|
It did fork the other day. I don't know how bad it was or if its worked its way out now. Many users had major syncing issues and I was on a forked chain for a while. Network weight seems kind of lower than normal at about 108,147 right now. Its usually higher. Block explorer has been down too. Crypsty's wallet has been down for days. I don't bother with them anymore because last time it took them like over a week to fix it. User Mullick is the guy who fixes the Cryptsy wallet, he posted in this thread couple weeks ago. Anyways hope there isn't a bad fork going on right now.
|
|
|
|
I was watching and there always seems to be minimum of 2 transactions per block: http://shadow.blockexplorer.cc/chain/ShadowCashThis must have something to do with how the POS works. Any good place to read how it all works? Is there any benefit to having a lot of coins in one address for staking, compared to having smaller amounts in numerous addresses? Also what if we had a bot that makes a lot of transactions to itself all the time on the network. Would this help create more traffic to allow users to blend in better and remain more private? I actually like this idea. Could set a script so that it varies the amounts, makes a diff address each time And also does changes from shadow to sdc sdc to shadow. That way there is alot of tx's to hide behind. Yeah, or even there could be an option in everyone's wallet, called "mix" or "mash" or something. And you click a button and it goes to work sending a bunch of SDC and Shadow around to yourself. |
|
|
|
I was watching and there always seems to be minimum of 2 transactions per block: http://shadow.blockexplorer.cc/chain/ShadowCashThis must have something to do with how the POS works. Any good place to read how it all works? Is there any benefit to having a lot of coins in one address for staking, compared to having smaller amounts in numerous addresses? Also what if we had a bot that makes a lot of transactions to itself all the time on the network. Would this help create more traffic to allow users to blend in better and remain more private? |
|
|
|
Not entirely. If I send coins to you, I have no control of how careless you might be with the coins I just sent you. If you transact with them in a careless manner, that creates clues that may point back to me. It also contradicts the notion of "ease of use" if the onus is on the user to "be careful" all the time, or leave a trail.
I think it would not matter as long as you properly wash the coins before hand. Take care of the anonymity before you send those coins, and I don't see how the careless recipient could compromise you. Also although we may think that the Shadow scheme is pretty secure for Shadow>Shadow transfers right now, but we don't know what kind of vulnerabilities could be there in the future. As computers get more powerful and crypto/math and decryption techniques improve, those Shadow transactions could be vulnerable. There is always going to be an unknown factor. So I think by being able to switch back and forth between SDC and Shadow, it could possibly create a further layer of obfuscation. This makes me think its more private and anonymous if I switch from SDC to Shadow, back to SDC several times before sending any coins to recipients (as long as proper amount/timing precautions are made). This seems like it has a probability to be more secure than sending just Shadow alone. P.S. It seems the ShadowCash block explorer is down. |
|
|
|
Here is what Rynomster said about the difference between Shadow and 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  Smooth you said: This is a good system for anonymity, though perhaps a bit hampered in terms of anonymity by being on a shared chain (if conversion is used a lot, rather than transacting in Shadow itself)
I wonder in what ways do you think the anonymity is hampered by having two coins? I can see as if in the early stages it may be hampered because of lack of anonymous outputs or small ring sizes, but as the system grows surely this becomes less and less a problem? Or also because of timing or other attacks that examine coin amounts from transferring back and forth? Is that what you mean? It seems these types of issues are solved by user practices, by the user not making an error in their operational security. Perhaps the onus on the user could be improved in the future as well with different wallet functions. I am trying to weigh the pros and cons here. Because although you seem to focus on the downside of having two different units of account SDC and Shadow on the same chain, I see a lot of benefits to it as well. For one the SDC can more easily plug into existing infrastructure and exchanges. Having a transparent coin that is easy to track on the blockchain seems to have a lot of advantages also. As far as I know, XMR and Shadow can't really be tracked on the blockchain, right? This could cause problems at times. For example if we want to set up a promotional fund, nobody would be able to see the funds on the block explorer right unless we use SDC instead of Shadow? I think the process of switching back and forth is the minting and spending part that ryno is mentioning. When you go back to SDC it mints new coins I think. I really wonder if this adds another layer to the anonymity/privacy in any way compared to cryptonote?? Maybe its kind of like say you are walking down a path in the woods leaving footprints, well someone can track those. So after a while you jump up onto the tree limbs instead and start walking and climbing along there, but in the process you are rubbing off pieces of bark leaving similar treeprints. To further obfuscate your tracks, you may want to switch back and forth between the path and the trees. Its like everytime you drop down to the path, you are minting new SDC. Does this make any sense at all? Anyways I kind of like ShadowCash because of how you can switch between the two. It seems like it offers something extra that we never had before. Now we have a regular type of coin that can be made anonymous at will. That along with the wallet features, ShadowChat and soon to be marketplace ShadyBay make this project really appealing. Anyways sorry for rambling, hopefully I added something of value, lol. |
|
|
|
|
Anyone know how to install the wallet on linux ubuntu? I tried following the directions. I get stuck at the -make / -qmake part. Tried installing qt-creator also, and I am lost. Anyone have advice?
|
|
|
|
Seems block explorer is down: http://explorer.shadow.cash/I am getting this error: Error! Can't connect to ShadowCoind to get live updates from the p2p network. (Tried connecting to ShadowCoind at 127.0.0.1:51737 and failed.) |
|
|
|
What do you use then ?
I would use Bittrex. They by far have the largest volume than any other exchange for SDC. Their wallet seems to be working pretty good also. |
|
|
|
Btw, is cryptsy SDC wallet still frozen ?
Yeah its always frozen from what I can tell. I wouldn't expect it back up anytime soon. Maybe anywhere from 1 week to 5 weeks it might be fixed is my guess. They said before SDC is not a priority. Paycoin is their priority. Maybe if we all sent support tickets and complained to Mullick, then they will fix it. But I have about had it with Cryptsy. |
|
|
|
There have been no trades on https://exco.in/exchange/BTC/SDC for more than three days. We may try to pairing to BLK or NBT to see if that generates more interest. Yeah and Cryptsy ShadowCash wallet is ALWAYS in maintenance. I would add volume there, but their wallet is never working. But when their paycoin wallet broke, they fixed it pronto. They said SDC was not a priority. |
|
|
|
Hey Peter Todd, wondering what you think about ShadowCash? It seems pretty cool to me, but I am not nearly technical enough to completely understand the inner workings. I only barely grasp the concepts they are using, but it sounds pretty revolutionary. They just released their shadow send feature and white paper a couple weeks ago. White paper here: http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdfLike stealth, I don't have the background to really understand the ring-signatures ShadowCash uses; I was contacted by ShadowCash to do an audit and deferred it to a cryptographer I know. They said the math looked to be a clone of Monero, done on top of Bitcoin. They were however potentially interested in doing an audit of the ring signatures idea to get a better idea of what kind of privacy it really gives people in practice - we'll see if they have the time to work on that further in the near future. Best not to say more publicly than that given I just haven't done the research to really know. Thanks, really appreciate the reply. Hopefully Shadow will be vetted by more people in the near future. |
|
|
|
Peter Todd invented stealth addresses.
I wouldn't say I "invented" stealth addresses; I'd say I designed stealth addresses. The part that you could call an "invention" was created by ByteCoin (the bitcointalk user) years ago - what I did was take that math and figured out a good way to use it given real world constraints. (some of them 100% political!) To be perfectly honest, I don't really understand the math behind ECC signatures, and hence stealth addresses. My original stealth addresses writeup actually got some of the details there wrong, basically because I was copying-and-pasting from the BIP32 writeup. But IMO that's actually a nice example of how you can treat the math as a "black-box" with known properties and do your innovation elsewhere - no different than how most of you probably don't know much about how compilers work under the hood, yet successfully use them every day to make software. Hey Peter Todd, wondering what you think about ShadowCash? It seems pretty cool to me, but I am not nearly technical enough to completely understand the inner workings. I only barely grasp the concepts they are using, but it sounds pretty revolutionary. They just released their shadow send feature and white paper a couple weeks ago. White paper here: http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdfAlso someone made this good presentation to show how the system works: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1yX2jN618Rnzs4g2ri_utdKdHbny6-xnRcPhOuhLNGB0/edit?pli=1#slide=id.g577a31a2a_086They also have Shadow Chat encrypted messenger within the official wallet and have a plan for ShadyBay, a decentralized marketplace within the wallet soon as well. So do you think this project is legit? Do you have any recommendations to the developers on how they could improve their system? |
|
|
|
I just said it  I have now 6 shadows because I was able to convert successfuly 2 shadows. Then I tried again with 2 and it didn't work, then with the whole 6, neither. Try making ring size 3 which is the smallest possible. I had similar issue recently. I am wondering the reason as well, and if things will improve as the network grows. I believe the larger the ring size, the better the anonymity. |
|
|
|
try this, go to help tab in wallet, click on debug window, click console, type rewindchain 249000, press enter and leave it for a bit, rhyno gave me these commands and they worked for me.
This also worked for me. Seemed like there was a nasty fork or something yesterday. Still the network weight right now seems much lower than usual, making me think the problem is widespread. Maybe also why the exchanges have SDC in maintenance right now. Hope all is well. |
|
|
|
My wallet is no longer syncing properly, seems like it has forked or something and finding blocks all on its own. Says network weight is only 2060. It usually says out of sync. Or sometimes it says it is synced, but I really don't think it is. I guess I will just try to redownload the blockchain, anyone have any advice?  |
|
|
|
Interesting post on front page of /r/bitcoin: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2r07hu/whats_happening_with_stealth_addresses/Some are talking about ShadowCash, and Peter Todd is commenting telling us he will expose how stealth addresses are bad. I wasn't sure, but I thought I heard something about how Shadow uses stealth addresses along with ShadowChat, which helps fix some of the weaknesses in stealth addresses brought up by Adam Back and others? Can somebody clarify? |
|
|
|
It would be best if the donation address is set up by someone from the sdc team. I'll start by donating 1000sdc once the address is set up.
@soepkip can you set up a donation address? Also, would you be willing to pay all sdc newcomers 100sdc from this donation address? If not we should find a trustworthy person that has a reputation in our community.
Sounds like a good idea. I am also willing to donate. Is it possible yet to set up a multi-sig address for SDC? Perhaps we could set up a fund not only as a faucet for newbs but possibly for a media/marketing campaign or other stuff as well. We could put out bounties, or hire someone to make a Shadow marketing video for example. I wish we could get some funding to help spread awareness of this project. Someone like Trace Mayer, that guy probably has got like a bazillion bitcoins, and hes really into anonymity and privacy. He has the website http://www.howtovanish.com/. I have heard him talking about anoncoin back when it was the first privacy centric coin on the market. Wish we could get some big movers and shakers to help out if they believe in this project. But anyways its good to see the volume and liquidity improving on Bittrex today. Seems like someone is playing a little market maker. Hope it stays that way for a while. |
|
|
|
Adam knows about this project.
He has some interesting concerns about stealth addresses: I think its an interesting idea that multiple people reinvented (I was one of them, but there were 5 and some predate Peter Todd's and also mine). The problem is identified in the article: to receive you have to scan the entire block chain and trial decrypt each one. The solution hint is actually worse than not using stealth addresses (shard or prefix index etc) - because that allows a passive adversary to use that hint to eliminate from the already weak network flow analysis. When I thought of the idea these problems caused me to reject the solution. The other idea - that you out source your scanning to a random server isnt so hot as it sees all of your received transactions. I actually came up with a better solution called IBE addresses https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=431756.new.... though its still not ideal as the crypto is a bit more complex, somewhat though not horribly novel, and a bit more computationally intensive. anyway I think the Dark Wallet guys got impatient and stealth addresses have a cooler name and are simpler, so started coding. another even simpler solution is to use pseudonymous email system to send the recipient the payment, and they can broadcast it themselves. in my view bitcoin needs a store & forward distributed/redundant/reliable privacy preserving message bus. Not sure how the dual-key stealth addresses in Shadow work, anyone have any insight? What's the advantage of dual-key stealth address compared to regular stealth address? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
