[ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread

[SyRenity]

Hi prophetx, just like you I am extremely skeptical of central bankers, inflation, and bailouts.  And for the record I also believe strongly in the concept of "sanctity of protocol", i.e., the idea that the protocol should be sacred and for all intents and purposes untouchable or off limits to devs and community.

Nevertheless, there is an important distinction here.

The world's central banks operate in a totally non-transparent fashion and they make decisions to inflate our currency without our knowledge or consent.  Over the past 50 years since we left the gold standard (which had previously been in existence for more than 1000 years) this pattern of central bank corruption has become pervasive and systemic, with centralized governments accruing massive fiscal deficits,  then running the printing presses to fund the bailout, at the same time constantly "cooking" the methodologies for calculating inflation to fix the optics.  I have traveled to more than 100 countries over the past decade and I would say that more than, say, 25% of the 206 countries in the world are in total economic shambles as a consequence of this (and other associated and interrelated) macro-economic mismanagement.  It is absolutely disgusting, it is immoral, and it leads to massive poverty, inequality, violence, etc.  

I personally believe that it is a basic human right that we should have a "non-corruptible currency" for use in our everyday lives, kind of like our right to water and oxygen.  =)

Notwithstanding, at this stage in the Counterparty project, where the project is still in alpha and we have encountered a technical glitch that has damaged many members of this community, and the community still being relatively small, I can also justify in my mind the situation of holding a community vote.  If we were to hold a community vote and if there was a majority or supermajority consensus that every XCP holder should give-up a tiny fraction of ownership in order to cover the costs of this unintended technical glitch, then, I think this would be possibly the fairest outcome, and it would add credibility to the community.  This would not be an non-transparent and centrally imposed inflation like we are faced with every day by the evil central bankers.  It would be community driven!  See the difference?

In summary, while I deeply and fundamentally agree with everyone arguing for "sanctity of protocol", and while I believe it is a very fine line and potentially a dangerous and slippery slope to introduce any inflation at all, I also see the possibility for an educated and intelligent community rallying together under the  exceptional circumstances of a "force majeur" event such as the security breech that has just occurred to hold a vote and make a collective decision to self-tax ourselves in the spirit of helping Busoni cover the loss.

Finally, my apologies for the long and passionate message, and I will refrain from any further posts on this topic until after we hear the result of Busoni and xnova's earnest efforts to reach a resolution with the greyhat.

Awesome write-up - I agree this could be the best solution.

[chinnuperiya]

I see your point on transparency and voting mechanisms.  In general I think that is a great idea. Implementation might be a challenge.

However I would point out that in this particular case it is the fault of the exchange operator not having adequate controls when on-ramping a new protocol; specifically I am referring to allowing withdrawals without manual intervention by operator staff.

But be that as it may...

Would any entity have the same chance to ask the XCP community to insure them?  Basically insure the counterparty risk because he is unable to meet his obligations? Even 50 years from now?

That is the way to be fair about this over time, not some arbitrary fork in the road with a one liner that can easily be commented out. i actually laughed when i read that one...

I agree with prophetx

[Spekulatius]

... I wonder if it is technically realistic?  How would this solution actually be implemented?  

Hard code into the next version, recognizing an address that PhantomPhreak controls as having a balance of 35,000 XCP on the first block. Then, PhantomPhreak sends this to busoni.  I would think it could be a 1 liner, not too hard?

I would hope that, if this is done, we can also set a date for when this type of fix is permanently "off limits". Maybe 6-12 months from now. In other words, a date where we all agree it is no longer Alpha software, but Beta.

And secondly, raise a pool of funds (controlled by PhantomPhreak?) to have a security audit done by an outside party, before we declare the transition from Alpha to Beta.  I would donate to this and I think many others would too.

That's completely defeating the purpose of PoB.

No it doesn't. Burning again doesn't defeat the purpose of burning, it just reestablishes value.

Im not sure what the "purpose" of PoB is for you but for me it solves the problem of the initial distribution problem in an altruistic way, unfortunately only among the comparatively small group of burners. Therefore creating some extra credibility for the project's creators for not taking everybodies money upfront. This purpose I see not impeded if we increase the total money supply evenly distributed among holders of XCP.

The problems with PoB on the other hand are the small size of initial holders aka burners vs. PoW or give aways.

Also, maybe most worrysome are the "burnt" BTCs to begin with because in opposition to the IPO model, like NXT, MasterCoin or Ethereum those resources are ultimately lost and leave the community without benefitting the project development. With MasterCoin et al at least the devs can set up bounties, work full time and hire additional gear and personal to move the project forward.

To ease out some of the problems associated with PoB, while retaining its values I make the proposition to have the vote on whether or not to increase everybodies holdings by a little margin, thus distributing XCP also to new holders of the currency, fixing the exchanges (Poloniex) and its users losses,

and

setting up a budget for the devs and furtherproject development!

[chinnuperiya]

XCP off coinmarketcap.com. So sad

[porqupine]

If you change the original distribution / PoB once citing this problem or that problem, this sets a precedent that it could be done again. That means you now have a currency/protocol that is decidedly untrustworthy - since it might change in the future as well. I don't think you will see a lot of users that want to hedge their BTC or other assets for stability, when the very terms on which the protocol is based are potentially subject to change, same goes for companies issuing stocks etc.

This is all just some absurd naivety of people that do not understand the implications of 'decentralized' or 'trustless' systems, while being proponents of - because it sounds cool or something of the sort. This continues until it occurs to them (i.e. as by consequence of an event such as this one) that there are drawbacks and aspects of 'decentralized' protocols that do not always work as they would like etc; and are now bothered by the fact that they don't have Paypal Customer Support or Ebay Buyer Protection.

[nakaone]

Hi prophetx, just like you I am extremely skeptical of central bankers, inflation, and bailouts.  And for the record I also believe strongly in the concept of "sanctity of protocol", i.e., the idea that the protocol should be sacred and for all intents and purposes untouchable or off limits to devs and community.

Nevertheless, there is an important distinction here.

The world's central banks operate in a totally non-transparent fashion and they make decisions to inflate our currency without our knowledge or consent.  Over the past 50 years since we left the gold standard (which had previously been in existence for more than 1000 years) this pattern of central bank corruption has become pervasive and systemic, with centralized governments accruing massive fiscal deficits,  then running the printing presses to fund the bailout, at the same time constantly "cooking" the methodologies for calculating inflation to fix the optics.  I have traveled to more than 100 countries over the past decade and I would say that more than, say, 25% of the 206 countries in the world are in total economic shambles as a consequence of this (and other associated and interrelated) macro-economic mismanagement.  It is absolutely disgusting, it is immoral, and it leads to massive poverty, inequality, violence, etc.  

I personally believe that it is a basic human right that we should have a "non-corruptible currency" for use in our everyday lives, kind of like our right to water and oxygen.  =)

Notwithstanding, at this stage in the Counterparty project, where the project is still in alpha and we have encountered a technical glitch that has damaged many members of this community, and the community still being relatively small, I can also justify in my mind the situation of holding a community vote.  If we were to hold a community vote and if there was a majority or supermajority consensus that every XCP holder should give-up a tiny fraction of ownership in order to cover the costs of this unintended technical glitch, then, I think this would be possibly the fairest outcome, and it would add credibility to the community.  This would not be an non-transparent and centrally imposed inflation like we are faced with every day by the evil central bankers.  It would be community driven!  See the difference?

In summary, while I deeply and fundamentally agree with everyone arguing for "sanctity of protocol", and while I believe it is a very fine line and potentially a dangerous and slippery slope to introduce any inflation at all, I also see the possibility for an educated and intelligent community rallying together under the  exceptional circumstances of a "force majeur" event such as the security breech that has just occurred to hold a vote and make a collective decision to self-tax ourselves in the spirit of helping Busoni cover the loss.

Finally, my apologies for the long and passionate message, and I will refrain from any further posts on this topic until after we hear the result of Busoni and xnova's earnest efforts to reach a resolution with the greyhat.

Awesome write-up - I agree this could be the best solution.

without being in any way disrespectful, but I think changing the supply of coins (after burning) is one of the worst ideas. I studied mostly macroeconomic theory and all the stuff done by central banks was initially started by a good purpose. but if you start with changing supply, you will always find reason to do so (yesterdays bug found will probably not be the last bug), so better do not start.

let us wait if busoni finds and the developers find a solution. and if that is not possible we can discuss further steps.

as a hint if we'll have some kind of voting, the last thing I vote for will be a change in supply. If we in any way want to compensate for the loss we can do it by bounty. I could also imagine a taxation of all existing accounts, but please no direct change in supply of xcp

[chinnuperiya]

Agree with proqupine. No change to protocol.

Hey all, let us wait for Busoni. He hasn't come back to us

[IamNotSure]

The problem is not with XCP anymore. Transactions were reversed and balances have been re-established.

I don't wanna shoot the ambulance, but Poloniex has allowed a withrawal of 80 BTC to the (dark) grey hat without manual check. This point could be discussed, but it wasn't obviously a good idea when you allow the trade of multiple 2.0 coins in alpha or the other shitcoins he lists.

Meanwhile I have faith in the devs & busoni and I think they'll come up with something that minimize the impact for the users. Wait & see.

[minuchi.str]

The problem is not with XCP anymore. Transactions were reversed and balances have been re-established.

I don't wanna shoot the ambulance, but Poloniex has allowed a withrawal of 80 BTC to the (dark) grey hat without manual check. This point could be discussed, but it wasn't obviously a good idea when you allow the trade of multiple 2.0 coins in alpha or the other shitcoins he lists.

Meanwhile I have faith that the devs & busoni and I think they'll come up with something that minimize the impact of the users. Wait & see.

Yeah true. Allowing 80 BTCs to be withdrawn without check is not a good risk management.

[romerun]

did anyone try to install the new 0.6 client? all that happens when I open it (after installing https://github.com/xnova/counterpartyd_binaries) is a comand line window opening and closing again after a few seconds...?

The same happened to me. Just build it from source.

i have no clue how to do that

also, are other clients like https://github.com/JahPowerBit/BoottleXCP not recommended anymore since the new 0.6 version with the fix came out?

That's not affected since the client has external reference to counterpartyd so it always checks out the latest code

[romerun]

The problem is not with XCP anymore. Transactions were reversed and balances have been re-established.

I don't wanna shoot the ambulance, but Poloniex has allowed a withrawal of 80 BTC to the (dark) grey hat without manual check. This point could be discussed, but it wasn't obviously a good idea when you allow the trade of multiple 2.0 coins in alpha or the other shitcoins he lists.

Meanwhile I have faith that the devs & busoni and I think they'll come up with something that minimize the impact of the users. Wait & see.

Yeah true. Allowing 80 BTCs to be withdrawn without check is not a good risk management.

35000 xcp deposit should also raise some flags too

[qtgwith]

A quick update: We are currently working through things with busoni and the anonymous hacker regarding the security incident. We have essentially extended a reward as well as a security developer-type position to this individual contingent upon us fully settling this issue and the funds being fully returned.

Phantom is currently implementing even more strict transaction validity checking rules as we speak (to among other things, guard against a specific potential security issue in bitcoind "quirk" in bitcoind itself that the hacker has identified). We are also working on an intermediate transaction database (to lessen the need to do a full rebuild off of bitcoind for all but the most major updates). That all being said, there will most likely be another update out shortly that requires a rebuild, but we hope that this will be the last for awhile.

We have also created two donation addresses:

Bug bounty program: 14Tf35AovvRVURzd623q5i9kry2EW8WzyL
General donations: 19U6MmLLumsqxXSBMB5FgYXbezgXYC6Gpe

We will be announcing the terms of a bug bounty program later today. If you are interested in helping pay for bounties for bugs found, please donate BTC or XCP to the bounty address above.

General donations (to be used with the project at the Counterparty team's discretion) can be sent to the General donations address.

Again, thank you all for your patience on this matter as we drive it to resolution.

Good news!

[DaFockBro]

The recent bug make you feel some type of way:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KKbdErJkiY

"PhantomPhreak been hustlin' trying to make him something
Ain't no telling what he'll do for the bitcoins
Soufflé, he's straight, he write his code
xnova, he's a smooth developer"

[minuchi.str]

come on guys. let us pump XCP

[qtgwith]

I can't believe that modifying the protocol to "poof" an extra 35k xcp out of thin air is even being discussed. Talk about defeating the purpose of this project and going against the spirit of the crypto movement itself. How does that make us any different from the banks? Are we really going down that road?

Absolutely agree with you. It can kill Counterparty XCP and become a joke.

[supervine]

Busoni, come on. It's not takes days to reindex the database. And even internal orders you can rollback in a hour (20-30 orders at most) directly on database.
There is a problem with missing BTC.
But, please, do a favor for all of us and return XCP page to poloniex now! With all correct XCP balances (and missing BTCs) - Try later to resolve the issue with missing BTCs.
Now we must to see this page online.
Coinmarket Cap took price from there - now the whole XCP dissappeared. MTGox going to die. All that really hurts the moral and believe in the coin. People started to ask me if XCP died too.
So, get it back ASAP!

Thank you

[DaFockBro]

Busoni, come on. It's not takes days to reindex the database. And even internal orders you can rollback in a hour (20-30 orders at most) directly on database.
There is a problem with missing BTC.
But, please, do a favor for all of us and return XCP page to poloniex now! With all correct XCP balances (and missing BTCs) - Try later to resolve the issue with missing BTCs.
Now we must to see this page online.
Coinmarket Cap took price from there - now the whole XCP dissappeared. MTGox going to die. All that really hurts the moral and believe in the coin. People started to ask me if XCP died too.
So, get it back ASAP!

Thank you

We could petition another exchange to add XCP in the meantime while busoni decides what to do about the poloniex issue.


What do you guys think about coinedup?  They were the first to add Dogecoin, Catcoin, Earthcoin, several others too.  They've been very fast about adding new coins in the past.


Bitcointalk thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=264327.0

Exchange:
https://coinedup.com/

Email:
contact@coinedup.com

Reddit:
http://www.reddit.com/r/coinedup

Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CoinedUp

[busoni]

Update.

The trades have been rolled back and all XCP orders have been cancelled.

The total XCP missing from the wallet--from people who bought from the dump and made hasty withdrawals--is about 7,000 XCP. I think it is a matter for the community how we want to deal with this. Do we all want to contribute? Should everyone's balances be taxed? Does everyone think this is all my fault and I should pay it out of pocket?

Because this XCP is missing from the wallet, I'm not sure I can turn withdrawals on yet, and until XCP is really verified secure, I can't turn the exchange on. If the exchange isn't on, then I doubt people would really care to keep their XCP in their Poloniex account, and if everyone withdraws, some people at the end are going to be stuck with that missing 7,000 XCP. So I guess we need to decide about this as soon as possible.

The BTC has not been returned yet, but I still have reason to believe that it will be. The attacker has found some other issues with XCP, including one that PhantomPhreak fixed before the attacker reported it and some others that have not been verified yet. The attacker seems intent on the success of XCP and also has opinions about the rollback, and seems to be withholding the BTC pending certain fixes. I have asked for final word on when the BTC will be returned, what he is waiting for, and he should respond by tomorrow. He has been very communicative and has been continuing to search XCP for security flaws--not really the profile of a thief.

Maximum daily withdrawal limits have now been implemented on all coins. For BTC, it is 50. Other security measures will come, and more coins will be moved to cold storage. (The majority of the BTC was in cold storage before any of this happened.)

I expect everything will return to normal in a few days, but I don't have anything definite yet. I'll keep everyone updated as I learn more. Realistically, I could just resume operations now, but I don't think that is wise or fair.

[vivinamie]

my btc balance was 0
and xcp trade Has been deleted

[frozen123]

thanks for update busoni
i think we can consider different solutions until everyone is satisfied,if u need donate to cover that lost,np for me