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

[canth]

Well if you like crapulence you should go read the DASH thread. Never seen a bigger circle jerk in all my life.

The DASH guys say the same thing about Monero. What is it with you guys. Is DASH really that big of a threat? The way I see it, you both can co-exist.

DASH isn't a threat - it's hard to believe that anyone would want to get involved with something with that big of a premine. Co-exist, sure - but there's just no strong comparison on features or fairness.

[generalizethis]

Well if you like crapulence you should go read the DASH thread. Never seen a bigger circle jerk in all my life.

The DASH guys say the same thing about Monero. What is it with you guys. Is DASH really that big of a threat? The way I see it, you both can co-exist.

Anyone who has been on r/bitcoin when a privacy thread comes up, knows that dashtards get in the way of any meaningful conversation. Dash is an obstacle and their anoncoin status by way of hype and repeated false arguments is annoying--about as annoying as when  people, who are most likely hedged* in both, ask this community to get along with a fraud.

*do your due diligence on privacy and the coins themselves and you won't need to dilute your investment with hedging.

[fluffypony]

Do you need help in Portuguese translation?

It's not so much the translation itself, though help will be most welcome when the time comes. I'm stuck at understanding the translation framework (if one is at all in place already, or perhaps planned for later on). Reference location for any related followup: Translating GetMonero.org

Can't keep a straight face reading your nick bytemuma 

Just replied to that thread with details

[fluffypony]

I like the Monero Forum for resource gathering, but for interaction, I like HERE--it has more of a conversational feel, while the Monero....Why bother explaining; it's in the etymology.

-forum (n.)
mid-15c., "place of assembly in ancient Rome," from Latin forum "marketplace, open space, public place," apparently akin to foris, foras "out of doors, outside," from PIE root *dhwer- "door, doorway" (see door). Sense of "assembly, place for public discussion" first recorded 1680s.

-talk (n.)
late 15c., "speech, discourse, conversation," from talk (v.). Meaning "informal lecture or address" is from 1859. Meaning "a subject of gossip" is from 1620s (in talk of the town). Talk show first recorded 1965; talk radio is from 1985.

-talk (v.)
c. 1200, talken, probably a diminutive or frequentative form related to Middle English tale "story," and ultimately from the same source as tale, with rare English formative -k (compare hark from hear, stalk from steal, smirk from smile) and replacing that word as a verb. East Frisian has talken "to talk, chatter, whisper." Related: Talked; talking.

To talk (something) up "discuss in order to promote" is from 1722.

tl;dr - Bitcointalk is for gossip, Monero Forum is for discussion? :-P

[ShenNoether]

Because I am not up-to-speed on communicating with the Monero devs (on Github or other back channels), and because my efficiency is my utmost priority and given posting in this forum is the most efficient way for me to communicate my thoughts to all that follow me, I will post this somewhat out-of-band comment here in hopes of getting a response from smooth (or if need be tacotime or fluffypony).

I do not have time to read various Monero research papers and otherwise dig to see if the following concern is already addressed.

I am concerned about a hole in the anonymity of Cryptonote ring signatures. I had sort of described this issue to smooth (who apparently relayed it to all) when I was contemplating ways that BCX might unmask the anonymity of users. I do not recall if I made this specific weakness explicit as follows.

If the actual input to a transaction (in Monero terminology this is the output of the prior transaction) is not also an input to another transaction's ring signature (and when all the other inputs to the ring are spent) or if it is also the input to a subsequent ring in which all the other inputs were outputs created after the said transaction was created, then the anonymity of the said transaction is entirely unmasked.

Combinatorial trees can be searched as well, thus even if only some of the other inputs were outputs created after the said input was created, this could cascade into unmasking the anonymity or at least reducing the anonymity set. And note the anonymity set also vulnerable to further reduction by out-of-band attacks such as IP de-obfuscation, rubber hoses, stolen private keys, hacked users, etc.

There are some tweaks that need to be made to insure the above is unlikely. Hopefully Monero is enforcing some restrictions already on which outputs can be used in ring inputs? If not, they need to get on it pronto.

P.S. for those who thought I wasn't sincerely attempting to help Monero during the BCX incident, I hope the above satisfies you. I think before I had an agreement with the Monero devs (via smooth) not to write publicly all the details of the above weakness in order to give them time to address it. I think they've had sufficient time and I want to make sure this is addressed.

TPTB_need_war, I'm a little confused by your comments here, :

"If the actual input to a transaction (in Monero terminology this is the output of the prior transaction) is not also an input to another transaction's ring signature (and when all the other inputs to the ring are spent) or if it is also the input to a subsequent ring in which all the other inputs were outputs created after the said transaction was created, then the anonymity of the said transaction is entirely unmasked."
[

could you explain how an input to a transaction is not also an input to another transactions ring signature when other inputs to the ring are spent? Specifically, how do you know the other inputs are spent, if they are also in ring signatures? (Ofc all other inputs could be sent with 0-mixin, but fluffyponyza has mentioned that this is in MRL004, and will be modified in a upcoming fork (for example mymonero forces min-mixin 3).

Also in your second sentence (sorry it's a little hard to parse), "[if actual input to a transaction]

is also the input to a subsequent ring in which all other inputs were outputs created after the said transaction was created

," how do you know in the subsequent (or initial ring) that said input is not being grabbed ad-hoc from another user as a decoy input for both the initial and subsequent ring without knowing which inputs have actually been spent?

could you please help me out by perhaps giving an example of how either of these would work (disregarding the 0-mixin case which has been addressed by fluffypony  / mrl-004)

(unless you have some way of telling whether outputs have been spent, thus proving the proofs of Fujisaki/Suzuki https://eprint.iacr.org/2006/389.pdf incorrect, what you suggest seems impossible to me). Ok - I see there is an error in this logic.. in FS, they don't have any additional data about the ring itself (like inputs / outputs) so perhaps with some graph analysis with this might be possible.. -I don't think it would be a difficult fix if this was possible however, you just need to compute the graph of the people you are mixing with and make sure there are no loops.. (if the graph gets too big, pick a new ring)..

[Wanderlust]

I like the Monero Forum for resource gathering, but for interaction, I like HERE--it has more of a conversational feel, while the Monero....Why bother explaining; it's in the etymology.

-forum (n.)
mid-15c., "place of assembly in ancient Rome," from Latin forum "marketplace, open space, public place," apparently akin to foris, foras "out of doors, outside," from PIE root *dhwer- "door, doorway" (see door). Sense of "assembly, place for public discussion" first recorded 1680s.

-talk (n.)
late 15c., "speech, discourse, conversation," from talk (v.). Meaning "informal lecture or address" is from 1859. Meaning "a subject of gossip" is from 1620s (in talk of the town). Talk show first recorded 1965; talk radio is from 1985.

-talk (v.)
c. 1200, talken, probably a diminutive or frequentative form related to Middle English tale "story," and ultimately from the same source as tale, with rare English formative -k (compare hark from hear, stalk from steal, smirk from smile) and replacing that word as a verb. East Frisian has talken "to talk, chatter, whisper." Related: Talked; talking.

To talk (something) up "discuss in order to promote" is from 1722.

tl;dr - Bitcointalk is for gossip, Monero Forum is for discussion? :-P

The former sounds about right. Monerians are not unresponsible for that fact either As for the latter I have no idea so would also include the ? you did.

gossip
ˈɡɒsɪp/
noun
noun: gossip

    1.
    casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details which are not confirmed as true.

e.g. there is a great deal of gossip surrounding Bytecoin and Cryptonote, mostly spread by the cult of Monero.

Yes, BCT truly is a house of gossip…

F.A.O smooth

[fluffypony]

As for the latter I have no idea so would also include the ? you did.

question mark

noun

1.
Also called interrogation point, interrogation mark. a mark indicating a question: usually, as in English, the mark (?) placed after a question.


Because I was asking generalizethis if that was the correct tl;dr.

[Wanderlust]

As for the latter I have no idea so would also include the ? you did.

question mark

noun

1.
Also called interrogation point, interrogation mark. a mark indicating a question: usually, as in English, the mark (?) placed after a question.


Because I was asking generalizethis if that was the correct tl;dr.

witty. the former is correct. cannot speak to the latter. nobody knows the future

p.s. @fluffypony: do you ever worry about the future of crytographic software development in this tense/paranoid geopolitical climate? The "Man" knocking at the door?

I mean let's face it that since Phil Zimmermann the writing's on the wall. Im sure Satoshi had his reasons for complete anonym and then running away (the same day as Gavin's unusual meeting)! And if Satoshi re-entered the space what would he do differently?? LOL

* Wanderlust throws it to the forum…

[fluffypony]

p.s. @fluffypony: do you ever worry about the future of crytographic software development in this tense/paranoid geopolitical climate? The "Man" knocking at the door?

On a completely personal level...not really. I'm more than happy to cooperate with governments, TLAs, and law enforcement, and to educate and give them guidance on how this newfangled world works.

Look at how "the man" has struggled to adapt to everything from p2p distribution mechanisms to consumer-grade "drones". They don't understand Twitter or Instagram or Snapchat, they don't know how to police or govern any of it. Personal beliefs aside, we have to pragmatically recognise that the "status quo" is going to stay as it is for the foreseeable future in most countries, and it's better to help them understand potentially ubiquitous technology.

The worst thing that can happen to me is that I'm "disappeared", but that's why the core team is seven strong:)

[Wanderlust]

p.s. @fluffypony: do you ever worry about the future of crytographic software development in this tense/paranoid geopolitical climate? The "Man" knocking at the door?

On a completely personal level...not really. I'm more than happy to cooperate with governments, TLAs, and law enforcement, and to educate and give them guidance on how this newfangled world works.

Look at how "the man" has struggled to adapt to everything from p2p distribution mechanisms to consumer-grade "drones". They don't understand Twitter or Instagram or Snapchat, they don't know how to police or govern any of it. Personal beliefs aside, we have to pragmatically recognise that the "status quo" is going to stay as it is for the foreseeable future in most countries, and it's better to help them understand potentially ubiquitous technology.

The worst thing that can happen to me is that I'm "disappeared", but that's why the core team is seven strong:)

Nice reply. Sufficed to say your "cooperation" would not go so far as to backdoor anything or use libs you otherwise would not have, correct?

While perhaps "we have to pragmatically recognise that the "status quo" is going to stay as it is for the foreseeable future in most countries" my concern is that things might become considerably worse, and quickly. In other words you might be be doing more listening than talking.

Don't disappear yet, we hardly know ye. On second thought, run for the hills!

[5w00p]

That's why it's OPEN SOURCE.

[Wanderlust]

That's why it's OPEN SOURCE.

LOL… that's why? I am Spartacus.

[5w00p]

lol lawlz lolololololololololoo so much funny biznissss so funnee wow much jokez lol.lolololololo

Yes, that's why a project is kept open source, whether the project in question is Monero or what-the-phack-ever.

To prevent the use of "backdoors" etc and malicious code in general. Transparency.

Do I really have to explain EVERYTHING to you like you're five?

Are you five?

[Wanderlust]

lol lawlz lolololololololololoo so much funny biznissss so funnee wow much jokez lol.lolololololo

Yes, that's why a project is kept open source, whether the project in question is Monero or what-the-phack-ever.

To prevent the use of "backdoors" etc and malicious code in general. Transparency.

Do I really have to explain EVERYTHING to you like you're five?

Are you five?

I assumed you were referring to future arrests/interventions (as I did). And who would undertake to maintain a life-threatening Git repo? Few.

I agree open-sourcing is about transparency. Still - that hasn't helped OpenSSL fast enough…

BTW Asking "stupid" questions is not evidence of stupidity. Not asking questions is.

[illodin]

lol lawlz lolololololololololoo so much funny biznissss so funnee wow much jokez lol.lolololololo

Yes, that's why a project is kept open source, whether the project in question is Monero or what-the-phack-ever.

To prevent the use of "backdoors" etc and malicious code in general. Transparency.

Do I really have to explain EVERYTHING to you like you're five?

Are you five?

Do you mean there can be no backdoors in open source programs?

[5w00p]

Do you mean there can be no backdoors in open source programs?

I mean that if there is, it is likely to be found when reviewed by benevolent people.

Do you think a hypothetical backdoor is less likely to be found in open source than closed source?
...

Well, OpenSSL does not have malicious code, it just has had weaknesses that have been exploited.  

Sure, open source code is supposed to be less prone to these exploits, due to much review, but I think it typically holds true that open source software is more robust and resilient to exploits than closed source software.

[Wanderlust]

Do you mean there can be no backdoors in open source programs?

I mean that if there is, it is likely to be found when reviewed by benevolent people.

Do you think a hypothetical backdoor is less likely to be found in open source than closed source?
...

Well, OpenSSL does not have malicious code, it just has had weaknesses that have been exploited.  

Sure, open source code is supposed to be less prone to these exploits, due to much review, but I think it typically holds true that open source software is more robust and resilient to exploits than closed source software.

Now you're the one with his back-to-the-door, so to speak. As I said before my point has more to do with the ramifications of developing crypto tech to the individual(s) developing it.

[GingerAle]

lol lawlz lolololololololololoo so much funny biznissss so funnee wow much jokez lol.lolololololo

Yes, that's why a project is kept open source, whether the project in question is Monero or what-the-phack-ever.

To prevent the use of "backdoors" etc and malicious code in general. Transparency.

Do I really have to explain EVERYTHING to you like you're five?

Are you five?

Do you mean there can be no backdoors in open source programs?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9L5zbaQML0

there are front doors, and there are revolving doors
doors on rudders of big ships
and there are revolving doors
there are doors that open by themselves
there are sliding doors, and there are secret doors
there are doors that lock
and doors that don't
there are doors that let you in
and then, there are those - that naturally - that you can't come back from

[fluffypony]

Nice reply. Sufficed to say your "cooperation" would not go so far as to backdoor anything or use libs you otherwise would not have, correct?

While perhaps "we have to pragmatically recognise that the "status quo" is going to stay as it is for the foreseeable future in most countries" my concern is that things might become considerably worse, and quickly. In other words you might be be doing more listening than talking.

Don't disappear yet, we hardly know ye. On second thought, run for the hills!

Absolutely, any "assistance" would naturally be limited to what is actually achievable by blockchain / data analysis of Monero transactions (practically nothing). In fact, going down the road of trying to assist them would be an excellent education in-and-of-itself, so that's good:)

Also I didn't mean I'd willingly disappear, I meant I'd *be* "disappeared" by forces unknown:)

[fluffypony]

In other news: https://forum.getmonero.org/1/news-announcements-and-editorials/319/monday-monero-missives-30-june-29th-2015