[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency

[humanitee]

I admit I'm a bit out of my technological depth here so this may be an obvious question but does a master node maintain anonymity?

A follow-up question if the answer is 'no': Could there be grounds for the prosecution of a master node operator for money laundering?

Behind TOR, yes.

As for your second question, mixing coins is not money laundering as far as I know, it's a privacy tool.

Ah ok, thanks. If the first question is resolved, the second doesn't really matter.

I was imagining that the issue could be with a legal system (in any country) defining "coin-mixing" as a money laundering tool. The master node operator is obscuring the transfer of money from one place to another. I'm not sure that saying "you can't prove that illegal money passed through my node" will convince a judge.

I'm going to quote myself because I did a double edit the same time you did your post.

double edit:
Going by this: http://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027&context=law_facpub

1) You would have to provide the service knowing that the other party was structuring/laundering (you wouldn't).
2) They would have to be able to prove through tracing many DarkSends that those parties even owned the coins. Next to impossible unless sybil attack somehow happens on a wide scale (highly unlikely from what I've read by Evan).
3) Most of those sections have to do with a user declaring their own money or a receiving business declaring the money, both of which would not apply to a master node.

[AnonyMint]

I admit I'm a bit out of my technological depth here so this may be an obvious question but does a master node maintain anonymity?

A follow-up question if the answer is 'no': Could there be grounds for the prosecution of a master node operator for money laundering?

This is a very good question.

Obviously the Masternode has no anonymity. I think you just identified a key weaknesses.

No one can predict what the government will rule. If Homelust ScrewUrity can create the TSA to let aspiring closet pedophiles put their hands down your kids' pants and jackoff in the viewing room to your wife's nude Infrared breasts, there is nothing they can't potentially do.

It would be much better if the ones doing the mixing are anonymous too.

[CHAOSiTEC]

Well, seems like we have someone unethical among us,

today at 11.30 AM and 1:30 PM Quebec time, someon decided to hack the dice game, and the wheel game, they have been emptied out...

i have lost 357 drk in this hack, and im in contact with digital ocean where one of the hacks where run from, and to nephax.net where the other was run from...

im covering those accounts on there with my own drk (which means that after tomorrow where the last extra lottery is being drawn from lotterymining, i will stop doing lotteries, since im now so low in drk that i will not use the last few that i have)

with the help of evan both wheel of fortune, and the dice game are now safe from timing attacks.


CHAOSiTEC

Edit: the dice game and wheel of fortune have been refunded, go play..

and remember 25% of all the profits go to darkcoin projects/bounties

the rest is used to fund other crazy ideas on how to make peoples lives a little richer...

[kaene]

The next stage of DarkSend

The design of Darkcoin is all about economic incentives, I've tried to bake as much of that in as possible. I've been thinking about the reliance on master nodes in our new design for securing the network and I see some room for improvement.

With the current design we will require 1000DRK to operate a master node. That requires you putting 1000DRK in a hotwallet (dangerous) only to collect the collateral fees which won't amount to much.

So what do we want?

- We want as many master nodes as possible (the more nodes the more secure the network)
- We want them to be profitable to run
- We want it to be very expensive investment to operate a master node

So I propose the following solution, each block the last master node will receive 10% of the mining reward (in addition to the reward given to the miner). So for example, if the mining reward was 19DRK the last master node will automatically receive 1.9DRK.

This also has some really great side effects:

- It creates a completely new type of investor that buys DRK and holds it (where as miners create dark coin and sell it for the most part)
- It adds a ton of full nodes to the network
- It creates demand and scarcity, which should provide a nice return for our investors

Also, these payments are completely secure. New blocks with the dividend payment made out to the incorrect master node will be rejected (the whole network knows who won the election).

At the present moment we have a chicken and egg problem. We need master nodes to support darksend and we don't want to go live with 1 or 2 master nodes. To solve this we will implement the election code into the main client, along with the payments to master nodes while DarkSend is still beta.

What type of return will you see?

- If there’s 1 capable master node, you’ll receive all payments 576*(AverageReward/10) per day

Capable Nodes, Daily Reward
1, 1094DRK
2, 547DKR
5, 218DRK
10, 109DRK
20, 54DRK
50, 21DRK
100, 11DRK

As you can see, we’ll quickly reach equilibrium with the price and at the same time this will create buying pressure raising the price more and causing the network to become increasingly secure.

Also, we can build our master node network now in the immediate. Users can buy the darkcoin needed to run one and they will just run the beta client. We'll open source the election code and hard fork to add the payments to master nodes in and our network will be secure by the time we're ready to do a full launch.

I really love the idea, thoughts?

What would happen if I have the same wallet in 2 or 3 computers? I guess they shouldn't all be able to act as a master node but only 1.

[eduffield]

The next stage of DarkSend

The design of Darkcoin is all about economic incentives, I've tried to bake as much of that in as possible. I've been thinking about the reliance on master nodes in our new design for securing the network and I see some room for improvement.

With the current design we will require 1000DRK to operate a master node. That requires you putting 1000DRK in a hotwallet (dangerous) only to collect the collateral fees which won't amount to much.

So what do we want?

- We want as many master nodes as possible (the more nodes the more secure the network)
- We want them to be profitable to run
- We want it to be very expensive investment to operate a master node

So I propose the following solution, each block the last master node will receive 10% of the mining reward (in addition to the reward given to the miner). So for example, if the mining reward was 19DRK the last master node will automatically receive 1.9DRK.

This also has some really great side effects:

- It creates a completely new type of investor that buys DRK and holds it (where as miners create dark coin and sell it for the most part)
- It adds a ton of full nodes to the network
- It creates demand and scarcity, which should provide a nice return for our investors

Also, these payments are completely secure. New blocks with the dividend payment made out to the incorrect master node will be rejected (the whole network knows who won the election).

At the present moment we have a chicken and egg problem. We need master nodes to support darksend and we don't want to go live with 1 or 2 master nodes. To solve this we will implement the election code into the main client, along with the payments to master nodes while DarkSend is still beta.

What type of return will you see?

- If there’s 1 capable master node, you’ll receive all payments 576*(AverageReward/10) per day

Capable Nodes, Daily Reward
1, 1094DRK
2, 547DKR
5, 218DRK
10, 109DRK
20, 54DRK
50, 21DRK
100, 11DRK

As you can see, we’ll quickly reach equilibrium with the price and at the same time this will create buying pressure raising the price more and causing the network to become increasingly secure.

Also, we can build our master node network now in the immediate. Users can buy the darkcoin needed to run one and they will just run the beta client. We'll open source the election code and hard fork to add the payments to master nodes in and our network will be secure by the time we're ready to do a full launch.

I really love the idea, thoughts?

What would happen if I have the same wallet in 2 or 3 computers? I guess they shouldn't all be able to act as a master node but only 1.

Yeah, they have the same "ticket" they're entering with. So 1 of them would act as master if selected.

[DieCommieScum]

The next stage of DarkSend

The design of Darkcoin is all about economic incentives, I've tried to bake as much of that in as possible. I've been thinking about the reliance on master nodes in our new design for securing the network and I see some room for improvement.

With the current design we will require 1000DRK to operate a master node. That requires you putting 1000DRK in a hotwallet (dangerous) only to collect the collateral fees which won't amount to much.

So what do we want?

- We want as many master nodes as possible (the more nodes the more secure the network)
- We want them to be profitable to run
- We want it to be very expensive investment to operate a master node

So I propose the following solution, each block the last master node will receive 10% of the mining reward (in addition to the reward given to the miner). So for example, if the mining reward was 19DRK the last master node will automatically receive 1.9DRK.

This also has some really great side effects:

- It creates a completely new type of investor that buys DRK and holds it (where as miners create dark coin and sell it for the most part)
- It adds a ton of full nodes to the network
- It creates demand and scarcity, which should provide a nice return for our investors

Also, these payments are completely secure. New blocks with the dividend payment made out to the incorrect master node will be rejected (the whole network knows who won the election).

At the present moment we have a chicken and egg problem. We need master nodes to support darksend and we don't want to go live with 1 or 2 master nodes. To solve this we will implement the election code into the main client, along with the payments to master nodes while DarkSend is still beta.

What type of return will you see?

- If there’s 1 capable master node, you’ll receive all payments 576*(AverageReward/10) per day

Capable Nodes, Daily Reward
1, 1094DRK
2, 547DKR
5, 218DRK
10, 109DRK
20, 54DRK
50, 21DRK
100, 11DRK

As you can see, we’ll quickly reach equilibrium with the price and at the same time this will create buying pressure raising the price more and causing the network to become increasingly secure.

Also, we can build our master node network now in the immediate. Users can buy the darkcoin needed to run one and they will just run the beta client. We'll open source the election code and hard fork to add the payments to master nodes in and our network will be secure by the time we're ready to do a full launch.

I really love the idea, thoughts?

Is there a binary for bitcoind to run as a master node on Linux? Or on Windows will the QT client work as a masternode? I can have 5 master nodes up this evening. I also need to know what exactly belongs in the .conf for this.

[eduffield]

Is there a binary for bitcoind to run as a master node on Linux? Or on Windows will the QT client work as a masternode? I can have 5 master nodes up this evening. I also need to know what exactly belongs in the .conf for this.

That's great, but I still need to write the election code and hard folk the mainnet to enable it. Soon 

[coins101]

did I just dream henryxx looking to buy 97btc worth of drk on irc? is that for real or just a prank?

[roslinpl]

Im ready to invest

Good! make some support and give some cash! Buy as many as you want!

[daddeo]

I have to admit, my head's spinning a bit from all the great discussions taking place over the last 20+ pages.
If I read correctly earlier, a Master node which is misbehaving is detected by the other Master nodes. What if a trust factor was incorporated in where a Master node is rewarded for behaving responsibly after a certain amount of time. For example: My single Master node which cost me 1000DRK to operate is legit for say 1 month. I get rewarded for "good behavior" by being allowed a second Master node for that same 1000DRK. Now I have two Master nodes that only require 500 DRK to operate. Maybe that scenario doesn't work from a technical standpoint. Maybe just decreasing the cost of Master node operation after x amount of time or x amount of blocks would allow trustworthy Master nodes to duplicate.

[AlexGR]

As I'm thinking more of it, perhaps the greatest weakness of the system is the requirement to have hundreds of thousands of DRKs online: If a network exploit is found at some point that allows the hacking of the master nodes, then every single node can be emptied of their money and a hacker will end up with something like half a million DRK... wallets and stuff are relatively safe due to the encryption, offline protection etc, but networks have a much weaker reputation: Exchanges, pools, even dice games -as reported above- are getting hacked.

Cryptoland and online money seem to be the hacker's paradise and the DRK master node network will be a multimillion dollar bounty for someone who finds a good exploit for the node daemons.

[AnonyMint]

As I'm thinking more of it, perhaps the greatest weakness of the system is the requirement to have hundreds of thousands of DRKs online: If a network exploit is found at some point that allows the hacking of the master nodes, then every single node can be emptied of their money and a hacker will end up with something like half a million DRK... wallets and stuff are relatively safe due to the encryption, offline protection etc, but networks have a much weaker reputation: Exchanges, pools, even dice games -as reported above- are getting hacked.

Cryptoland and online money seem to be the hacker's paradise and the DRK master node network will be a multimillion dollar bounty for someone who finds a good exploit for the node daemons.

If I understand correctly, only one Masternode is operating at each period time. And at most that Masternode can only steal the collateral payments, not your signed Darksend inputs since you only sign them to the transaction you agreed to.

There are other concerns expressed on this page about the Masternodes that look worthy of discussion.

[CHAOSiTEC]

As I'm thinking more of it, perhaps the greatest weakness of the system is the requirement to have hundreds of thousands of DRKs online: If a network exploit is found at some point that allows the hacking of the master nodes, then every single node can be emptied of their money and a hacker will end up with something like half a million DRK... wallets and stuff are relatively safe due to the encryption, offline protection etc, but networks have a much weaker reputation: Exchanges, pools, even dice games -as reported above- are getting hacked.

Cryptoland and online money seem to be the hacker's paradise and the DRK master node network will be a multimillion dollar bounty for someone who finds a good exploit for the node daemons.

If I understand correctly, only one Masternode is operating at each period time. And at most that Masternode can only steal the collateral payments, not your signed Darksend inputs since you only sign them to the transaction you agreed to.

There are other concerns expressed on this page about the Masternodes that look worthy of discussion.

this part is solved with the masternode cannot steal the collateral because only the next masternode can cash it for the 1 one

[illodin]

I can have 5 master nodes up this evening.

That's great, but I still need to write the election code and hard folk the mainnet to enable it. Soon 

Tomorrow?

 

[AlexGR]

As I'm thinking more of it, perhaps the greatest weakness of the system is the requirement to have hundreds of thousands of DRKs online: If a network exploit is found at some point that allows the hacking of the master nodes, then every single node can be emptied of their money and a hacker will end up with something like half a million DRK... wallets and stuff are relatively safe due to the encryption, offline protection etc, but networks have a much weaker reputation: Exchanges, pools, even dice games -as reported above- are getting hacked.

Cryptoland and online money seem to be the hacker's paradise and the DRK master node network will be a multimillion dollar bounty for someone who finds a good exploit for the node daemons.

If I understand correctly, only one Masternode is operating at each period time. And at most that Masternode can only steal the collateral payments, not your signed inputs since you only sign them to the transaction you agreed to.

There are other concerns expressed on this page about the Masternodes that look worthy of discussion.

Transaction-wise I'm clueless to comment on the problems as I do not really have a deep understanding of coinjoin and darksend. You, Evan and perhaps 2-3 more on the thread are like ten levels above the "mortals" when discussing these.

I'm trying to see problems that may arise from things that my reasoning can grasp, whether it is related to market operation, network operation, hacking incentives etc and mainly on a general or peripheral basis since my "under-the-hood" understanding is minimal.

With that out of the way, what I meant is related to the requirement of a DarkSend node to have a proposed 1000 DRK wallet to operate and its online exposure 24/7, in parallel with all the wallets of all other DarkSend nodes. Could this be a massive security risk for the network to hackers if a daemon exploit is found?

this part is solved with the masternode cannot steal the collateral because only the next masternode can cash it for the 1 one

Unless I have a wrong understanding, the collateral is a transaction related fee, not the 1000 DRKs for running a node... correct? If so, I'm talking about the 1000, not the tx related fees.

[CHAOSiTEC]

As I'm thinking more of it, perhaps the greatest weakness of the system is the requirement to have hundreds of thousands of DRKs online: If a network exploit is found at some point that allows the hacking of the master nodes, then every single node can be emptied of their money and a hacker will end up with something like half a million DRK... wallets and stuff are relatively safe due to the encryption, offline protection etc, but networks have a much weaker reputation: Exchanges, pools, even dice games -as reported above- are getting hacked.

Cryptoland and online money seem to be the hacker's paradise and the DRK master node network will be a multimillion dollar bounty for someone who finds a good exploit for the node daemons.

If I understand correctly, only one Masternode is operating at each period time. And at most that Masternode can only steal the collateral payments, not your signed inputs since you only sign them to the transaction you agreed to.

There are other concerns expressed on this page about the Masternodes that look worthy of discussion.

Transaction-wise I'm clueless to comment on the problems as I do not really have a deep understanding of coinjoin and darksend. You, Evan and perhaps 2-3 more on the thread are like ten levels above the "mortals" when discussing these.

I'm trying to see problems that may arise from things that my reasoning can grasp, whether it is related to market operation, network operation, hacking incentives etc and mainly on a general or peripheral basis since my "under-the-hood" understanding is minimal.

With that out of the way, what I meant is related to the requirement of a DarkSend node to have a proposed 1000 DRK wallet to operate and its online exposure 24/7, in parallel with all the wallets of all other DarkSend nodes. Could this be a massive security risk for the network to hackers if a daemon exploit is found?

this part is solved with the masternode cannot steal the collateral because only the next masternode can cash it for the 1 one

Unless I have a wrong understanding, the collateral is a transaction related fee, not the 1000 DRKs for running a node... correct? If so, I'm talking about the 1000, not the tx related fees.

the 1000 is the masternodes own money, and no one else in the transaction of a darksend can steal those

[AlexGR]

the 1000 is the masternodes own money, and no one else in the transaction of a darksend can steal those

So running a dark send node, with an online wallet attached containing 1000 DRKs, is 100% secure? The risk for exposing these 1000 DRKs is zero?

[CHAOSiTEC]

the 1000 is the masternodes own money, and no one else in the transaction of a darksend can steal those

So running a dark send node, with an online wallet attached containing 1000 DRKs, is 100% secure? The risk for exposing these 1000 DRKs is zero?

hmm i would think that having a encrypted wallet would be ok, as long as the value is 1000 drk..

[coins101]

the 1000 is the masternodes own money, and no one else in the transaction of a darksend can steal those

So running a dark send node, with an online wallet attached containing 1000 DRKs, is 100% secure? The risk for exposing these 1000 DRKs is zero?

hmm i would think that having a encrypted wallet would be ok, as long as the value is 1000 drk..

Very good encryption password.

Would also have to take backing-up more seriously.

[eduffield]

As I'm thinking more of it, perhaps the greatest weakness of the system is the requirement to have hundreds of thousands of DRKs online: If a network exploit is found at some point that allows the hacking of the master nodes, then every single node can be emptied of their money and a hacker will end up with something like half a million DRK... wallets and stuff are relatively safe due to the encryption, offline protection etc, but networks have a much weaker reputation: Exchanges, pools, even dice games -as reported above- are getting hacked.

Cryptoland and online money seem to be the hacker's paradise and the DRK master node network will be a multimillion dollar bounty for someone who finds a good exploit for the node daemons.

You're referring to the 1000DRK kept in the hot wallet right? All of the Bitcoin exchanges have began to switch to multisig setups that would require 2 of 3 of the different networks to be breached. I'm sure the same thing will happen for Darkcoin, we just need a good enough setup to protect the money.