NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[gbeirn]

you guys are confusing me with weight.... i have 6 hallmarked nodes, each on a separate IP.  if i set the weight to 100 on all of them, then doesnt each hallmarked node appear to have 1/6 of my hallmarked accounts balance?

I think that no matter what you set the Weight too, the Weight will show what your account holds now. And if you add more to that account, the Weight will reflect that accordingly. So there is a need to set up a special 'node' account and fund it with 100 NXT only. Maybe someone can set up a donation fund just for that and verify that people indeed set up hallmarked nodes with the amount they received from the donation fund by looking up the IP in the peers list.

I think we are thinking along the same lines:

Edit: and since it is unrealistic to un-hallmark all nodes our only option is to hallmark as many as possible to spread out the number of targets which can be DDoS'd....and we wouldn't want too many hallmarked nodes to stand out above the others since they would be the first targets. So maybe we all agree to setup nodes with similar weights?

Yes, many 100 Weight nodes, or any other small number will do. Someone should manage the donation fund for that purpose specifically and verify that hallmarked nodes with paid out amounts are indeed running with the paid out Weight value.

There needs to be a fallback mechanism in the code to allow for nodes that do not receive a response from hallmarked nodes to then request data from lesser and lesser weighted nodes.

Yes I agree, until we get the source code though we will have to make due the best we can. I think setting up many small hallmarked nodes will at least make it costlier for the DDoSing and buy the network time

[1714189275]

1714189275

[1714189275]

1714189275

[1714189275]

1714189275

[2Kool4Skewl]

what port do i need to unblock for the client?

TCP port 7874 is the port for peer connections.

[laowai80]

you guys are confusing me with weight.... i have 6 hallmarked nodes, each on a separate IP.  if i set the weight to 100 on all of them, then doesnt each hallmarked node appear to have 1/6 of my hallmarked accounts balance?

I think that no matter what you set the Weight too, the Weight will show what your account holds now. And if you add more to that account, the Weight will reflect that accordingly. So there is a need to set up a special 'node' account and fund it with 100 NXT only. Maybe someone can set up a donation fund just for that and verify that people indeed set up hallmarked nodes with the amount they received from the donation fund by looking up the IP in the peers list.

I think we are thinking along the same lines:

Edit: and since it is unrealistic to un-hallmark all nodes our only option is to hallmark as many as possible to spread out the number of targets which can be DDoS'd....and we wouldn't want too many hallmarked nodes to stand out above the others since they would be the first targets. So maybe we all agree to setup nodes with similar weights?

Yes, many 100 Weight nodes, or any other small number will do. Someone should manage the donation fund for that purpose specifically and verify that hallmarked nodes with paid out amounts are indeed running with the paid out Weight value.

There needs to be a fallback mechanism in the code to allow for nodes that do not receive a response from hallmarked nodes to then request data from lesser and lesser weighted nodes.

Actually, manually verifying would be tiresome, there needs to be a script coded, that checks all payees of the Special public node donation fund and then verifies if that IP is running and verify its hallmark. Should be all doable with the API requests. I think Weight value of 100 is too large. We need tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of such nodes, in the future when NXT price is higher that'd be too generous. People need to support the network anyway, so paying 10 NXTs to hallmark is enough, what do you think?

[Come-from-Beyond]

If I unlock my account on my system at 2:00 and someone breaks into my system at 3:00, can they retrieve my private key?

Can anyone help me here?  I'm trying to figure out if my private key can be stolen after I unlock my account.

Yes, ur private key may be stolen by someone who gets access to memory of Java Virtual Machine.

[laowai80]

a node hallmarked with 100 nxt and a node hallmarked with 100,000 nxt would have the same priority with peers.

CfB, please confirm if this is true?
If true, it shouldn't be that way, I think?
More weight = more trust from peers approach is better?

The problem with this is that heavily weighted nodes are bigger targets to attack and when they get attacked, they disrupt the network to greater extent because they are being used as the main nodes.

True, there shouldn't be linear progression, but still more Weight value should mean more trust.
Otherwise, a rich enough attacker could set up thousands of hallmarked nodes and disrupt the network.
So a sort of balance needs to be worked out here.

[gbeirn]

you guys are confusing me with weight.... i have 6 hallmarked nodes, each on a separate IP.  if i set the weight to 100 on all of them, then doesnt each hallmarked node appear to have 1/6 of my hallmarked accounts balance?

I think that no matter what you set the Weight too, the Weight will show what your account holds now. And if you add more to that account, the Weight will reflect that accordingly. So there is a need to set up a special 'node' account and fund it with 100 NXT only. Maybe someone can set up a donation fund just for that and verify that people indeed set up hallmarked nodes with the amount they received from the donation fund by looking up the IP in the peers list.

I think we are thinking along the same lines:

Edit: and since it is unrealistic to un-hallmark all nodes our only option is to hallmark as many as possible to spread out the number of targets which can be DDoS'd....and we wouldn't want too many hallmarked nodes to stand out above the others since they would be the first targets. So maybe we all agree to setup nodes with similar weights?

Yes, many 100 Weight nodes, or any other small number will do. Someone should manage the donation fund for that purpose specifically and verify that hallmarked nodes with paid out amounts are indeed running with the paid out Weight value.

There needs to be a fallback mechanism in the code to allow for nodes that do not receive a response from hallmarked nodes to then request data from lesser and lesser weighted nodes.

Actually, manually verifying would be tiresome, there needs to be a script coded, that checks all payees of the Special public node donation fund and then verifies if that IP is running and verify its hallmark. Should be all doable with the API requests. I think Weight value of 100 is too large. We need tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of such nodes, in the future when NXT price is higher that'd be too generous. People need to support the network anyway, so paying 10 NXTs to hallmark is enough, what do you think?

Yes something smaller is a good idea for future proofing.

[opticalcarrier]

you guys are confusing me with weight.... i have 6 hallmarked nodes, each on a separate IP.  if i set the weight to 100 on all of them, then doesnt each hallmarked node appear to have 1/6 of my hallmarked accounts balance?

I think that no matter what you set the Weight too, the Weight will show what your account holds now. And if you add more to that account, the Weight will reflect that accordingly. So there is a need to set up a special 'node' account and fund it with 100 NXT only. Maybe someone can set up a donation fund just for that and verify that people indeed set up hallmarked nodes with the amount they received from the donation fund by looking up the IP in the peers list.

I just checked, it appears to divy up te balance base on the number of active peers. For example, I have 6 hallmarked nodes with the same account's hallmark (but different IPs in each hallmark) and 1 of the nodes sees 3 other hallmarked peers in the active peers list.  since thats 4 total nodes (itself and the 3 peers) I do see my account balance split 4 ways in the balance show on each peer.

My question is, do the VPSs need to be unlocked with any particular account, or do they just need to have a good blockchain and good peers?

[gbeirn]

a node hallmarked with 100 nxt and a node hallmarked with 100,000 nxt would have the same priority with peers.

CfB, please confirm if this is true?
If true, it shouldn't be that way, I think?
More weight = more trust from peers approach is better?

The problem with this is that heavily weighted nodes are bigger targets to attack and when they get attacked, they disrupt the network to greater extent because they are being used as the main nodes.

True, there shouldn't be linear progression, but still more Weight value should mean more trust.
Otherwise, a rich enough attacker could set up thousands of hallmarked nodes and disrupt the network.
So a sort of balance needs to be worked out here.

Or setup a very high Weight node and disrupt from the top down if the other nodes look to it?

[2Kool4Skewl]

you guys are confusing me with weight.... i have 6 hallmarked nodes, each on a separate IP.  if i set the weight to 100 on all of them, then doesnt each hallmarked node appear to have 1/6 of my hallmarked accounts balance?

I think that no matter what you set the Weight too, the Weight will show what your account holds now. And if you add more to that account, the Weight will reflect that accordingly. So there is a need to set up a special 'node' account and fund it with 100 NXT only. Maybe someone can set up a donation fund just for that and verify that people indeed set up hallmarked nodes with the amount they received from the donation fund by looking up the IP in the peers list.

I think we are thinking along the same lines:

Edit: and since it is unrealistic to un-hallmark all nodes our only option is to hallmark as many as possible to spread out the number of targets which can be DDoS'd....and we wouldn't want too many hallmarked nodes to stand out above the others since they would be the first targets. So maybe we all agree to setup nodes with similar weights?

Yes, many 100 Weight nodes, or any other small number will do. Someone should manage the donation fund for that purpose specifically and verify that hallmarked nodes with paid out amounts are indeed running with the paid out Weight value.

There needs to be a fallback mechanism in the code to allow for nodes that do not receive a response from hallmarked nodes to then request data from lesser and lesser weighted nodes.

Actually, manually verifying would be tiresome, there needs to be a script coded, that checks all payees of the Special public node donation fund and then verifies if that IP is running and verify its hallmark. Should be all doable with the API requests. I think Weight value of 100 is too large. We need tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of such nodes, in the future when NXT price is higher that'd be too generous. People need to support the network anyway, so paying 10 NXTs to hallmark is enough, what do you think?

I think having the network reliant upon VPS provided by benefactors is a bad idea.  Nxt will then be centralized because it will depend on the people paying for VPS and the VPS providers.  Both of these can be taken down.

[gbeirn]

you guys are confusing me with weight.... i have 6 hallmarked nodes, each on a separate IP.  if i set the weight to 100 on all of them, then doesnt each hallmarked node appear to have 1/6 of my hallmarked accounts balance?

I think that no matter what you set the Weight too, the Weight will show what your account holds now. And if you add more to that account, the Weight will reflect that accordingly. So there is a need to set up a special 'node' account and fund it with 100 NXT only. Maybe someone can set up a donation fund just for that and verify that people indeed set up hallmarked nodes with the amount they received from the donation fund by looking up the IP in the peers list.

I think we are thinking along the same lines:

Edit: and since it is unrealistic to un-hallmark all nodes our only option is to hallmark as many as possible to spread out the number of targets which can be DDoS'd....and we wouldn't want too many hallmarked nodes to stand out above the others since they would be the first targets. So maybe we all agree to setup nodes with similar weights?

Yes, many 100 Weight nodes, or any other small number will do. Someone should manage the donation fund for that purpose specifically and verify that hallmarked nodes with paid out amounts are indeed running with the paid out Weight value.

There needs to be a fallback mechanism in the code to allow for nodes that do not receive a response from hallmarked nodes to then request data from lesser and lesser weighted nodes.

Actually, manually verifying would be tiresome, there needs to be a script coded, that checks all payees of the Special public node donation fund and then verifies if that IP is running and verify its hallmark. Should be all doable with the API requests. I think Weight value of 100 is too large. We need tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of such nodes, in the future when NXT price is higher that'd be too generous. People need to support the network anyway, so paying 10 NXTs to hallmark is enough, what do you think?

I think having the network reliant upon VPS provided by benefactors is a bad idea.  Nxt will then be centralized because it will depend on the people paying for VPS and the VPS providers.  Both of these can be taken down.

So then the only ideal situation is to remove hallmarking altogether? This way anyone can setup a node that is no greater or less than another making a DDoS attack only successful (and costly) to go after all the nodes?

[2Kool4Skewl]

It also seems that hallmarked accounts with large balances completely overpower smaller hallmarked accounts.  I don't think setting up a lot of hallmarked nodes with small balance will help much.

[laowai80]

a node hallmarked with 100 nxt and a node hallmarked with 100,000 nxt would have the same priority with peers.

CfB, please confirm if this is true?
If true, it shouldn't be that way, I think?
More weight = more trust from peers approach is better?

The problem with this is that heavily weighted nodes are bigger targets to attack and when they get attacked, they disrupt the network to greater extent because they are being used as the main nodes.

True, there shouldn't be linear progression, but still more Weight value should mean more trust.
Otherwise, a rich enough attacker could set up thousands of hallmarked nodes and disrupt the network.
So a sort of balance needs to be worked out here.

Or setup a very high Weight node and disrupt from the top down if the other nodes look to it?

Yes, that's why it has to be a balance.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Come-from-beyond, can you please relay this information to BCNext?  What are your thoughts?  I hope the source code is release asap, so these problems can get sorted out quickly.

I'll add a parameter that will switch weighting on/off. Everyone should decide if they want to use it.

[2Kool4Skewl]

you guys are confusing me with weight.... i have 6 hallmarked nodes, each on a separate IP.  if i set the weight to 100 on all of them, then doesnt each hallmarked node appear to have 1/6 of my hallmarked accounts balance?

I think that no matter what you set the Weight too, the Weight will show what your account holds now. And if you add more to that account, the Weight will reflect that accordingly. So there is a need to set up a special 'node' account and fund it with 100 NXT only. Maybe someone can set up a donation fund just for that and verify that people indeed set up hallmarked nodes with the amount they received from the donation fund by looking up the IP in the peers list.

I think we are thinking along the same lines:

Edit: and since it is unrealistic to un-hallmark all nodes our only option is to hallmark as many as possible to spread out the number of targets which can be DDoS'd....and we wouldn't want too many hallmarked nodes to stand out above the others since they would be the first targets. So maybe we all agree to setup nodes with similar weights?

Yes, many 100 Weight nodes, or any other small number will do. Someone should manage the donation fund for that purpose specifically and verify that hallmarked nodes with paid out amounts are indeed running with the paid out Weight value.

There needs to be a fallback mechanism in the code to allow for nodes that do not receive a response from hallmarked nodes to then request data from lesser and lesser weighted nodes.

Actually, manually verifying would be tiresome, there needs to be a script coded, that checks all payees of the Special public node donation fund and then verifies if that IP is running and verify its hallmark. Should be all doable with the API requests. I think Weight value of 100 is too large. We need tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of such nodes, in the future when NXT price is higher that'd be too generous. People need to support the network anyway, so paying 10 NXTs to hallmark is enough, what do you think?

I think having the network reliant upon VPS provided by benefactors is a bad idea.  Nxt will then be centralized because it will depend on the people paying for VPS and the VPS providers.  Both of these can be taken down.

So then the only ideal situation is to remove hallmarking altogether? This way anyone can setup a node that is no greater or less than another making a DDoS attack only successful (and costly) to go after all the nodes?

This is one solution.  With this solution you have the problem of zombie accounts.  You can mitigate zombie accounts by having the software fallback to another node when the current node doesn't respond properly.  As the network grows, the percentage of healthy nodes will increase making zombies less of an issue.

Another solution is to modify hallmarking, so everything hallmarked over 100 nxt has the same priority for peers.

[laowai80]

I think having the network reliant upon VPS provided by benefactors is a bad idea.  Nxt will then be centralized because it will depend on the people paying for VPS and the VPS providers.  Both of these can be taken down.

Well, we need many solutions on how to incentivize NXT users to create many nodes.
I think it'd be sort of automatic just like with miners of bitcoin invest into hardware, when the price of NXT grows, NXT users will invest into setting up a node.
But at the beginning we need some sort of bootstrapping mechanism to grow the network to mitigate risks of the next DDOS attack which will undoubtedly be much bigger. And we need to grow the network quick.

[OKNXT]

One question: Are the peers listed as active peers hallmarked? How to verify a peer if it is hallmarked if I know IP address?

[laowai80]

@2Kool4Skewl,

please edit the first post as creator of the thread and say something about the need to create a public node if you want to use NXT. It's important to underline the significance of this to make sure NXT users set up the VPS node at the same time they buy their first NXTs, and the significance of the network and that NXTs aren't worth much without investing into infrastructure. Can link to my signature post on how to set up a VPS.

[Come-from-Beyond]

I'm sure that would be possible, but hallmarking nodes is just a bad idea in my opinion.  Instead of using hallmarked nodes to stay in sync, nodes should simply use other nodes with the lowest ping time.

Well, hallmarks would work if everyone used them. Wait for a few hours and I'll release a version with disabled hallmarks.

[abctc]

I think having the network reliant upon VPS provided by benefactors is a bad idea.  Nxt will then be centralized because it will depend on the people paying for VPS and the VPS providers.  Both of these can be taken down.

- agree 100%

[OKNXT]

One more question: Is the account associated with the hallmark code forging? If it is forging during the service of public node, I think the general user would like to do it.