Official Anoncoin chat thread (including history)

[AnonyMint]

Apologies if this has already been asked upthead. I didn't have time to read the entire thread.

Does Anoncoin not view high-latency for I2P as critically urgent as I do?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=273197.msg2950363#msg2950363
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=276849.msg2955966#msg2955966
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=273197.msg2950849#msg2950849

I2P doesn't plan on implementing until version 3.0? When is that ETA?

only bitcoin and anoncoin so far work with i2p

Bitcoin doesn't require all winning blocks to be sent over I2P, thus in a high-latency setup, those miners who want their awarded coins to be anonymous, would be at a timing disadvantage.

I assume anoncoin requires all winning blocks to be sent over I2P?

nope, you can send it over i2p, TOR (to clearnet or HS nodes) and clearnet.
the main idea about i2p in anoncoin is to eliminate attacks to find your location and making listening on others connections impossible. (from a technical view)

Don't we want miners to be anonymous when they are awarded coins for PoW of the winning block?

So then if they use the high-latency setting to be confidently anonymous, they are at a speed disadvantage to those miners who don't want to be anonymous (e.g. the corporations, etc).

Also does anyone understand and agree that without high-latency, the NSA knows who you are? (due to timing attacks are possible on low-latency mix-nets)

nope, i2p is end to end encrypted, nobody (beside the involved ones) knows what passes from where to where, ie someone else cant see who published it or how high their latency is.

Timing attacks work regardless of end-to-end encryption.

My understanding is that all low-latency mix-nets are subject to timing attacks. Perhaps you should read up on the research before making a claim? Or am I missing something?

Note Tor and I2P are both Chaum mix-nets (so what applies to low-latency attacks of Tor applies also to I2P):

https://blog.torproject.org/blog/one-cell-enough
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sjm217/papers/oakland05torta.pdf

[K1773R]

Apologies if this has already been asked upthead. I didn't have time to read the entire thread.

Does Anoncoin not view high-latency for I2P as critically urgent as I do?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=273197.msg2950363#msg2950363
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=276849.msg2955966#msg2955966
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=273197.msg2950849#msg2950849

I2P doesn't plan on implementing until version 3.0? When is that ETA?

only bitcoin and anoncoin so far work with i2p

Bitcoin doesn't require all winning blocks to be sent over I2P, thus in a high-latency setup, those miners who want their awarded coins to be anonymous, would be at a timing disadvantage.

I assume anoncoin requires all winning blocks to be sent over I2P?

nope, you can send it over i2p, TOR (to clearnet or HS nodes) and clearnet.
the main idea about i2p in anoncoin is to eliminate attacks to find your location and making listening on others connections impossible. (from a technical view)

Don't we want miners to be anonymous when they are awarded coins for PoW of the winning block?

So then if they use the high-latency setting to be confidently anonymous, they are at a speed disadvantage to those miners who don't want to be anonymous (e.g. the corporations, etc).

Also does anyone understand and agree that without high-latency, the NSA knows who you are? (due to timing attacks are possible on low-latency mix-nets)

nope, i2p is end to end encrypted, nobody (beside the involved ones) knows what passes from where to where, ie someone else cant see who published it or how high their latency is.

Timing attacks work regardless of end-to-end encryption.

My understanding is that all low-latency mix-nets are subject to timing attacks. Perhaps you should read up on the research before making a claim? Or am I missing something?

Note Tor and I2P are both Chaum mix-nets (so what applies to low-latency attacks of Tor applies also to I2P):

https://blog.torproject.org/blog/one-cell-enough
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sjm217/papers/oakland05torta.pdf

ok, good to see someone with knowledge around here
i2p user (A) finds blocks, broadcasts to all users in i2p (UI), now some of the UI are connected to clearnet, some user (B) broadcast it over clearnet to the other nodes, so with a timing attack you could find user B but not user A

[AnonyMint]

Apologies if this has already been asked upthead. I didn't have time to read the entire thread.

Does Anoncoin not view high-latency for I2P as critically urgent as I do?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=273197.msg2950363#msg2950363
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=276849.msg2955966#msg2955966
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=273197.msg2950849#msg2950849

I2P doesn't plan on implementing until version 3.0? When is that ETA?

only bitcoin and anoncoin so far work with i2p

Bitcoin doesn't require all winning blocks to be sent over I2P, thus in a high-latency setup, those miners who want their awarded coins to be anonymous, would be at a timing disadvantage.

I assume anoncoin requires all winning blocks to be sent over I2P?

nope, you can send it over i2p, TOR (to clearnet or HS nodes) and clearnet.
the main idea about i2p in anoncoin is to eliminate attacks to find your location and making listening on others connections impossible. (from a technical view)

Don't we want miners to be anonymous when they are awarded coins for PoW of the winning block?

So then if they use the high-latency setting to be confidently anonymous, they are at a speed disadvantage to those miners who don't want to be anonymous (e.g. the corporations, etc).

Also does anyone understand and agree that without high-latency, the NSA knows who you are? (due to timing attacks are possible on low-latency mix-nets)

nope, i2p is end to end encrypted, nobody (beside the involved ones) knows what passes from where to where, ie someone else cant see who published it or how high their latency is.

Timing attacks work regardless of end-to-end encryption.

My understanding is that all low-latency mix-nets are subject to timing attacks. Perhaps you should read up on the research before making a claim? Or am I missing something?

Note Tor and I2P are both Chaum mix-nets (so what applies to low-latency attacks of Tor applies also to I2P):

https://blog.torproject.org/blog/one-cell-enough
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sjm217/papers/oakland05torta.pdf

ok, good to see someone with knowledge around here
i2p user (A) finds blocks, broadcasts to all users in i2p (UI), now some of the UI are connected to clearnet, some user (B) broadcast it over clearnet to the other nodes, so with a timing attack you could find user B but not user A

My understanding is that with a timing attack on low-latency mix-nets, you can identify A because you watch the statistical timing of packets throughout the darknet (I2P) to determine where they are originating from by IP address. It is not necessary to know what it is inside the packets.

Whereas, with high-latency mix-nets, the peers scramble and delay some packets in random orders and delays, so that the statistical timing attack is foiled.

[K1773R]

Apologies if this has already been asked upthead. I didn't have time to read the entire thread.

Does Anoncoin not view high-latency for I2P as critically urgent as I do?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=273197.msg2950363#msg2950363
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=276849.msg2955966#msg2955966
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=273197.msg2950849#msg2950849

I2P doesn't plan on implementing until version 3.0? When is that ETA?

only bitcoin and anoncoin so far work with i2p

Bitcoin doesn't require all winning blocks to be sent over I2P, thus in a high-latency setup, those miners who want their awarded coins to be anonymous, would be at a timing disadvantage.

I assume anoncoin requires all winning blocks to be sent over I2P?

nope, you can send it over i2p, TOR (to clearnet or HS nodes) and clearnet.
the main idea about i2p in anoncoin is to eliminate attacks to find your location and making listening on others connections impossible. (from a technical view)

Don't we want miners to be anonymous when they are awarded coins for PoW of the winning block?

So then if they use the high-latency setting to be confidently anonymous, they are at a speed disadvantage to those miners who don't want to be anonymous (e.g. the corporations, etc).

Also does anyone understand and agree that without high-latency, the NSA knows who you are? (due to timing attacks are possible on low-latency mix-nets)

nope, i2p is end to end encrypted, nobody (beside the involved ones) knows what passes from where to where, ie someone else cant see who published it or how high their latency is.

Timing attacks work regardless of end-to-end encryption.

My understanding is that all low-latency mix-nets are subject to timing attacks. Perhaps you should read up on the research before making a claim? Or am I missing something?

Note Tor and I2P are both Chaum mix-nets (so what applies to low-latency attacks of Tor applies also to I2P):

https://blog.torproject.org/blog/one-cell-enough
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sjm217/papers/oakland05torta.pdf

ok, good to see someone with knowledge around here
i2p user (A) finds blocks, broadcasts to all users in i2p (UI), now some of the UI are connected to clearnet, some user (B) broadcast it over clearnet to the other nodes, so with a timing attack you could find user B but not user A

My understanding is that with a timing attack on low-latency mix-nets, you can identify A because you watch the statistical timing of packets throughout the darknet (I2P) to determine where they are originating from by IP address. It is not necessary to know what it is inside the packets.

Whereas, with high-latency mix-nets, the peers scramble and delay some packets in random orders and delays, so that the statistical timing attack is foiled.

yes, there are delays.

more informations which will answer 90% of your questions:
http://www.i2p2.de/how_threatmodel.html#timing (i would suggest to read the full threat model).
http://www.i2p2.de/techintro.html
http://www.i2p2.de/how_networkcomparisons.html

if your further interested then this can link you to more info -> http://www.i2p2.de/how.html (the rest of the page also, of course)

[AnonyMint]

Apologies if this has already been asked upthead. I didn't have time to read the entire thread.

Does Anoncoin not view high-latency for I2P as critically urgent as I do?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=273197.msg2950363#msg2950363
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=276849.msg2955966#msg2955966
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=273197.msg2950849#msg2950849

I2P doesn't plan on implementing until version 3.0? When is that ETA?

only bitcoin and anoncoin so far work with i2p

Bitcoin doesn't require all winning blocks to be sent over I2P, thus in a high-latency setup, those miners who want their awarded coins to be anonymous, would be at a timing disadvantage.

I assume anoncoin requires all winning blocks to be sent over I2P?

nope, you can send it over i2p, TOR (to clearnet or HS nodes) and clearnet.
the main idea about i2p in anoncoin is to eliminate attacks to find your location and making listening on others connections impossible. (from a technical view)

Don't we want miners to be anonymous when they are awarded coins for PoW of the winning block?

So then if they use the high-latency setting to be confidently anonymous, they are at a speed disadvantage to those miners who don't want to be anonymous (e.g. the corporations, etc).

Also does anyone understand and agree that without high-latency, the NSA knows who you are? (due to timing attacks are possible on low-latency mix-nets)

nope, i2p is end to end encrypted, nobody (beside the involved ones) knows what passes from where to where, ie someone else cant see who published it or how high their latency is.

Timing attacks work regardless of end-to-end encryption.

My understanding is that all low-latency mix-nets are subject to timing attacks. Perhaps you should read up on the research before making a claim? Or am I missing something?

Note Tor and I2P are both Chaum mix-nets (so what applies to low-latency attacks of Tor applies also to I2P):

https://blog.torproject.org/blog/one-cell-enough
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sjm217/papers/oakland05torta.pdf

ok, good to see someone with knowledge around here
i2p user (A) finds blocks, broadcasts to all users in i2p (UI), now some of the UI are connected to clearnet, some user (B) broadcast it over clearnet to the other nodes, so with a timing attack you could find user B but not user A

My understanding is that with a timing attack on low-latency mix-nets, you can identify A because you watch the statistical timing of packets throughout the darknet (I2P) to determine where they are originating from by IP address. It is not necessary to know what it is inside the packets.

Whereas, with high-latency mix-nets, the peers scramble and delay some packets in random orders and delays, so that the statistical timing attack is foiled.

yes, there are delays.

more informations which will answer 90% of your questions:
http://www.i2p2.de/how_threatmodel.html#timing (i would suggest to read the full threat model).
http://www.i2p2.de/techintro.html
http://www.i2p2.de/how_networkcomparisons.html

if your further interested then this can link you to more info -> http://www.i2p2.de/how.html (the rest of the page also, of course)

I read those before coming to this thread.

I am trying to warn you that I2P does not have high latency delays yet. It is planned for version 3.0.

And without those high-latency delays, the NSA can know who A is.

This is not yet an anonymous coin.

The I2P one-way paths and (on top of I2P) application protocol delays doesn't protect against the sophisticated timing analysis. The delays must be put into the I2P peers who are relaying the packets.

[K1773R]

I read those before coming to this thread.

I am trying to warn you that I2P does not have high latency delays yet. It is planned for version 3.0.

And without those high-latency delays, the NSA can know who A is.

This is not yet an anonymous coin.

The I2P one-way paths and (on top of I2P) application protocol delays doesn't protect against the sophisticated timing analysis. The delays must be put into the I2P peers who are relaying the packets.

a truly anonymous coin isnt possible anyway due to the existing blockchain.

EDIT: there are also small latencys before relaying the block wich are variable, *coind has to validate a block before it relays it to other nodes, now depending on the speed of pcs, this may differ (tough only in fraction of seconds aslong we dont have blocks with alot of txs). are you interested to hop onto freenode/i2p #anoncoin if you want to submit ideas or just discuss such things? we'r kinda spamming this thread.

[digeros]

I read those before coming to this thread.

I am trying to warn you that I2P does not have high latency delays yet. It is planned for version 3.0.

And without those high-latency delays, the NSA can know who A is.

This is not yet an anonymous coin.

The I2P one-way paths and (on top of I2P) application protocol delays doesn't protect against the sophisticated timing analysis. The delays must be put into the I2P peers who are relaying the packets.

a truly anonymous coin isnt possible anyway due to the existing blockchain.

EDIT: there are also small latencys before relaying the block wich are variable, *coind has to validate a block before it relays it to other nodes, now depending on the speed of pcs, this may differ (tough only in fraction of seconds aslong we dont have blocks with alot of txs). are you interested to hop onto freenode/i2p #anoncoin if you want to submit ideas or just discuss such things? we'r kinda spamming this thread.

Well than I guess a Distributed "coinblender" Server system may be of some use to the payment system then??? thoughts???

[bingjiw]

What is the current develop progress status?
Is there a time schedule for next releases with new features?

[AnonyMint]

I read those before coming to this thread.

I am trying to warn you that I2P does not have high latency delays yet. It is planned for version 3.0.

And without those high-latency delays, the NSA can know who A is.

This is not yet an anonymous coin.

The I2P one-way paths and (on top of I2P) application protocol delays doesn't protect against the sophisticated timing analysis. The delays must be put into the I2P peers who are relaying the packets.

a truly anonymous coin isnt possible anyway due to the existing blockchain.

EDIT: there are also small latencys before relaying the block wich are variable, *coind has to validate a block before it relays it to other nodes, now depending on the speed of pcs, this may differ (tough only in fraction of seconds aslong we dont have blocks with alot of txs). are you interested to hop onto freenode/i2p #anoncoin if you want to submit ideas or just discuss such things? we'r kinda spamming this thread.

I hope the developers are aware of such issues.

I don't know how to access "freenode/i2p #anoncoin". Is that an IRC channel?

[K1773R]

I read those before coming to this thread.

I am trying to warn you that I2P does not have high latency delays yet. It is planned for version 3.0.

And without those high-latency delays, the NSA can know who A is.

This is not yet an anonymous coin.

The I2P one-way paths and (on top of I2P) application protocol delays doesn't protect against the sophisticated timing analysis. The delays must be put into the I2P peers who are relaying the packets.

a truly anonymous coin isnt possible anyway due to the existing blockchain.

EDIT: there are also small latencys before relaying the block wich are variable, *coind has to validate a block before it relays it to other nodes, now depending on the speed of pcs, this may differ (tough only in fraction of seconds aslong we dont have blocks with alot of txs). are you interested to hop onto freenode/i2p #anoncoin if you want to submit ideas or just discuss such things? we'r kinda spamming this thread.

I hope the developers are aware of such issues.

I don't know how to access "freenode/i2p #anoncoin". Is that an IRC channel?

yes it is, #anoncoin is accessible with freenode or irc2p (i2p irc) and is relayed between.

[meeh]

What is the current develop progress status?
Is there a time schedule for next releases with new features?

The development status is "in progress".

Currently it's the new codebase (from Bitcoin 0.8.3.7) that is under development. Feel free to watch the development here; https://github.com/Anoncoin/anoncoin/tree/master-0.8

Release dates are not yet out. We're currently discussing a maybe backport on the IRC seed, with support for Irc2P, or another IRC server inside the I2P network. And maybe a kind of coincontrol in the Qt gui which we are currently looking into. We're aiming on a bigger feature list before another release, since we don't want to spam our users with new small releases to often.


Mac OSX users will probably get a early release of the new source once the Qt linking problem is solved. We're currently researching some odd problems where the bundled Qt dylibs requires system libraries that usualy don't exists on OSX installations, which makes the client crash. So that's 1st prio at the moment. (Daemon on OSX is working fine however)

I hope the developers are aware of such issues.

Of course we are. Both I, K1773R and BroTroxer have had discussion on this. Implementations of zerocoin, coloredcoin etc have been discussed. And you will probably see one of the features in Anoncoin in the future, and if none of them, another system that's similar and does the same job. No schedule is set on this. However, the latency problem is known, but not addressed yet. Note, none of those features will come in the next release, but probably the next after this.

Feel free to join us at #anoncoin (IRC, Freenode or I2P)

[AnonyMint]

I hope the developers are aware of such issues.

Of course we are. Both I, K1773R and BroTroxer have had discussion on this. Implementations of zerocoin, coloredcoin etc have been discussed. And you will probably see one of the features in Anoncoin in the future, and if none of them, another system that's similar and does the same job. No schedule is set on this. However, the latency problem is known, but not addressed yet. Note, none of those features will come in the next release, but probably the next after this.

Feel free to join us at #anoncoin (IRC, Freenode or I2P)

Thank you

[meeh]

Protocol switch complete - Fun watching the coin change diff after each block!

[BroTroxer]

Protocol switch complete - Fun watching the coin change diff after each block!

With excitement, without problems. Just the way we like it!

[A L I E N]

Protocol switch complete - Fun watching the coin change diff after each block!

With excitement, without problems. Just the way we like it!

Looks like the days of loading up on low diff ANC are over.  Its going to be hard to mine now with the difficulty keeping pace with the hash rate.

Any idea why CoinChoose is showing a 17.42 block reward?

[meeh]

Looks like the days of loading up on low diff ANC are over.  Its going to be hard to mine now with the difficulty keeping pace with the hash rate.

Any idea why CoinChoose is showing a 17.42 block reward?

Yepp

I guess CC is using old information.

PS: If you look at the diff now, don't worry, it will be stable soon.

[BroTroxer]

Protocol switch complete - Fun watching the coin change diff after each block!

With excitement, without problems. Just the way we like it!

Looks like the days of loading up on low diff ANC are over.  Its going to be hard to mine now with the difficulty keeping pace with the hash rate.

Any idea why CoinChoose is showing a 17.42 block reward?

Yeah, this way it should be a lot more fair to miners that are mining around the clock, or just often. No more hit 'n runs by the big guys to grab easy coins and mess up the difficulty for others.

[DiCE1904]

What is the current develop progress status?
Is there a time schedule for next releases with new features?

The development status is "in progress".

Currently it's the new codebase (from Bitcoin 0.8.3.7) that is under development. Feel free to watch the development here; https://github.com/Anoncoin/anoncoin/tree/master-0.8

Release dates are not yet out. We're currently discussing a maybe backport on the IRC seed, with support for Irc2P, or another IRC server inside the I2P network. And maybe a kind of coincontrol in the Qt gui which we are currently looking into. We're aiming on a bigger feature list before another release, since we don't want to spam our users with new small releases to often.


Mac OSX users will probably get a early release of the new source once the Qt linking problem is solved. We're currently researching some odd problems where the bundled Qt dylibs requires system libraries that usualy don't exists on OSX installations, which makes the client crash. So that's 1st prio at the moment. (Daemon on OSX is working fine however)

I hope the developers are aware of such issues.

Of course we are. Both I, K1773R and BroTroxer have had discussion on this. Implementations of zerocoin, coloredcoin etc have been discussed. And you will probably see one of the features in Anoncoin in the future, and if none of them, another system that's similar and does the same job. No schedule is set on this. However, the latency problem is known, but not addressed yet. Note, none of those features will come in the next release, but probably the next after this.

Feel free to join us at #anoncoin (IRC, Freenode or I2P)

Very happy to see you pushing for the mac client update, thank you

[sal002]

Protocol switch complete - Fun watching the coin change diff after each block!

With excitement, without problems. Just the way we like it!

Looks like the days of loading up on low diff ANC are over.  Its going to be hard to mine now with the difficulty keeping pace with the hash rate.

Any idea why CoinChoose is showing a 17.42 block reward?

Fixed - not sure why I was but was the reward different in the past?

[BroTroxer]

Protocol switch complete - Fun watching the coin change diff after each block!

With excitement, without problems. Just the way we like it!

Looks like the days of loading up on low diff ANC are over.  Its going to be hard to mine now with the difficulty keeping pace with the hash rate.

Any idea why CoinChoose is showing a 17.42 block reward?

Fixed - not sure why I was but was the reward different in the past?

The rewards are currently at 5 coins per block. I see CoinChoose still reports it to be 17.42. There was a change made to the coin that reduces block sizes from the original plans, adding rapid dynamic difficulty changes at the same time as block rewards decreases.
You can read about the changes in the previous announcement posted here; https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=227287.msg2764735#msg2764735