invalidate all their claims. As I have said many times already, get someone to review the code, and prove it doesn't have backdoors. Stop grasping at anything you can to defend monero. When that is done, I'll agree it is secure. Until then, I'll continue to question, as any intelligent human would. If it is secure, then prove it. DASH has been audited by experts, and has been shown to have a good security model. HAHAHA, you just lost all credibility with this post. By the way, at the moment DASH has a market cap of $16.3 million and monero is $4.7. Seems quite a few people agree with me. XMR is a project in early development with real value and innovative technology backing it - whatever DASH may be, it focuses one HELL of a lot more on marketing itself than any actual development. I applaud your work in crytominers. On this particular subject, I have to respectfully disagree. Monero needs a security audit. Until an audit gets funded and completed, the coin will have a serious disadvantage. Currently this is showing in 1/4 the market cap of DASH. Just answer my challenge of auditing it, and I go away. Your choice. Have a good 'un. I agree it needs auditing! I disagree that's the reason for the difference in marketcap, however. Ok, here is my logic. People research. They find this thread where I ask for an audit and am told give us the money and we'll do it. No one steps up. Looks bad for monero. Market cap can't grow and will probably erode. I gave all you monero supporters a way to defeat me, and you don't use it. We will see how this turns out. I am out to spread light, truth, and expose lies. Nothing can hide in the dark forever. Anyone that does research will find out about the security problems. |
|
|
|
"...me and a few of my fellow researchers looked at ..." They did not look at a 5th-grade English grammar text. Credibility broken. Do you think their native tongue is maybe another language than English? Also one small error does not invalidate all their claims. As I have said many times already, get someone to review the code, and prove it doesn't have backdoors. Stop grasping at anything you can to defend monero. When that is done, I'll agree it is secure. Until then, I'll continue to question, as any intelligent human would. If it is secure, then prove it. DASH has been audited by experts, and has been shown to have a good security model. HAHAHA, you just lost all credibility with this post. By the way, at the moment DASH has a market cap of $16.3 million and monero is $4.7. Seems quite a few people agree with me. XMR is a project in early development with real value and innovative technology backing it - whatever DASH may be, it focuses one HELL of a lot more on marketing itself than any actual development. I applaud your work in crytominers. On this particular subject, I have to respectfully disagree. Monero needs a security audit. Until an audit gets funded and completed, the coin will have a serious disadvantage. Currently this is showing in 1/4 the market cap of DASH. Just answer my challenge of auditing it, and I go away. Your choice. Have a good 'un. |
|
|
|
"...me and a few of my fellow researchers looked at ..." They did not look at a 5th-grade English grammar text. Credibility broken. Do you think their native tongue is maybe another language than English? Also one small error does not invalidate all their claims. As I have said many times already, get someone to review the code, and prove it doesn't have backdoors. Stop grasping at anything you can to defend monero. When that is done, I'll agree it is secure. Until then, I'll continue to question, as any intelligent human would. If it is secure, then prove it. DASH has been audited by experts, and has been shown to have a good security model. HAHAHA, you just lost all credibility with this post. By the way, at the moment DASH has a market cap of $16.3 million and monero is $4.7. Seems quite a few people agree with me. |
|
|
|
|
