[XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency

[alyssa85]

Some info on the Monero hard fork:

https://getmonero.org/2018/02/11/PoW-change-and-key-reuse.html

we strongly believe that it's beneficial to preserve our ASIC resistance. Therefore, we will perform an emergency hard fork to curb any potential threat from ASICs if needed. Furthermore, in order to maintain its goal of decentralization and to provide a deterrent for ASIC development and to protect against unknown or undetectable ASIC development, the Monero team proposes modifying the Cryptonight PoW hash every scheduled fork, twice a year. The modifications will be light, and should not change performance profiles much. The first change is now being tested, and will happen in the coming March fork. Finally, we will continue to research alternative Proof of Work functions that may provide better ASIC resistance than Cryptonight.

Patches will be available for the following software: zone117x's pool, Snipa's pool, Lucas Jones' CPU miner, wolf0's CPU miner, ccminer-cryptonight, sgminer-gm, xmr-stak, xmrig-nvidia, wolf-xmr-miner.

[ctya]

Some info on the Monero hard fork:

https://getmonero.org/2018/02/11/PoW-change-and-key-reuse.html

we strongly believe that it's beneficial to preserve our ASIC resistance. Therefore, we will perform an emergency hard fork to curb any potential threat from ASICs if needed. Furthermore, in order to maintain its goal of decentralization and to provide a deterrent for ASIC development and to protect against unknown or undetectable ASIC development, the Monero team proposes modifying the Cryptonight PoW hash every scheduled fork, twice a year. The modifications will be light, and should not change performance profiles much. The first change is now being tested, and will happen in the coming March fork. Finally, we will continue to research alternative Proof of Work functions that may provide better ASIC resistance than Cryptonight.

Patches will be available for the following software: zone117x's pool, Snipa's pool, Lucas Jones' CPU miner, wolf0's CPU miner, ccminer-cryptonight, sgminer-gm, xmr-stak, xmrig-nvidia, wolf-xmr-miner.

I must have missed it but do we know which block will activate the fork

[dEBRUYNE]

Some info on the Monero hard fork:

https://getmonero.org/2018/02/11/PoW-change-and-key-reuse.html

we strongly believe that it's beneficial to preserve our ASIC resistance. Therefore, we will perform an emergency hard fork to curb any potential threat from ASICs if needed. Furthermore, in order to maintain its goal of decentralization and to provide a deterrent for ASIC development and to protect against unknown or undetectable ASIC development, the Monero team proposes modifying the Cryptonight PoW hash every scheduled fork, twice a year. The modifications will be light, and should not change performance profiles much. The first change is now being tested, and will happen in the coming March fork. Finally, we will continue to research alternative Proof of Work functions that may provide better ASIC resistance than Cryptonight.

Patches will be available for the following software: zone117x's pool, Snipa's pool, Lucas Jones' CPU miner, wolf0's CPU miner, ccminer-cryptonight, sgminer-gm, xmr-stak, xmrig-nvidia, wolf-xmr-miner.

I must have missed it but do we know which block will activate the fork

There's currently no block height set yet. It'll probably be set soon though.

[explorer]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/7ydncd/question_about_monero_deanonymization_via_forks/

Good point, being that to be a real threat, people would actually have to use the fork (for more than a one time --> exchange - dump).  I'm still not touching this shit unless  there is an approved zero-privacy-errosion method put forward, but it  does take the theoretical and temper it with reality a little.

[birr]

I'm running 0.11.1.0 Helium Hydra 64 bit linux on a notebook and Armv7 on a phone.
My daemon says

Code:

2018-02-18 19:27:48.946 [P2P1] WARN global src/cryptonote_core/cryptonote_core.cpp:1283 Last scheduled hard fork time shows a daemon update is needed now.

The update is not available yet at getmonero.org
It still says
Current Version: 0.11.1.0 Helium Hydra

[explorer]

I'm running 0.11.1.0 Helium Hydra 64 bit linux on a notebook and Armv7 on a phone.
My daemon says

Code:

2018-02-18 19:27:48.946 [P2P1] WARN global src/cryptonote_core/cryptonote_core.cpp:1283 Last scheduled hard fork time shows a daemon update is needed now.

The update is not available yet at getmonero.org
It still says
Current Version: 0.11.1.0 Helium Hydra

Typical warning pre-fork.  It's not announced/available yet.  Better than too late

See dEBRUYNE's post just above...

[Hueristic]

Should be interesting to watch the hashrate after the fork.

[explorer]

Should be interesting to watch the hashrate after the fork.

Yep.  Going to fire  up everything I can for a short stint just before showtime   ISP usually chokes me out within a couple hours when I start using bandwidth, but you never know 

[babybonoba]

I'm a little behind the times, are we going to see zk-STARKS in Monero?

[Anon136]

I'm a little behind the times, are we going to see zk-STARKS in Monero?

While Monero’s lead developer, Riccardo Spagni, has criticized Zcash in the past, calling it a “complete security farce,” this new system of implementing zero knowledge proofs may avoid some of the serious issues that Zcash’s current zk-SNARKs system has. Spagni told CoinDesk that Monero will integrate zk-STARKs “if and when it’s usable.

https://www.deepdotweb.com/2017/10/11/monero-considers-implementing-zk-starks/

I don't think our community is wedded to any particular technology. We have a vision of providing private fungible value storage and transfer at the best scale that technology currently allows for while using only safe and well vetted techniques. We also have very healthy governance and a well balanced and rational community who all have a similar vision, so forks tend to be a breeze. If it turns out that sk-starks is the bees knees it will almost certainly be implemented here.

[explorer]

I'm a little behind the times, are we going to see zk-STARKS in Monero?

While Monero’s lead developer, Riccardo Spagni, has criticized Zcash in the past, calling it a “complete security farce,” this new system of implementing zero knowledge proofs may avoid some of the serious issues that Zcash’s current zk-SNARKs system has. Spagni told CoinDesk that Monero will integrate zk-STARKs “if and when it’s usable.

https://www.deepdotweb.com/2017/10/11/monero-considers-implementing-zk-starks/

I don't think our community is wedded to any particular technology. We have a vision of providing private fungible value storage and transfer at the best scale that technology currently allows for while using only safe and well vetted techniques. We also have very healthy governance and a well balanced and rational community who all have a similar vision, so forks tend to be a breeze. If it turns out that sk-starks is the bees knees it will almost certainly be implemented here.

It is not usable, and doesn't look to become usable in the foreseeable future.  IIRC transactions would take like 20 minutes or something to compute.  I don't remember the details, just that it isn't currently viable.

[Anon136]

I'm a little behind the times, are we going to see zk-STARKS in Monero?

While Monero’s lead developer, Riccardo Spagni, has criticized Zcash in the past, calling it a “complete security farce,” this new system of implementing zero knowledge proofs may avoid some of the serious issues that Zcash’s current zk-SNARKs system has. Spagni told CoinDesk that Monero will integrate zk-STARKs “if and when it’s usable.

https://www.deepdotweb.com/2017/10/11/monero-considers-implementing-zk-starks/

I don't think our community is wedded to any particular technology. We have a vision of providing private fungible value storage and transfer at the best scale that technology currently allows for while using only safe and well vetted techniques. We also have very healthy governance and a well balanced and rational community who all have a similar vision, so forks tend to be a breeze. If it turns out that sk-starks is the bees knees it will almost certainly be implemented here.

It is not usable, and doesn't look to become usable in the foreseeable future.  IIRC transactions would take like 20 minutes or something to compute.  I don't remember the details, just that it isn't currently viable.

20 minute compute time does sound beyond reasonable for most applications. Hopefully they can get it down lower. But really if they do manage to get a trustless demonstrably private zero knowledge anti double spend proof system off the ground that would be groundbreaking, 20 minutes to compute time or otherwise. Computers will get faster, it could probably be optimized, and even if it couldn't and even if moors law abruptly ran out there are definitely real world applications right now for private transactions that take 20 minutes to compute.

[pönde]

Well here is an interesting article.

"In 10 Years We Won't Have Blockchains"

The idea is, that in future the blockchains evolve the way that they are no more a linear timely arranged chain of blocks, but a some kind of a mesh of transactions. So blockchains are then no more called blockchains, because it is misleading name for them.

And the advance of this kind of a new structure is efficiency. Faster transactions and so on.

The writer of the article does not tell details how such system would work, but the idea sounds interesting. Just like before 2009 we did not know exactly how blockchain works, but the idea truly was interesting.

I think Monero team must think about this. This could be future. And if Monero was first to take it in use. That would be nice.

In 10 Years We Won't Have Blockchains

I predict that in 10 years blockchain technology will improve to a level that calling it "blockchain" will no longer be a useful term.

Let's think about this a moment. Why do we call it a blockchain? The three most interesting parts of the blockchain are:

Consensus mechanisms
Management mechanisms (meta-consensus of how to manage future improvements to the overall chain)
The structure of the blockchain itself
The last one will affect how large the network can get, how fast transaction times will happen, and so on. And the structure of the blockchain is why we call it a "blockchain."

So, what do we mean by "blockchain?" Let's break out the two component terms:

Block: A bunch of transactions bundled together.

Chain: The blocks cryptographically connected in a linear fashion.


Bye-bye blocks

I think in the future the block will not be needed. In its place will be a system where transactions are linked together and can confirm previous transactions.

In order to submit your next transaction, you need to validate others in the queue. In order to get what you want (your transaction submitted), you have to do some work for others.

Why do it this way? Transaction times in this model would be faster than, for example, bitcoin's transaction times today. The miner is technically removed and each transaction validates past transactions. Transaction times can actually go down as more people use the system.


Ciao to chains

I also think that in the future, the chain won't be a single directional string of blocks. I think it will look more like a mesh (or graph). Maybe we could have a non-linear set of of branches that go in several different directions, where many parallel transactions are happening.

So, maybe we'll call it a transaction graph. I've also seen the term Tangle (in the IOTA protocol) for early similar concepts.

Maybe we'll call it "the graph" much the same way we speak of "the cloud" today. We will all save information and transactions into this global graph (whether we know it or not).


Enter the DAG

The closest thing I've seen so far that matches my imagined path is a directed acyclic graph.

From Wikipedia:

"In mathematics and computer science, a directed acyclic graph is a finite directed graph with no directed cycles."

A DAG model works differently than a blockchain. A common blockchain requires miners to maintain blocks, but a DAG wouldn't need either proof-of-work or blocks.

New models of management would be needed. So, there is a lot of work to do.

But this model theoretically gets better as new nodes are added. So it may be an improved model for both fees (or, in ethereum parlance, "gas") and scalability over current blockchain models.

In the future, we may have something that does what a blockchain does, only better. There are still challenges to this model, so I don't know how this will play out. But, I think this design is intriguing, and I'm curious to see how it develops.

https://www.coindesk.com/10-years-wont-blockchains/

[BidiPass]

Can this coin be merge mined with fantomcoin?

[explorer]

Well here is an interesting article.

"In 10 Years We Won't Have Blockchains"

The idea is, that in future the blockchains evolve the way that they are no more a linear timely arranged chain of blocks, but a some kind of a mesh of transactions. So blockchains are then no more called blockchains, because it is misleading name for them.

And the advance of this kind of a new structure is efficiency. Faster transactions and so on.

The writer of the article does not tell details how such system would work, but the idea sounds interesting. Just like before 2009 we did not know exactly how blockchain works, but the idea truly was interesting.

I think Monero team must think about this. This could be future. And if Monero was first to take it in use. That would be nice.

They are way ahead of you the curve.  Go to getmonero.org and read some blogs.  Or just hold your nose, and go to reddit, where the news breaks these days.

[pönde]

They are way ahead of you the curve.  Go to getmonero.org and read some blogs.  Or just hold your nose, and go to reddit, where the news breaks these days.

Great if the team really is aware and even ahead.

Could you give some links on getmonero.org about this issue. There is too much info to search for me.

[revelacaogr]

worth read

MoneroV: A Trap Laid for Monero Users?

https://monetse.com/bitcoinschannel/monerov-a-trap-laid-for-monero-users-


Fork mania has arrived for the blockchain network Monero. There are plans to fork and provide an airdrop for holders of the altcoin during early March, dubbed MoneroV. The cash grab could be a way to uncover the individual identities of those who use Monero if they fall into the trap. Here, we outline the facts about MoneroV (XMV) and why you should cautiously consider claiming these coins.


What’s so bad about on airdrop on the Monero network? It’s free money right? Not necessarily; some people say there’s no such thing as a free lunch. As bitcoin has experienced, sometimes the promise of free money has resulted in malware or phishing attacks.


Furthermore, the launch of XMV produces adverse effects similar to the attack described in MRL-001 during September 2014. The privacy of users may be compromised because, if their same address is on both the Monero and MoneroV blockchain, when they spend any transaction in any of those chains it will produce the same key image. A key image, in simple terms, allows the Monero network to confirm whether an output has been spent or not quickly.


How Does the Attack Work?...........

[elrippos friend]

Hy guys,

is there here on bitcointalk a thread for the monerujo android wallet, i personally didn´t find one.
Thank you for pointing me in the right direction in forehand!

[Anon136]

How Does the Attack Work?...........

Suppose you have an address that your coins are on when then fork happens. Now you have the same private key holding funds on both the main chain and the fork chain. You decide to make a transaction on the main chain. Your client picks 4 random inputs for ring signature partners plus your actual input. A B C D E are the ring signatories for your transaction on main chain. Which one is the real input? Nobody knows. Now you go over to the fork chain and you use that same private key to author a transaction on that that chain. Your client picks 4 random inputs for ring signature partners plus your actual input. F G C H I are the ring signatories for your transaction on the fork chain. Now which ring signature input was the real one and which were the decoys?

[ingo49]

worth read

MoneroV: A Trap Laid for Monero Users?

https://monetse.com/bitcoinschannel/monerov-a-trap-laid-for-monero-users-

...

How Does the Attack Work?...........

tbh, this read just made me more in favour of xmv. It appears as a one-sided smear.
And actually what they were quoted by are excellent responses.

I'd be very happy to see the full response of monerov's team if Jaimy would release it.