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

[child_harold]

First, to own 50% of the masternodes currently you'd have to buy another 1240 nodes. If you got those at spot price it would be $3MM. But you won't, so you'd probably spend closer to $30MM. And when/if DRK is at a point where national agencies start getting interested, it's not going to be $2.39/DRK anymore.

Second, 50% is not some magic number wrt owning masternodes. Actually, 50% is not nearly enough to give any meaningful chance of deanonymizing anything. And even if you had 100% of the nodes, you couldn't deanonymize the transactions that have already happened, nor the future transactions that use funds that have been premixed earlier. Trying to corner the masternode network just requires a lot of effort and resources for questionable gains.

Fair point (other than the assumption that they do not already run a % of current MNs; which they could quite easily or equally not) what I am trying to understand is how we came to the conclusion that it is cheaper to crack encryption algos v.s. buying up enough MN to decrypt x% of TXs.

You cannot buy enough darkcoin to jeopardize the network.

1200ish MN's exist, if you wanted 50% of the MN network you'd need another 1,200,000 Darkcoins!

Buying this amount over any time period will have significant effect on the spot price.

As the buyer is clearly buying, sell walls would be removed and people become bullish. The price of Darkcoin would go so high the incentive for investors to set up new masternodes becomes more attractive, bringing more masternodes to the network that are not "Gov" owned.

If the government wanted to buy 1,200,000 darkcoin, it would send the market cap into the billions.

1) Would it be necessary for all MN's in the mixing rounds to be bad actors? Maybe just the "entry" and "exit" MN? Plus one in the middle?
2) Three-letter organizations don't necessarily have to pay for DRK (hacks, seizures etc)

MOST IMPORTANTLY

3) Even if there was only a 1% chance of your anon transaction getting de-anonymized by bad actors would you really take that chance? And if it were a 3% chance?

You take my point I'm sure.

[1714976450]

1714976450

[1714976450]

1714976450

[1714976450]

1714976450

[salmion]

I sure someone will dig up the percentages and it was incredibly lower than one percent. This is why we commissioned Kristov Atlas.

At this point you do sound more and more like a concern troll.

[illodin]

1) Would it be necessary for all MN's in the mixing rounds to be bad actors? Maybe just the "entry" and "exit" MN? Plus one in the middle?

Yes you need to control all the MN's taking part in the mixing.

2) Three-letter organizations don't necessarily have to pay for DRK (hacks, seizures etc)

True dat, and some people have been saying all along that we'd need to move nodes from Amazon et al. to independent operators. Currently people just run them where it's cheapest and easiest and where the step-by-step guides tell them to. When/if the price rises enough so the costs of running a node ($5 a month or $50 a month) doesn't matter anymore people will move I hope. And, if the price really goes skyhigh we'll be running our masternodes on our own datacenters.

3) Even if there was only a 1% chance of your anon transaction getting de-anonymized by bad actors would you really take that chance? And if it were a 3% chance?

Depends on the transaction. You could mix them again to make a relatively high 3% chance to go to 0.09%. And then once more to make it 0.0027%. And even then the party having the luck of "deanonymizing" that transaction, wouldn't likely have enough information to find out who I really am. All they would now have is a collection of inputs that I got from somewhere and that were sent to somewhere.



And to keep things in perspective, it's unclear if it is at all possible to make NSA resistant anonymity. They could have access to all personal computers/laptops already (and if not now, then in the very near future). They might even be recording all internet traffic right now. But to achieve anonymity that will keep regular police, banks, and criminals from finding out your finances, is very possible.

At this point you do sound more and more like a concern troll.

No, he just sounds like someone who is asking the questions he should be asking.

[child_harold]

I sure someone will dig up the percentages and it was incredibly lower than one percent. This is why we commissioned Kristov Atlas.

At this point you do sound more and more like a concern troll.

I can quite imagine I might be coming off that way, but Im not. It is admittedly a rather legitimate and serious concern so I think we can discredit trolling.

[BlockaFett]

I love Darksend but you have to realize it will be replaced once someone starts a zero knowledge proof coin.

While I've been working on DarkSend I've been thinking about this alot. You know what the problem is with a zero knowledge proof? There's a secret key that will be attacked by governments and it will eventually be cracked. That will make every transaction that ever happened in that blockchain cleartext and allow every future transaction to also be viewed as cleartext. I'm going to venture to say the government is working on quantum computers and such crypto can be solved with shor's algorithm. When they do, they're not going to tell anyone. So it's a giant honeypot.

DarkSend is immune to such attacks, all involved crypto functions could be cracked and the mixing is still done off blockchain by the masternodes. Off blockchain means that the information is lost and that's the only way to secure it, you can't do it with cryptography.

The fact that quantum computation is such a holy grail for governments, yet publicly they don't seem to be putting any time and resources into it and apparent progress is so pathetic, suggests they already have it.  So I hope DRK is fully secure in those circumstances.

[thelonecrouton]

1) Would it be necessary for all MN's in the mixing rounds to be bad actors? Maybe just the "entry" and "exit" MN? Plus one in the middle?
2) Three-letter organizations don't necessarily have to pay for DRK (hacks, seizures etc)

MOST IMPORTANTLY

3) Even if there was only a 1% chance of your anon transaction getting de-anonymized by bad actors would you really take that chance? And if it were a 3% chance?

You take my point I'm sure.

#1. There's no way of knowing which MNs are the 1st and last points, you'd need all or them.

#2. Forget about defeating the NSA/CIA/MOSSAD/etc. You're not equipped. Not even remotely. You have no fucking clue at all what you are up against. 3 letter agencies aren't going to cock about buying MNs or devising supercomputers to crack encryption. They are going to bundle you into a van and cut your genitals off. Or kidnap your children and cut them up in front of you.  

#3. You are 100x more likely to give yourself away via other channels than by having your DRK transactions traced.


Arguing about MN security when you could completely control the blockchain for a trivial cost thanks to centralised pools is obtuse.

[Sapereaude]

I love Darksend but you have to realize it will be replaced once someone starts a zero knowledge proof coin.

While I've been working on DarkSend I've been thinking about this alot. You know what the problem is with a zero knowledge proof? There's a secret key that will be attacked by governments and it will eventually be cracked. That will make every transaction that ever happened in that blockchain cleartext and allow every future transaction to also be viewed as cleartext. I'm going to venture to say the government is working on quantum computers and such crypto can be solved with shor's algorithm. When they do, they're not going to tell anyone. So it's a giant honeypot.

DarkSend is immune to such attacks, all involved crypto functions could be cracked and the mixing is still done off blockchain by the masternodes. Off blockchain means that the information is lost and that's the only way to secure it, you can't do it with cryptography.

The fact that quantum computation is such a holy grail for governments, yet publicly they don't seem to be putting any time and resources into it and apparent progress is so pathetic, suggests they already have it.  So I hope DRK is fully secure in those circumstances.

I know that Boeing already have a quantum computer, so that must mean others places have them as well..

[toknormal]

If I was strategy commander for Darkcoin (which I'm not by the way   ), I'd create some kind of contingency whereupon the mining majority could somehow protect the masternode majority in some kind of symbiotic dependency.

i.e. to subvert the masternode population you'd have to subvert the mining population as well.

I imagine that to do this, the mining population would somehow have to have an awareness of what code the masternodes "should be running" and shutdown bad actors (or just ignore them).

I don't know - maybe this is the way it already works, but I've always wondered how secure the masternode network is given that there's so few of them compared to he mining population.

Forget the cost of subversion - a few $million is peanuts. If cost is the only barrier to disruption then there's no barrier. There has to be some kind of decentralised protection I think.

[MyFarm]

At this point you do sound more and more like a concern troll.

No he's not.  They're excellent questions and DRK should have transparent answers for him.  DRK is a truly incredible currency that will no doubt improve over time.  If we were a scam coin, then such questions would need to be attacked with spin.  But as we're as legit as they come, there's nothing wrong with being transparent about DRK's potential limitations and how they're going to be rectified over time.  That breeds trust within the community.

[thelonecrouton]

If I was strategy commander for Darkcoin (which I'm not by the way   ), I'd create some kind of contingency whereupon the mining majority could somehow protect the masternode majority in some kind of symbiotic dependency.

i.e. to subvert the masternode population you'd have to subvert the mining population as well.

I imagine that to do this, the mining population would somehow have to have an awareness of what code the masternodes "should be running" and shutdown bad actors (or just ignore them).

I don't know - maybe this is the way it already works, but I've always wondered how secure the masternode network is given that there's so few of them compared to he mining population.

Forget the cost of subversion - a few $million is peanuts. If cost is the only barrier to disruption then there's no barrier. There has to be some kind of decentralised protection I think.

You have that utterly arse backwards.

90% of mining goes through 5 pools. And you would need at most 3 of them to control or destroy the coin.

Mining provides exactly fuck all security.

[child_harold]

1) Would it be necessary for all MN's in the mixing rounds to be bad actors? Maybe just the "entry" and "exit" MN? Plus one in the middle?

Yes you need to control all the MN's taking part in the mixing.

2) Three-letter organizations don't necessarily have to pay for DRK (hacks, seizures etc)

True dat, and some people have been saying all along that we'd need to move nodes from Amazon et al. to independent operators. Currently people just run them where it's cheapest and easiest and where the step-by-step guides tell them to. When/if the price rises enough so the costs of running a node ($5 a month or $50 a month) doesn't matter anymore people will move I hope. And, if the price really goes skyhigh we'll be running our masternodes on our own datacenters.

3) Even if there was only a 1% chance of your anon transaction getting de-anonymized by bad actors would you really take that chance? And if it were a 3% chance?

Depends on the transaction. You could mix them again to make a relatively high 3% chance to go to 0.09%. And then once more to make it 0.0027%. And even then the party having the luck of "deanonymizing" that transaction, wouldn't likely have enough information to find out who I really am. All they would now have is a collection of inputs that I got from somewhere and that were sent to somewhere.



And to keep things in perspective, it's unclear if it is at all possible to make NSA resistant anonymity. They could have access to all personal computers/laptops already (and if not now, then in the very near future). They might even be recording all internet traffic right now. But to achieve anonymity that will keep regular police, banks, and criminals from finding out your finances, is very possible.

At this point you do sound more and more like a concern troll.

No, he just sounds like someone who is asking the questions he should be asking.

^thx

Your comment about Amazon made me think… of course you probably don't even need to buy darkcoin and set up the MN's. Powning the MN achieves the same result. And yeah, having Amazon (or U.S. based outfits) could be unwise moving into the future.

[illodin]

Mining provides exactly fuck all security.

Yea, just ask BCX, he can timewarp any coin.

[Cryptosis]

Even if someone could somehow buy the amount of drk to setup 1250 masternodes, they would then have tongonand setup 1250 masternodes all with their own ips. The task of doing such for the avg person would near impossible. Let's say they bought 1250 VPS to run their masternodes @5$/month plus the cost of the drk to begin with, I would say this happening are next to nil. Maybe a gov org could pull it off but I highly doubt it and as the network grows the chance fades away. They would have to come up with another way like spoofing 1250 mn or some other type of exploit.

[MyFarm]

As I have a little experience in venture capital, let me provide some perspective.  If Evan was for some reason going to seek venture capital, he would speak to someone (or a group of people) who would be asking a lot of hard questions.  Many of those questions would be about risk and limitations.  If Evan didn't have good answers for what the risks and limitations of DRK were, there's no way in hell he would ever see a dime.  

Smart investors know that there is risk in any investment.  They want to know that those in charge are aware of them and have sound plans to mitigate those risks.  As DRK begins to gain broader exposure and interest, I suggest this community answer the difficult questions with maturity.  Saying something along the lines of, "That's a good question and beyond my technical knowledge, but we'll make sure [member of the dev team] sees it and answers it for you" is perfectly acceptable.

With all that said, it may be time that DRK begins to present itself in a more marketable way.  No, I'm not saying name change, but present its strengths and weaknesses in a manner that will garner greater interest among those with deep pockets.

[robboman]

DRK has some similarities to TOR with how the mixing works. While it's probably not perfect it's a huge gain in anonymity over using BTC.

How many MM are used during mixing?

[salmion]

At this point you do sound more and more like a concern troll.

No he's not.  They're excellent questions and DRK should have transparent answers for him.  DRK is a truly incredible currency that will no doubt improve over time.  If we were a scam coin, then such questions would need to be attacked with spin.  But as we're as legit as they come, there's nothing wrong with being transparent about DRK's potential limitations and how they're going to be rectified over time.  That breeds trust within the community.

Well it has indeed got an interesting conversation going. And dark has always been Question Everything.

But troll check doesn't hurt either

[thelonecrouton]

How many MM are used during mixing?

Each round of mixing happens via one Masternode chosen at random from the total number, with (currently, IIRC) two other participant mixers. You may repeat this process between 2 and 8 times via the setting in the wallet, or as often as you like by taking coins already mixed through 8 rounds and repeating the process.

[Ignition75]

As I have a little experience in venture capital, let me provide some perspective.  If Evan was for some reason going to seek venture capital, he would speak to someone (or a group of people) who would be asking a lot of hard questions.  Many of those questions would be about risk and limitations.  If Evan didn't have good answers for what the risks and limitations of DRK were, there's no way in hell he would ever see a dime.  

Smart investors know that there is risk in any investment.  They want to know that those in charge are aware of them and have sound plans to mitigate those risks.  As DRK begins to gain broader exposure and interest, I suggest this community answer the difficult questions with maturity.  Saying something along the lines of, "That's a good question and beyond my technical knowledge, but we'll make sure [member of the dev team] sees it and answers it for you" is perfectly acceptable.

With all that said, it may be time that DRK begins to present itself in a more marketable way.  No, I'm not saying name change, but present its strengths and weaknesses in a manner that will garner greater interest among those with deep pockets.

Good post.  I was really concerned about Darks image a few months ago and I wanted to moderate this thread so we could control the brand a little more effectively.

Things have settled down now, investors just need to remember there are a lot of kids on this thread and plenty of clowns.

For serious discussions about risks and issues there's plenty of good discussion on the DarkCoinTalk forums as well.

[robboman]

How many MM are used during mixing?

Each round of mixing happens via one Masternode chosen at random from the total number, with (currently, IIRC)two other participant mixers. You may repeat this process between 2 and 8 times via the setting in the wallet, or as often as you like by taking coins already mixed through 8 rounds and repeating the process.

Thanks for the reply! I'm a noob when it comes to drk but I find it a very interesting coin

So it it using 3 MN's during a mixing process, or 1 like u said?

8 rounds of mixing would mean 8 rounds at the same mixer, or 8 different ones?

Thanks

[salmion]

How many MM are used during mixing?

Each round of mixing happens via one Masternode chosen at random from the total number, with (currently, IIRC)two other participant mixers. You may repeat this process between 2 and 8 times via the setting in the wallet, or as often as you like by taking coins already mixed through 8 rounds and repeating the process.

Thanks for the reply! I'm a noob when it comes to drk but I find it a very interesting coin

So it it using 3 MN's during a mixing process, or 1 like u said?

8 rounds of mixing would mean 8 rounds at the same mixer, or 8 different ones?

Thanks

As far as I know three different partners for each round.