[BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed Since 2014

[Normandoyle]

I am just a simple C programmer

James

P.S. The fundraising idea did not work out, but this has nothing to do with the tech. SuperNET is not a one dimensional thing.

James, I just wish you could support BBR for what it is and not get it intertwined in SuperNET. I wish you all the best.

you really dont understand...

I am supporting BBR for what it is.

One part of SuperNET is as a network and connecting different crypto's is what it does. Since BBR is a crypto, connecting to it is part of what SuperNET does. Once it is properly connected, then all of SuperNET is able to connect to BBR.

so, think of it like a cellphone network where each network can only call phones in its network. vodaphone vs ATT vs Tmobile
imagine that you cant call from vodaphone to ATT, or from any network to another. this is what crypto is now.

now the SuperNET allows all the networks to talk to each other. So this makes the vodaphone, ATT and Tmobile phones all get the ability they didnt have before. Regardless of what vodaphone thinks of ATT, how is it worse off by having the option of being able to call users from the other network?

this is what "intertwined with SuperNET" is. Do you not want BBR to be connected to the other users? You want BBR island?

James

awesome to see you again, James. Holding onto my jl777hodls like they're diamonds!

[slapper]

I am just a simple C programmer

James

P.S. The fundraising idea did not work out, but this has nothing to do with the tech. SuperNET is not a one dimensional thing.

James, I just wish you could support BBR for what it is and not get it intertwined in SuperNET. I wish you all the best.

What are you talking about?  Intertwined with SuperNet?  BBR was fading fast before the SuperNet announcement.  It was falling out of the top 100 on CMC.  If anything the SuperNet alliance has helped BBR.  Do you want to go back in time?  If your so smart then why don't you lay out a plan for BBR to be successful.  At this point in time and under these current conditions, being a core coin in SuperNet is a good thing.  BBR was unable to get any traction on it's own despite being the most advanced Cryptonote coin with the best dev.  BBR needs allies because of people like Reptile, the self appointed ruler of the Monero kingdom trying to buy Monero a first place spot and doing anything he can to destroy BBR because he put all his eggs in the XMR basket and it isn't working out like he planned.     

Some people.

Your (sic) extrapolating. BBR does need allies and supporters. Does it need MallaNET to do so?

[slapper]

I am just a simple C programmer

James

P.S. The fundraising idea did not work out, but this has nothing to do with the tech. SuperNET is not a one dimensional thing.

James, I just wish you could support BBR for what it is and not get it intertwined in SuperNET. I wish you all the best.

you really dont understand...

I am supporting BBR for what it is.

One part of SuperNET is as a network and connecting different crypto's is what it does. Since BBR is a crypto, connecting to it is part of what SuperNET does. Once it is properly connected, then all of SuperNET is able to connect to BBR.

so, think of it like a cellphone network where each network can only call phones in its network. vodaphone vs ATT vs Tmobile
imagine that you cant call from vodaphone to ATT, or from any network to another. this is what crypto is now.

now the SuperNET allows all the networks to talk to each other. So this makes the vodaphone, ATT and Tmobile phones all get the ability they didnt have before. Regardless of what vodaphone thinks of ATT, how is it worse off by having the option of being able to call users from the other network?

this is what "intertwined with SuperNET" is. Do you not want BBR to be connected to the other users? You want BBR island?

James

What is the incentive for holding BBR then if I can get the functionality via SuperNET?

Edit: And let me guess, SuperNET will replenish BBR holdings from time to time once it's spent, acting as a "centralized" shop like multipools  Is that what we need for BBR?

[otila]

            cipherids = (password % NUM_CIPHERS);  // choose one of 18 ciphers
8<
The following are the ciphers:
    "aes","blowfish","xtea","rc5","rc6","saferp","twofish","safer_k64","safer_sk64","safer_k128",
    "safer_sk128","rc2","des3","cast5","noekeon","skipjack","khazad","anubis","rijndael"

But why?

Why not just AES? And do you realize how much RC2 sucks, and SAFER-(S)K64 has 64 bit key size?

[jl777]

            cipherids = (password % NUM_CIPHERS);  // choose one of 18 ciphers
8<
The following are the ciphers:
    "aes","blowfish","xtea","rc5","rc6","saferp","twofish","safer_k64","safer_sk64","safer_k128",
    "safer_sk128","rc2","des3","cast5","noekeon","skipjack","khazad","anubis","rijndael"

But why?

Why not just AES? And do you realize how much RC2 sucks, and SAFER-(S)K64 has 64 bit key size?

does having different ciphers hurt? it allows short (user rememberable passwords to "salt" things)
unless any of these ciphers have been cracked, using them means that all the ciphers would need to be cracked.
using just AES means if AES is cracked then all the files are cracked.

so is having a sucky RC2 and a weak 64 bit layer in addition to AES worse than just AES?

[jl777]

I am just a simple C programmer

James

P.S. The fundraising idea did not work out, but this has nothing to do with the tech. SuperNET is not a one dimensional thing.

James, I just wish you could support BBR for what it is and not get it intertwined in SuperNET. I wish you all the best.

you really dont understand...

I am supporting BBR for what it is.

One part of SuperNET is as a network and connecting different crypto's is what it does. Since BBR is a crypto, connecting to it is part of what SuperNET does. Once it is properly connected, then all of SuperNET is able to connect to BBR.

so, think of it like a cellphone network where each network can only call phones in its network. vodaphone vs ATT vs Tmobile
imagine that you cant call from vodaphone to ATT, or from any network to another. this is what crypto is now.

now the SuperNET allows all the networks to talk to each other. So this makes the vodaphone, ATT and Tmobile phones all get the ability they didnt have before. Regardless of what vodaphone thinks of ATT, how is it worse off by having the option of being able to call users from the other network?

this is what "intertwined with SuperNET" is. Do you not want BBR to be connected to the other users? You want BBR island?

James

What is the incentive for holding BBR then if I can get the functionality via SuperNET?

Edit: And let me guess, SuperNET will replenish BBR holdings from time to time once it's spent, acting as a "centralized" shop like multipools  Is that what we need for BBR?

without BBR you cant use the BBR.
SuperNET is NOT a coin. do you understand this?
it is the network that binds the coins
if people on the SuperNET want to use cryptonote functionality, then they would use BBR in this process. How can you take BBR out of this equation?

[otila]

            cipherids = (password % NUM_CIPHERS);  // choose one of 18 ciphers
8<
The following are the ciphers:
    "aes","blowfish","xtea","rc5","rc6","saferp","twofish","safer_k64","safer_sk64","safer_k128",
    "safer_sk128","rc2","des3","cast5","noekeon","skipjack","khazad","anubis","rijndael"

But why?

Why not just AES? And do you realize how much RC2 sucks, and SAFER-(S)K64 has 64 bit key size?

does having different ciphers hurt? it allows short (user rememberable passwords to "salt" things)
unless any of these ciphers have been cracked, using them means that all the ciphers would need to be cracked.
using just AES means if AES is cracked then all the files are cracked.

so is having a sucky RC2 and a weak 64 bit layer in addition to AES worse than just AES?

cipherids = (password % NUM_CIPHERS);
cipherids and password are not used inside the loop, who knows what it's supposed to do.
And how do you calculate modulus of char*? password does not change, so cipherids is the same, too.

What are you doing, encrypting the same plaintext 18 times with different ciphers?
Besides bloating the code, it would be over 100 times slower than just using AES (+AES-NI), and think if someone wants to reimplement this part of the code using Haskell or something

[jl777]

           cipherids = (password % NUM_CIPHERS);  // choose one of 18 ciphers
8<
The following are the ciphers:
    "aes","blowfish","xtea","rc5","rc6","saferp","twofish","safer_k64","safer_sk64","safer_k128",
    "safer_sk128","rc2","des3","cast5","noekeon","skipjack","khazad","anubis","rijndael"

But why?

Why not just AES? And do you realize how much RC2 sucks, and SAFER-(S)K64 has 64 bit key size?

does having different ciphers hurt? it allows short (user rememberable passwords to "salt" things)
unless any of these ciphers have been cracked, using them means that all the ciphers would need to be cracked.
using just AES means if AES is cracked then all the files are cracked.

so is having a sucky RC2 and a weak 64 bit layer in addition to AES worse than just AES?

cipherids = (password % NUM_CIPHERS);
cipherids and password are not used inside the loop, who knows what it's supposed to do.
And how do you calculate modulus of char*? password does not change, so cipherids is the same, too.

What are you doing, encrypting the same plaintext 18 times with different ciphers?
Besides bloating the code, it would be over 100 times slower than just using AES (+AES-NI), and think if someone wants to reimplement this part of the code using Haskell or something

i simplified the code before posting:

Code:

            (*cipheridsp)[i]= (password[i] % NUM_CIPHERS);

it uses the ascii char val  to choose the cipher to use. so if you have a 4 char pin code, this will map to using 4 of the ciphers. I apply it iteratively to the output of the previous cipher.

not sure how even 18 times becomes over 100 times slower, maybe AES is 10 times faster? if you like AES just use a one char pin code that maps to AES. it is up to the user. anyway the code is already done and it didnt bloat things that much.

James

here is the inner loop that applies the ciphers:

Code:

    for (j=0; j<n; j++)
    {
        i = (decrypt != 0) ? (n-1-j) : j;
        cipher_idx = (cipherids[i] % NUM_CIPHERS);
        ivsize = cipher_descriptor[cipher_idx].block_length;
        ks = (int32_t)hash_descriptor[hash_idx].hashsize;
        if ( cipher_descriptor[cipher_idx].keysize(&ks) != CRYPT_OK )
        {
            printf("ciphers_codec: Invalid keysize???\n");
            return(0);
        }
        outlen = sizeof(key);
        if ( (errno= hash_memory(hash_idx,(uint8_t *)privkeys[i],strlen(privkeys[i]),key,&outlen)) != CRYPT_OK )
        {
            printf("ciphers_codec: Error hashing key: %s\n",error_to_string(errno));
            return(0);
        }
        origlen = len;
        if ( decrypt != 0 )
            ptr = decrypt_cipher(cipher_idx,key,ks,(int32_t)ivsize,data,&len);
        else
            ptr = encrypt_cipher(cipher_idx,key,ks,(int32_t)ivsize,data,&len);
         }
        if ( tmpptr != 0 )
            free(tmpptr);
        tmpptr = data = ptr;
    }

[windjc]

I am just a simple C programmer

James

P.S. The fundraising idea did not work out, but this has nothing to do with the tech. SuperNET is not a one dimensional thing.

James, I just wish you could support BBR for what it is and not get it intertwined in SuperNET. I wish you all the best.

you really dont understand...

I am supporting BBR for what it is.

One part of SuperNET is as a network and connecting different crypto's is what it does. Since BBR is a crypto, connecting to it is part of what SuperNET does. Once it is properly connected, then all of SuperNET is able to connect to BBR.

so, think of it like a cellphone network where each network can only call phones in its network. vodaphone vs ATT vs Tmobile
imagine that you cant call from vodaphone to ATT, or from any network to another. this is what crypto is now.

now the SuperNET allows all the networks to talk to each other. So this makes the vodaphone, ATT and Tmobile phones all get the ability they didnt have before. Regardless of what vodaphone thinks of ATT, how is it worse off by having the option of being able to call users from the other network?

this is what "intertwined with SuperNET" is. Do you not want BBR to be connected to the other users? You want BBR island?

James

What is the incentive for holding BBR then if I can get the functionality via SuperNET?

Edit: And let me guess, SuperNET will replenish BBR holdings from time to time once it's spent, acting as a "centralized" shop like multipools   Is that what we need for BBR?

without BBR you cant use the BBR.
SuperNET is NOT a coin. do you understand this?
it is the network that binds the coins
if people on the SuperNET want to use cryptonote functionality, then they would use BBR in this process. How can you take BBR out of this equation?

Slapper, SuperNet is just a vehicle where more people will be exposed to and hopefully use BBR. Everytime someone wants complete anonymous transaction through Supernet they will have to use BBR. Meaning they will have to own BBR. Supernet has a holding of BBR as a long term investment. That is not BBR that will be used by Supernet users.

So lets say 1000 people are using Supernet (fairly low # since there were like 800 some original buyers of it). Thats 1000 people that may want to make anonymous transactions within the Supernet eco-system (Privabet etc) or outside of it. Thats 1000 people who need to buy BBR to do so. You realize the potential implications of this, right?

[smooth]

SuperNET is NOT a coin. do you understand this?

Apparently he doesn't (nor do I, although I do understand teleport, after a lot of effort to do so) and this appears to be a common thread with your projects. Think about that. Just a bit of constructive criticism here. If it sounds like an attack it isn't meant that way at all.

[slapper]

At this point, I'd like to sincerely understand what is wrong with this coin. Why do people dump regardless of what direction it goes or wants to go. Last night's 50k dump was the first surreptitious dump, other times people are so pissed off they come and announce that they are dumping or have dumped, for one reason or another (see past posts of some of the regulars and some which are now deleted unfortunately e.g a guy called AdamWhite who dumped a few days ago when he said CZ isn't behaving).

Is there any reason for this coin to exist? If so, what is the correct valuation?

[otila]

it uses the ascii char val  to choose the cipher to use. so if you have a 4 char pin code, this will map to using 4 of the ciphers. I apply it iteratively to the output of the previous cipher.

not sure how even 18 times becomes over 100 times slower, maybe AES is 10 times faster? if you like AES just use a one char pin code that maps to AES. it is up to the user. anyway the code is already done and it didnt bloat things that much.

gnutls-cli --benchmark-ciphers says
3DES-CBC 21.39 MB/sec, AES-128-GCM 1.39 GB/sec

I still have absolutely no idea why someone would want to do it like you are doing.
Maybe you also want to use a key derivation function (KDF), scrypt or better? https://password-hashing.net/
Or was that your code already Final Release? Bummer.

[darlidada]

At this point, I'd like to sincerely understand what is wrong with this coin. Why do people dump regardless of what direction it goes or wants to go. Last night's 50k dump was the first surreptitious dump, other times people are so pissed off they come and announce that they are dumping or have dumped, for one reason or another (see past posts of some of the regulars and some which are now deleted unfortunately e.g a guy called AdamWhite who dumped a few days ago when he said CZ isn't behaving).

Is there any reason for this coin to exist? If so, what is the correct valuation?

it exists because CZ wants it to exists; it is relevant because CZ seems to have intimate knowledge of the CN technology; it will gain value when CZ understands that the crypto community favors transparency and openness over his coding skills.

[smooth]

At this point, I'd like to sincerely understand what is wrong with this coin.

You've already declared it to be the diamond in your signature, so how why ask now?

In all seriousness, it is an open source project, just like XMR (only different). The coin is a reflection of where you think that project is going and what that will be worth. People obviously have different opinions about the merits of this "fundraising" that didn't happen, so they are trading on that.

I happen to believe all this latest drama is a bunch of noise over not much of anything other than a few people who were looking for a faster payoff not getting it. Unless you were one of them

[sonoIO]

SuperNET is NOT a coin. do you understand this?

Apparently he doesn't (nor do I, although I do understand teleport, after a lot of effort to do so) and this appears to be a common thread with your projects. Think about that. Just a bit of constructive criticism here. If it sounds like an attack it isn't meant that way at all.

My concerns is that BBR is about to be connected on non-POW network, which raises questions of cheaper transactions there and whatnot. Everything today is created with best intentions but i personally do not see POS networks too stable, as i tried to ilustrate here

[jl777]

it uses the ascii char val  to choose the cipher to use. so if you have a 4 char pin code, this will map to using 4 of the ciphers. I apply it iteratively to the output of the previous cipher.

not sure how even 18 times becomes over 100 times slower, maybe AES is 10 times faster? if you like AES just use a one char pin code that maps to AES. it is up to the user. anyway the code is already done and it didnt bloat things that much.

gnutls-cli --benchmark-ciphers says
3DES-CBC 21.39 MB/sec, AES-128-GCM 1.39 GB/sec

I still have absolutely no idea why someone would want to do it like you are doing.
Maybe you also want to use a key derivation function (KDF), scrypt or better? https://password-hashing.net/
Or was that your code already Final Release? Bummer.

i am just offering a choice
i notice that people tend to feel quite strongly about which cipher is better and i prefer to avoid getting involved in such debates
my method allows people to choose their cipher (or cipher sequence)
the code is still not debugged yet, I just wrote the MofNfs calls yesterday, really as a good way to test the DHT calls I coded over the weekend.

is there a C library for the key derivation?

[jl777]

SuperNET is NOT a coin. do you understand this?

Apparently he doesn't (nor do I, although I do understand teleport, after a lot of effort to do so) and this appears to be a common thread with your projects. Think about that. Just a bit of constructive criticism here. If it sounds like an attack it isn't meant that way at all.

It did cross my mind also. My concerns is that BBR is about to be connected on non-POW network, which raises questions of cheaper transactions there and whatnot. Everything today is created with best intentions but i personally do not see POS networks too stable, as i tried to ilustrate here

what does PoS network have to do with anything?
BBR will be accessed, probably via RPC, so whatever connections it has, it already has

[jl777]

SuperNET is NOT a coin. do you understand this?

Apparently he doesn't (nor do I, although I do understand teleport, after a lot of effort to do so) and this appears to be a common thread with your projects. Think about that. Just a bit of constructive criticism here. If it sounds like an attack it isn't meant that way at all.

I am looking to hire someone to explain things in proper form. Alas, it is not one of my skills.

[slapper]

At this point, I'd like to sincerely understand what is wrong with this coin.

You've already declared it to be the diamond in your signature, so how why ask now?

It is the diamond. But my question was more along the lines of why is it not seen as such. That signature doesn't change with BBR monetary valuation.

In all seriousness, it is an open source projects, just like XMR (only different). The coin is a reflection of where you think that project is going and what that will be worth. People obviously have different opinions about the merits of this "fundraising" that didn't happen, so they are trading on that.

I happen to believe all this latest drama is a bunch of noise over not much of anything other than a few people who were looking for a faster payoff not getting it. Unless you were one of them

Yah I am intrigued by your thoughts and would like to subscribe to your shill letter. Please get tired of acting like a dick all day, for one day  

[Este Nuno]

SuperNET is NOT a coin. do you understand this?

Apparently he doesn't (nor do I, although I do understand teleport, after a lot of effort to do so) and this appears to be a common thread with your projects. Think about that. Just a bit of constructive criticism here. If it sounds like an attack it isn't meant that way at all.

It did cross my mind also. My concerns is that BBR is about to be connected on non-POW network, which raises questions of cheaper transactions there and whatnot. Everything today is created with best intentions but i personally do not see POS networks too stable, as i tried to ilustrate here

I don't see that concern being any different that saying you're not comfortable being on Poloniex with PoS coins. If you're worried about someone attacking a PoS coin like BTCD and then double spending it or something it's not something that's going to have any sort of direct effect on BBR(not that I think that's likely to happen at all with BTCD). Can't imagine superNET being designed in such a way that some flaw in PoS could translate in to some sort of flaw in BBR.