Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments

[SatoNatomato]

WebSocket with TLS - great choice as filtering Byteball is now harder as ISPs allow WebSocket for most web-sites to function. Security wise relying on TLS / Certificate Authorities is a "defense in depth" the security of the network does not rely on it, only makes it harder to attempt bad attacks, as all content and messages are also encrypted and signed within the transport layer. Also great design!

Probably, but I see it as a bottle neck. No UDP connections can be made, not easy to rewrite code on something not web related. WebSocket hammered protocol to web and TCP.

If network is replaced by a malicious one, is same general problem as for bitcoin and any other network, the user if paranoid or has reasons to suspect such an attack, should check with other sources, say different smartphones on different ISPs different public DAG explorers and compare...

 

No no no, you don't get it. After new malicious client will take over all old clients will stuck, crash and resinc, from start, legit one DAG lost forever. All clients downloaded new DAG with new "old" branch  full of some guy coins, accepted by witnesses, finalised. No other DAG more exist.

Well its quiet easy to rewrite the code for something not web related, we have a prototype running on an microcontroller, written in C, it speaks WebSocket. Dont let the name confuse.

UDP alone doesnt have transport layer security, most DTLS libraries Ive seen are not very tested. In any case, the transport protocol is not very important and can be changed later.

Sounds like you misunderstand how the network works right now, with the "old clients stuck, crash".

The current Byteball network, full wallets, hubs, relays, witnesses, will not magically disappear because someone hacks and modifies a link on byteball.org or github.com, even if the byteball.org hub is taken down, other hubs already can pick up the slack, they and all full wallets have the copy of the current DAG, the one seen on explorer.byteball.org.

If your malicious client downloads a modified DAG from hackers-server, where the DAG says hacker-has so much bytes, any transactions coming from it to the real network will just be trashed as spam, signatures would be invalid, by the rest of the full nodes and witnesses.

[1614835963]

1614835963

[dfd1]

If your malicious client downloads a modified DAG from hackers-server, where the DAG says hacker-has so much bytes, any transactions coming from it to the real network will just be trashed as spam, signatures would be invalid, by the rest of the full nodes and witnesses.

Maybe, don't know, hope so.
Yet we have checkpoints in bitcoin code just in case someone with huge computer power will rewrite chain from the start. So, if wallets (nodes) resinc they will not accept non legit blockchain (at least not rewrited from place before checkpoint). Byteball don't have POW, so probably checkpoints or something should be made, since crashed wallet can resinc from Sybil nodes (malicious hacker wallets) and lost legit one DAG forever. Attacker don't need to compute bitcoin level huge POW, all he do is replacing witnesses with wrong ones, new witnesses accept new DAG, finalize.

[SatoNatomato]

If your malicious client downloads a modified DAG from hackers-server, where the DAG says hacker-has so much bytes, any transactions coming from it to the real network will just be trashed as spam, signatures would be invalid, by the rest of the full nodes and witnesses.

Maybe,  we have checkpoints in bitcoin code just in case someone with huge computer power will rewrite chain from the start. So, if wallets (nodes) resinc they will not accept non legit blockchain (at least not rewrited from place before checkpoint). Byteball don't have POW, so probably checkpoints or something should be made, since crashed wallet can resinc from SyBill nodes (malicious hacker wallets) and lost legit one DAG forever.

Nobody looses legit one DAG forever even in such a scenario.

As described earlier, such an attack can be mounted on bitcoin users too, just change the checkpoints in the modified client too to match what the hacker-generated database has.

In both cases, to protect yourself, since this is an attack on the user and not on the network/technology, ensure you are on the right network, and the way to do that is to check with various trusted sources, use several smartphones with different ISPs, check your balance on explorers etc.

But, Byteball has something more clever than the above. Multi-signatures, just pair your wallet with another device and setup "requires 2 of 2 signatures" to transact or setup 2 of 3 devices. Simple.

[dfd1]

In both cases, to protect yourself, since this is an attack on the user and not on the network/technology, ensure you are on the right network, and the way to do that is to check with various trusted sources, use several smartphones with different ISPs, check your balance on explorers etc.

As you wish. In byteball users is a network, no third party like miners exists. No one really care, if DAG replaced.

[SatoNatomato]

In both cases, to protect yourself, since this is an attack on the user and not on the network/technology, ensure you are on the right network, and the way to do that is to check with various trusted sources, use several smartphones with different ISPs, check your balance on explorers etc.

As you wish. In byteball users is a network, no third party like miners exists. No one really care, if DAG replaced.

Well, I wrote above explaining why that statement doesnt float, but just because you repeat your original statement, doesnt mean it is true.

[dfd1]

In both cases, to protect yourself, since this is an attack on the user and not on the network/technology, ensure you are on the right network, and the way to do that is to check with various trusted sources, use several smartphones with different ISPs, check your balance on explorers etc.

As you wish. In byteball users is a network, no third party like miners exists. No one really care, if DAG replaced.

Well, I wrote above explaining why that statement doesnt float, but just because you repeat your original statement, doesnt mean it is true.

Ok, we can assume you win then. So now you know my point of view, DAG should have checkpoints. I'm not here for dispute gymnastics. Just cleared something for users of such a great software. Javascript is a good programming language too, why not? Good luck.

[SatoNatomato]

In both cases, to protect yourself, since this is an attack on the user and not on the network/technology, ensure you are on the right network, and the way to do that is to check with various trusted sources, use several smartphones with different ISPs, check your balance on explorers etc.

As you wish. In byteball users is a network, no third party like miners exists. No one really care, if DAG replaced.

Well, I wrote above explaining why that statement doesnt float, but just because you repeat your original statement, doesnt mean it is true.

Ok, we can assume you win then. So now you know my point of view, DAG should have checkpoints. I'm not here for dispute gymnastics. Just cleared something for users of such a great software. Javascript is a good programming language too, why not? Good luck.

Sorry, but you didnt clear anything up. checkpoints belong in forks of bitcoin, not in a DAG.

But thanks for the discussion.

[kripteka]

I have installed new wallet 1.6.0
 How much of time wallet must synchronize?

[connexus]

I have installed new wallet 1.6.0
 How much of time wallet must synchronize?

Desktop wallet running full nodes will take several minutes to an hour, while light wallet will take a few minutes.

[CryptKeeper]

I have installed new wallet 1.6.0
 How much of time wallet must synchronize?

I did a full sync out of curiosity a week ago and it took me 4 hours.

[TeraBite]

I have installed new wallet 1.6.0
 How much of time wallet must synchronize?

It depend on last synch so if you opening your wallet time to time than it would not take so long time to get fully sync to the latest block. I open my wallet after a week and it took only 3 minutes.

[vlom]

to everyone who wants to link an address using the ledger wallet.

the bot did not accept the sig the wallet made. now i found out why.

the fist line of the Signature is the BTC address you used to sign. just copy the rest. then it works.

-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
Dont copy this line, this is just the BTC address.
H3Q..... this is the sig, the bot needs.
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

[drawingthesun]

Is it possible to be apart of the next round using Bitcoins stored in a Nano S hardware wallet?

[miramare]

I install wallet v1.6.0 by using the light one.
How can I switch to the full one now?

[yeahbye]

Hi DEV:
How do I will be a full version of the wallet, converted to light wallet, and keep the original receipt address remains the same.
In light wallet, I use the restore function, the results of this light wallet into a full version.
I need my light wallet, use the original [full version wallet] receipt address

help me....
 

[kola-schaar]

Is it possible to be apart of the next round using Bitcoins stored in a Nano S hardware wallet?

Yes, works very well - tutorial 0o0o:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859.2020
Note the recommendation of vlom (above your request)

[bspus]

I'm sure it's been mentioned before but I'd better make sure.

Are linkings between byteball and btc addresses permanent throughout all the distributions?

What I mean is, I participated in the match distribution and my bitcoins will not be moving until the next one.

Do I need to chat with the bot again, or are the linkings still valid?

Also, this byteball addresses which I linked to btc ones were previously empty and now have my distribution coins.

Do I need to do something for them to receive the 10%? Like another type of linking, irrespective of btc?

Chat with the bot, and you'll get answers to your questions.

All I had to do was say hi and it gave me an exact answer to the above questions. I didn't even have to ask.

Spoooooky !!

[CryptKeeper]

I install wallet v1.6.0 by using the light one.
How can I switch to the full one now?

You can't switch wallet types and keep your addresses. You can only change wallet types with a new install (make sure your delete the user folder first)! But only with an  empty wallet, because all bytes and blackbytes will get lost this way!

[CryptKeeper]

Hi DEV:
How do I will be a full version of the wallet, converted to light wallet, and keep the original receipt address remains the same.
In light wallet, I use the restore function, the results of this light wallet into a full version.
I need my light wallet, use the original [full version wallet] receipt address

help me....
 

The only way to do this is to make a backup of your 12-word seed and do a complete reinstall of the wallet and restore from the seed. But you will loose all blackbytes and linked wallets this way!

Maybe you can move your blackbytes temporarily on another device and then back from there?

[legera]

Is it possible to be apart of the next round using Bitcoins stored in a Nano S hardware wallet?

This would be great if possible