Thoughts on Zcash?

[generalizethis]

Ring CT just got PRed to master!

https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/pull/961

Bear in mind that, even though the code is finished, it will need thorough review and testing before it will get merged into master.

Great work by MoneroMooo, Shen Noether and everyone else involved!

FWIW, the Zcash launch has been postponed to October 27, 2016. See:

https://github.com/zcash/zcash/milestone/30

https://github.com/zcash/zcash/milestones

It seems Monero started running in the Race of anonymity and the opposition is still crawling.

It seems Monero feels so threatened by Zcash that it started its campaign to discredit Zcash early.... i predict a flame-war from Monero towards Zcash
on this forum, that will make the Monero-Dash flame war small in comparison.

Anyways i think Zcash will have an impact on those cryptocurrencies that have anonymity and anonymity only as core-element
  

Fungibility is created by virtue of the degree of anonymity and is a primary trait of good money, so if it's not a core element, or is designed badly, then you should feel threatened by your own development team.

[adhitthana]

Does zcash have anything new?
There are quite a number of CN coins providing anonymity and they are live, unlike this coin which people say from time how good it is, but it's always beta.

ZCASH, if it ever happens, will use a zero knowledge proof
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-knowledge_proof

[c789]

Zcash requires a trusted setup. That's a huge problem. One of the foundational points of crypto is that we shouldn't have to trust anyone....only math.

A trusted setup also means that the Zcash team could print their own Zcash and nobody would necessarily know it ever happened.

Let's say that all of the Zcash core team is trustworthy. Fine, but it's still an assumption. Now, what if a hacker gained control of one of their accounts? They also could "print" their own Zcash without anyone necessarily knowing, inflating the Zcash economy.

Also, check out Zcash website and look at the loads of academic, government, and banking people involved with the project. To me, that makes them even more untrustworthy. Yet another foundational point of cryptocurrencies: you shouldn't need to rely on government or big banks, and Zcash has waded deep into both of those pools.

Bottom line: if you have to trust people, it's flawed from the start. You should only have to trust math.

Read more:

https://blog.okturtles.com/2016/03/the-zcash-catch/

http://weuse.cash/2016/06/09/btc-xmr-zcash/

Just go with Monero: open source, fully decentralized, no trusted setup, totally private, untraceable,and fungible.

[tromp]

Zcash requires a trusted setup.
Let's say that all of the Zcash core team is trustworthy. Fine, but it's still an assumption. Now, what if a hacker gained control of one of their accounts?

We need only assume that a hacker cannot gain control of all parties involved in the setup.

It only takes one faithful participant to make the setup secure...

[c789]

Zcash requires a trusted setup.
Let's say that all of the Zcash core team is trustworthy. Fine, but it's still an assumption. Now, what if a hacker gained control of one of their accounts?

We need only assume that a hacker cannot gain control of all parties involved in the setup.

It only takes one faithful participant to make the setup secure...

Like I said in my post, "How would you (or anyone else) know?" And then there are the other problems mentioned in the links I posted.

Trusting people in crypto is completely unnecessary. To have to trust someone is a fundamental, inbuilt flaw, and flaws can be exploited.

I'm not including open-source source code in this statement because anyone can look through and verify the code. I am saying that a completely decentralized, trustless system is a much better system, if not the absolute best. Zcash is centralized and requires trust. Caveat emptor.

[Tanglemymind]

Ethereum can be programmed to do anything including anonymity so no more need for specialized coins.

Ethereum will eventually provide all needs. Other coins pale in comparison.

Ethereum is already a mature produce with $millions spent on development. Z.cash is immature and not yet ready for prime time. Ethereum's price and market cap are going up and now #2 market cap.

Ethereum will steamroll everything including Bitcoin.

Sell your XMR and DRK for ETH.

Ethereum has lost all credibility...move on

[stealth923]

I think once Z-cash comes out Monero will most likely be redundant unless it innovates with some new feature that Z-Cash doesnt have.

Z-cash will be the new standard for the anonymity niche market which is currently Monero's only selling point.

[Mike8]

I think once Z-cash comes out Monero will most likely be redundant unless it innovates with some new feature that Z-Cash doesnt have.

Z-cash will be the new standard for the anonymity niche market which is currently Monero's only selling point.

This is interesting.
Clones with extra additions tend to be better than the source if they are done well.
While there are things that could be better in Monero, I am not sure z-cash will do it good (but I don't mind at all nice surprises!!). And the market will tell if the "innovations" of z-cash are something useful indeed or not.
When is any ETA for z-cash launch?

[rustynailer]

@c789 is spot on here.

Zcash could never be trusted with a trusted setup.  There is no way of knowing if someone had a golden key to unlimited coins. 

Would Bitcoin be as trusted as it is if there even was the slightest chance that someone could create unlimited coins without anyone knowing.

[dinofelis]

Ring CT just got PRed to master!

https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/pull/961

Bear in mind that, even though the code is finished, it will need thorough review and testing before it will get merged into master.

Great work by MoneroMooo, Shen Noether and everyone else involved!

FWIW, the Zcash launch has been postponed to October 27, 2016. See:

https://github.com/zcash/zcash/milestone/30

https://github.com/zcash/zcash/milestones

It seems Monero started running in the Race of anonymity and the opposition is still crawling.

It seems Monero feels so threatened by Zcash that it started its campaign to discredit Zcash early.... i predict a flame-war from Monero towards Zcash
on this forum, that will make the Monero-Dash flame war small in comparison.

Anyways i think Zcash will have an impact on those cryptocurrencies that have anonymity and anonymity only as core-element
  

I'm very interested in the anonymity aspects, and my respect for monero comes from its cryptographic technology, and not the other way around.  I like DASH because it tried to implement anonymity as best as it could in bitcoin technology, but cryptonote's technology of Monero is simply better at it.  Now, if Zcash improves significantly on that, I can only applaud that.  However, there are some things that I read about Zcash (but, contrary to monero, I haven't wrapped my mind yet around how it works) that one would need to trust anything.  If that is true, then Zcash is dead-born.  In crypto, everything should be verifiable from scratch, open source, and open math.
I don't see how such is possible with a company that can assign itself a certain fraction of monetary creation, because that implies a non-centralized aspect in the cryptography (not all players are equal, because some have an element that can assign them coins that others, in principle, can't).  In as much as this is true, there's nothing that can save zcash. 

Cryptographic systems are to be open, known algorithms with no hidden keys/backdoors in it.  With what I read, I have the impression, but I can be wrong, that zcash doesn't follow that principle.

[c789]

.
.
.
However, there are some things that I read about Zcash (but, contrary to monero, I haven't wrapped my mind yet around how it works) that one would need to trust anything.  If that is true, then Zcash is dead-born.  In crypto, everything should be verifiable from scratch, open source, and open math.
I don't see how such is possible with a company that can assign itself a certain fraction of monetary creation, because that implies a non-centralized aspect in the cryptography (not all players are equal, because some have an element that can assign them coins that others, in principle, can't).  In as much as this is true, there's nothing that can save zcash.  

I agree that Zcash, with its fundamental flaws, should be a non-event, but I'm assuming that logic and research will outweigh Zcash's marketing and PR...and that's a bad assumption on my part. History shows us that marketing tends to have more influence on more people than logic and reason. Check out the Zcash website and look at all of the academics, bankers, and industry titans that are part of the Zcash team. They will use their influence, which is broad and far-reaching, to push their product when it's time for release. You can bet they will have a large marketing campaign (twitter, reddit, web sites, forums, etc.). They stand to make loads of money from a flawed product and they will do whatever is necessary to defend that potential income (as banks and governments do). But if people aren't yet tired of making bankers and governments rich, they can use Zcash. It is nonsensical to me that anyone would trust bankers and governments with their private financial information, especially after Cyprus, Greece, Snowden, and looming negative interest rates.

Some may say, "But they require a trusted setup which is inherently insecure." Yes, it is. People who actually do research will understand that. But Microsoft and Apple both produce products with known security problems, including back doors, and nobody seems to mind and people continue to buy their products in droves when more secure products exist (i.e. Linux). Why? Marketing and market saturation. I can see this happening with Zcash: an inferior product that has massive amounts of influence and marketing but is foundationally flawed. People tend to go for hype.

I'm just posting this in case anyone who truly wants an completely trustless, private, untraceable, fungible, and decentralized cryptocurrency will look into this for themselves. They'll find that Zcash has lots of flash, and it will work, but it won't have the attributes listed above (although they will tell you it does). They should go with what is completely trustless, private, untraceable, fungible, decentralized, and open source (coin named in previous post).

[bbc.reporter]

Zcash requires a trusted setup. That's a huge problem. One of the foundational points of crypto is that we shouldn't have to trust anyone....only math.

A trusted setup also means that the Zcash team could print their own Zcash and nobody would necessarily know it ever happened.

Let's say that all of the Zcash core team is trustworthy. Fine, but it's still an assumption. Now, what if a hacker gained control of one of their accounts? They also could "print" their own Zcash without anyone necessarily knowing, inflating the Zcash economy.

Also, check out Zcash website and look at the loads of academic, government, and banking people involved with the project. To me, that makes them even more untrustworthy. Yet another foundational point of cryptocurrencies: you shouldn't need to rely on government or big banks, and Zcash has waded deep into both of those pools.

Bottom line: if you have to trust people, it's flawed from the start. You should only have to trust math.

Read more:

https://blog.okturtles.com/2016/03/the-zcash-catch/

http://weuse.cash/2016/06/09/btc-xmr-zcash/

Just go with Monero: open source, fully decentralized, no trusted setup, totally private, untraceable,and fungible.

Thank you for sharing the articles. I have been looking at zcash and I was confident until I saw your post. I will read the articles more thoroughly and I will ask more questions here and at the zcash forum to see what they think and also their arguments and defense.

[sofu]

ZCash is scammy. 20% founders reward on mined coins are a no-go

"80% of the newly created ZEC will go to the miners, and 20% ZEC to the founders."
https://z.cash/blog/funding.html


Someone should fork it out and make a better version 

[dinofelis]

ZCash is scammy. 20% founders reward on mined coins are a no-go

"80% of the newly created ZEC will go to the miners, and 20% ZEC to the founders."
https://z.cash/blog/funding.html


Someone should fork it out and make a better version 

It is this aspect which makes me think it is cryptographically broken, because in order to be able to do, as founders, what nobody else can, the cryptography cannot be open and clear, because if it is, the "founders" cannot possibly keep their privileged position.   There are only two ways in which I can imagine this is done: there is a golden key for the genesis block, or there is a golden key for the code.   If this golden key mechanism is public, then, as you point out, it is very easy to fork it (if it is the code) or to start a new chain (if it is the genesis block).  If this golden key mechanism is obfuscated, then the system is entirely not to be trusted, because that means there are potential back doors everywhere.
When you see that cryptographic standards go through all the pains to demonstrate that there AREN'T obfuscated golden keys (which was for instance a potentially unjustified suspicion on the DES S-boxes) and use mathematical constants such as Pi and prime numbers if they need "random stuff" to prove that it is not hiding any golden key, you can imagine what kind of error would be an obfuscated golden key in a block chain.

[bbc.reporter]

I do not think that it is scammy. They are just trying to find new ways to pay the investors back. Of course you have to pay them back, it is not a donation. It must be the Zcash founders thought that it is a better idea to the their pay back strategy than organizing an ICO or premine the coin. The 80/20 reward set up is only during the first 4 years. After the first halving it will be 100% reward for the miners.

I can be seen as a compromise between ICO or premine and pure POW mining. It could or could not be a good idea. Only in practice we can see and tell. If the outcome is good then it can be a pay back strategy that can be used by other projects in the future. At least ICO's will be now eliminated.

[dinofelis]

I do not think that it is scammy. They are just trying to find new ways to pay the investors back. Of course you have to pay them back, it is not a donation. It must be the Zcash founders thought that it is a better idea to the their pay back strategy than organizing an ICO or premine the coin. The 80/20 reward set up is only during the first 4 years. After the first halving it will be 100% reward for the miners.
 

My problem is not so much with the fact that the "founders" get rewarded (you might think that that is simply normal) but rather the cryptographic implications of this, especially if the goal of the system is to make a cryptographically secure anonymous system.

In order for the founders to be able to get stuff that others cannot get, they must be in possession of a golden key that others don't have, and that mechanism in itself is OR cryptographically unacceptable if obfuscated, OR can easily be forked away if "in the open".  If it is in the open, I don't see why there's not an immediate clone/fork without this reward for the "founders", giving the miners 20% more than on the original.

[dandroid]

“I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.”
― Thomas A. Edison

Zcash is just another way to not make an anonymous crypto, there are several other evolutionary dead ends I believe, shadowcash, dash, ethereum contracts, bitcoin sidechains, are just as untested, buged, suboptimal or vaporware as time always confirms.

If you have some time, what are your thoughts on sidechains?

[European Central Bank]

so ridiculous premine and a gaping security hole. when did that ever stop a coin from being a huge hit? hang on to your hats.

[dinofelis]

“I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.”
― Thomas A. Edison

Zcash is just another way to not make an anonymous crypto, there are several other evolutionary dead ends I believe, shadowcash, dash, ethereum contracts, bitcoin sidechains, are just as untested, buged, suboptimal or vaporware as time always confirms.

I haven't looked enough into it, and maybe Zcash contains some good ideas.  But for sure, as it is presented, there's something fundamentally fishy about it.

In fact, "to reward the founders", IMO, the best thing to do is to make a special genesis block with a single, exceptional "coinbase transaction" giving a known single "instamine" amount to "the founders", and that's it.  That's way, way simpler, clearer, more open, and cryptographically acceptable way of doing things than this funny 20% of mining rewards during 4 years.

[samspaces]

Zcash requires a trusted setup. That's a huge problem. One of the foundational points of crypto is that we shouldn't have to trust anyone....only math.

A trusted setup also means that the Zcash team could print their own Zcash and nobody would necessarily know it ever happened.

Let's say that all of the Zcash core team is trustworthy. Fine, but it's still an assumption. Now, what if a hacker gained control of one of their accounts? They also could "print" their own Zcash without anyone necessarily knowing, inflating the Zcash economy.

Also, check out Zcash website and look at the loads of academic, government, and banking people involved with the project. To me, that makes them even more untrustworthy. Yet another foundational point of cryptocurrencies: you shouldn't need to rely on government or big banks, and Zcash has waded deep into both of those pools.

Bottom line: if you have to trust people, it's flawed from the start. You should only have to trust math.

Read more:

https://blog.okturtles.com/2016/03/the-zcash-catch/

http://weuse.cash/2016/06/09/btc-xmr-zcash/

Just go with Monero: open source, fully decentralized, no trusted setup, totally private, untraceable,and fungible.

Nice summary. Besides. The way Bitcoin is traced back to it's owners will be no different from this project.

http://time.com/3689359/bitcoins-track-anonymous/

All the big names behind it indicate another highly speculative asset to hedge against BTC.