|
FreedomCoin
|
 |
July 31, 2014, 11:37:19 AM |
|
~~
Give me your source first. All the pros and cons listed, you should have source of. Not specific one. +1, will track them down. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Each block is stacked on top of the previous one. Adding another block to the top makes all lower blocks more difficult to remove: there is more "weight" above each block. A transaction in a block 6 blocks deep (6 confirmations) will be very difficult to remove.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
salmion
|
|
July 31, 2014, 11:38:39 AM |
|
I still don't get why people think that using a pretty popular OS (linux) for mining is some how instamining? You can get linux for free and set it up in under an hour lol There is limited support for Linux mining, i experienced this first hand when trying to set up my rigs to mine in Ubuntu. Got lots of weird errors and was unable to get any support for them. With Windows the learning curve is much less. I don't have a Doze machine.. a lot of coins release doze only to start but I don't shout scam? As far as I know most miners use linux. Academic anyway at this point.. |
|
|
|
|
|
kiindje
|
|
July 31, 2014, 11:50:17 AM |
|
If the new DarkTransit (TM) system is opened up as I hope it will be, MN earnings from block rewards are going to become the least part of a Masternode operator's revenue stream.  My advice to fellow Masternodeers - start thinking about upgrading your server specs.  could you explain this? what other earnings from MN could you expect? will you get a part of the tx fee as well? |
|
|
|
|
AlexGR
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1049
|
|
July 31, 2014, 11:53:44 AM |
|
I still don't get why people think that using a pretty popular OS (linux) for mining is some how instamining? You can get linux for free and set it up in under an hour lol There is limited support for Linux mining, i experienced this first hand when trying to set up my rigs to mine in Ubuntu. Got lots of weird errors and was unable to get any support for them. With Windows the learning curve is much less. Most cpu miners are using linux and those who chase new coin launches for CPU coins are usually on Xeon multi-core clusters. |
|
|
|
|
|
FreedomCoin
|
|
July 31, 2014, 12:18:05 PM |
|
I still don't get why people think that using a pretty popular OS (linux) for mining is some how instamining? You can get linux for free and set it up in under an hour lol There is limited support for Linux mining, i experienced this first hand when trying to set up my rigs to mine in Ubuntu. Got lots of weird errors and was unable to get any support for them. With Windows the learning curve is much less. Most cpu miners are using linux and those who chase new coin launches for CPU coins are usually on Xeon multi-core clusters. That would make sense, because nearly all the problems i was having in linux was graphics card drivers.. maybe CPU mining is easy in linux. |
|
|
|
|
salmion
|
|
July 31, 2014, 12:22:16 PM |
|
I still don't get why people think that using a pretty popular OS (linux) for mining is some how instamining? You can get linux for free and set it up in under an hour lol There is limited support for Linux mining, i experienced this first hand when trying to set up my rigs to mine in Ubuntu. Got lots of weird errors and was unable to get any support for them. With Windows the learning curve is much less. Most cpu miners are using linux and those who chase new coin launches for CPU coins are usually on Xeon multi-core clusters. That would make sense, because nearly all the problems i was having in linux was graphics card drivers.. maybe CPU mining is easy in linux. Were you using 14.04? I upgraded to 14.04 had my first massive clusterfuck of drivers problems and am now downgrading to 12.04 where everything works like it should... |
|
|
|
|
tungfa
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1023
|
|
July 31, 2014, 12:38:58 PM |
|
The entire cloak coin supply was instamined in 7 days. and development is open and transparent. Source on the instamine, if true i will add it to the cons? And last i checked the Darksend protocol was closed source, due to Evan not wanting the code stolen and used in another coin. that whole Cloakcoin thing has NOTHING to do here take it somewhere else please !! |
|
|
|
|
|
Scriptiee
|
|
July 31, 2014, 12:44:49 PM |
|
The entire cloak coin supply was instamined in 7 days. and development is open and transparent. Source on the instamine, if true i will add it to the cons? And last i checked the Darksend protocol was closed source, due to Evan not wanting the code stolen and used in another coin. that whole Cloakcoin thing has NOTHING to do here take it somewhere else please !! Feel the same way. That thread will end up with people calling each other names and pointing out why their coins is superior with one line sentences without any proof/facts to back these up. Basically will turn into pissing contest.... pointless |
|
|
|
|
|
illodin
|
|
July 31, 2014, 01:09:58 PM |
|
Regarding ddos attack vector against the masternode network,
let's assume we have 1000 masternodes at some point (this is a low end safe estimate imo), and an adversary has accumulated 100 masternodes. Ok we know this itself is not nearly enough to spy on the network, but let's say the attacker decides to ddos the other 900 nodes. Most nodes don't have any ddos protection, and will be taken out. Some nodes will have protection, and/or will be quickly restarted on another IP. So let's say there are now 200 nodes of which the attacker controls 100.
Suggestion:
The wallet would keep track of the number of running masternodes, and if the number decreases rapidly (like the number is 50% less than last time the wallet was running), it would display a warning when trying to denominate and continue normally after the number of the running nodes has returned to normal. Usually ddos attacks don't last long, and this would prevent the adversary from directing all the traffic to his own nodes.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freckleg
|
|
July 31, 2014, 01:22:57 PM |
|
Regarding ddos attack vector against the masternode network,
let's assume we have 1000 masternodes at some point (this is a low end safe estimate imo), and an adversary has accumulated 100 masternodes. Ok we know this itself is not nearly enough to spy on the network, but let's say the attacker decides to ddos the other 900 nodes. Most nodes don't have any ddos protection, and will be taken out. Some nodes will have protection, and/or will be quickly restarted on another IP. So let's say there are now 200 nodes of which the attacker controls 100.
Suggestion:
The wallet would keep track of the number of running masternodes, and if the number decreases rapidly (like the number is 50% less than last time the wallet was running), it would display a warning when trying to denominate and continue normally after the number of the running nodes has returned to normal. Usually ddos attacks don't last long, and this would prevent the adversary from directing all the traffic to his own nodes.
Thoughts?
The possibility someone is able to ddos a lot of the master nodes, and has the funds to run a lot of them them selves is highly unlikely or even impossible. A more feasible scenario is someone setting up 5000 nodes at once... Oh wait there aren't enough coins for that ;-) |
|
|
|
|
|
Ozziecoin
|
|
July 31, 2014, 01:34:27 PM |
|
The possibility someone is able to ddos a lot of the master nodes, and has the funds to run a lot of them them selves is highly unlikely or even impossible.
A more feasible scenario is someone setting up 5000 nodes at once... Oh wait there aren't enough coins for that ;-)
This is right. Pretty difficult to take down 900 MNs in the network. There are protections built into the standard satoshi client. |
|
|
|
|
illodin
|
|
July 31, 2014, 01:40:19 PM |
|
The possibility someone is able to ddos a lot of the master nodes, and has the funds to run a lot of them them selves is highly unlikely or even impossible.
A more feasible scenario is someone setting up 5000 nodes at once... Oh wait there aren't enough coins for that ;-)
This is right. Pretty difficult to take down 900 MNs in the network. There are protections built into the standard satoshi client. Difficult yes, but not impossible. Obviously this is only a concern against powerful three-letter-acronyms and police states. There's no such thing as being overly paranoid when it comes to privacy.  |
|
|
|
|
thelonecrouton
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 966
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 31, 2014, 01:40:43 PM |
|
Regarding ddos attack vector against the masternode network,
let's assume we have 1000 masternodes at some point (this is a low end safe estimate imo), and an adversary has accumulated 100 masternodes. Ok we know this itself is not nearly enough to spy on the network, but let's say the attacker decides to ddos the other 900 nodes. Most nodes don't have any ddos protection, and will be taken out. Some nodes will have protection, and/or will be quickly restarted on another IP. So let's say there are now 200 nodes of which the attacker controls 100.
Suggestion:
The wallet would keep track of the number of running masternodes, and if the number decreases rapidly (like the number is 50% less than last time the wallet was running), it would display a warning when trying to denominate and continue normally after the number of the running nodes has returned to normal. Usually ddos attacks don't last long, and this would prevent the adversary from directing all the traffic to his own nodes.
Thoughts?
Network status info and health warnings are trivial to add to the wallet. I know because I'm doing it:  Masternode monitoring getting easier by the day... |
|
|
|
|
|
Ozziecoin
|
|
July 31, 2014, 01:46:37 PM |
|
The possibility someone is able to ddos a lot of the master nodes, and has the funds to run a lot of them them selves is highly unlikely or even impossible.
A more feasible scenario is someone setting up 5000 nodes at once... Oh wait there aren't enough coins for that ;-)
This is right. Pretty difficult to take down 900 MNs in the network. There are protections built into the standard satoshi client. Difficult yes, but not impossible. Obviously this is only a concern against powerful three-letter-acronyms and police states. There's no such thing as being overly paranoid when it comes to privacy. I believe bitcoind is very DDOS resistant and so is Darkcoin as a consequence. Not sure about monero however. |
|
|
|
|
joelpina
|
|
July 31, 2014, 01:54:26 PM |
|
Wow your site looks great best interface I have seen so far this is a clever step adding darkcoin as market pair.. I will deposit some dark and try it out! |
|
|
|
|
|
Scriptiee
|
|
July 31, 2014, 01:57:20 PM |
|
Wow your site looks great best interface I have seen so far this is a clever step adding darkcoin as market pair.. I will deposit some dark and try it out! You better do a search on lazycoins before trusting it with your crypto |
|
|
|
|
|
illodin
|
|
July 31, 2014, 02:06:14 PM |
|
I believe bitcoind is very DDOS resistant and so is Darkcoin as a consequence. Not sure about monero however. 4. and 5. (no clue how this relates to 5) - collusion on its own is irrelevant. Of course it will be ineffectual. It would always be coupled with the compromise or the DDoSing of additional "masternodes". In such an event, the number of available masternodes is massively reduced, which means the the little Google spreadsheet is incorrect. Many hosts will null-route a dedicated server (even more so a VPS) if it is experiencing a DDoS. Other attacks such as a DDoS group constantly requesting a stream of blocks from a masternode would lead to its traffic exceeding normal use and massive traffic bills. Similarly, a DDoS group could broadcast thousands of bad blocks a second to a masternode, leading to it chewing through CPU cycles doing very heavy X11 verifications, ultimately leading to it becoming inaccessible or being killed by the oomkiller. Those are just off the top of my head, of course, and the attack stands regardless of whether these specific scenarios can be mitigated against.
Refreshing to read opinions of someone who actually has a clue instead of crypto noobs hyping their vapor buzzwords. I consider myself to be crypto noob as well, however: What if the Darkcoin wallet was monitoring the state of the network, and if the running masternode count fell for example 50% in a short period of time, it would stop denominating funds (denomination is the anonymization process which runs in the background). This wouldn't affect people sending or receiving coins because they already have them denominated/anonymized. It would only prevent people from re-sending received funds during this ddos period. Every other coin has to use nodes as well, and they can be ddos attacked which can halt the network for the duration of the attack. It's not only Darkcoin that is susceptible to ddos. |
|
|
|
|
|
joelpina
|
|
July 31, 2014, 02:08:44 PM |
|
Wow your site looks great best interface I have seen so far this is a clever step adding darkcoin as market pair.. I will deposit some dark and try it out! You better do a search on lazycoins before trusting it with your crypto They have been around since Jan and been in development.. They are legit and UK based, you find all the info at companies house. |
|
|
|
|
|
Scriptiee
|
|
July 31, 2014, 02:37:25 PM |
|
Wow your site looks great best interface I have seen so far this is a clever step adding darkcoin as market pair.. I will deposit some dark and try it out! You better do a search on lazycoins before trusting it with your crypto They have been around since Jan and been in development.. They are legit and UK based, you find all the info at companies house. Search for user reviews, I mean BFL is "legit" company too you know.... And tbh looking at your reply it looks like you are affiliated with them in some way and help them "advertise" their services. You jumped quite quickly to defend them. |
|
|
|
|
thelonecrouton
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 966
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 31, 2014, 02:56:42 PM |
|
I believe bitcoind is very DDOS resistant and so is Darkcoin as a consequence. Not sure about monero however. 4. and 5. (no clue how this relates to 5) - collusion on its own is irrelevant. Of course it will be ineffectual. It would always be coupled with the compromise or the DDoSing of additional "masternodes". In such an event, the number of available masternodes is massively reduced, which means the the little Google spreadsheet is incorrect. Many hosts will null-route a dedicated server (even more so a VPS) if it is experiencing a DDoS. Other attacks such as a DDoS group constantly requesting a stream of blocks from a masternode would lead to its traffic exceeding normal use and massive traffic bills. Similarly, a DDoS group could broadcast thousands of bad blocks a second to a masternode, leading to it chewing through CPU cycles doing very heavy X11 verifications, ultimately leading to it becoming inaccessible or being killed by the oomkiller. Those are just off the top of my head, of course, and the attack stands regardless of whether these specific scenarios can be mitigated against.
Refreshing to read opinions of someone who actually has a clue instead of crypto noobs hyping their vapor buzzwords. I consider myself to be crypto noob as well, however: What if the Darkcoin wallet was monitoring the state of the network, and if the running masternode count fell for example 50% in a short period of time, it would stop denominating funds (denomination is the anonymization process which runs in the background). This wouldn't affect people sending or receiving coins because they already have them denominated/anonymized. It would only prevent people from re-sending received funds during this ddos period. Every other coin has to use nodes as well, and they can be ddos attacked which can halt the network for the duration of the attack. It's not only Darkcoin that is susceptible to ddos. Masternodes do provide a nice easily identified target - I think some effort on testnet is needed at some point soon, maybe after RC4 release, to try and break testnet MNs with such attacks and figure out what we can implement to mitigate them, because we can't stop them. I don't know a lot about it, maybe we have a white hat among us who can assist? |
|
|
|
|
|
