[XC][XCurrency] Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat / Pos

[chaeplin]

I just did a test


http://cryptexplorer.com/address/XTiTRPu5dJgUou217i8ZZJukD1QQHA5Uhm


thats the receiver address, tell me the sender's wallet address

You use same amount for test.

Can't tell. 2 address popup.

can you reveal the source wallet or not?

Do you want change address ? XYqv6iJxvBE9sEwVeutn3Lw3yWCv5vKb8R

[atcsecure]

split the outputs randomly

Is this the multi-path part of the protocol?

it is the first part, the 2nd part is using multiple mixers going through another setup of multiple mixers, it will use a TTL type metric, so you can specify how many hops (mixers) to use

[520Bit]

What chaplin is doing is very basic. He is vetting the blockchain for the transaction amount -0.00001 transaction fee.
Just as an example:
So lets say an amount of 1 XC was sent on block 2135. It will be split and sent to 1 mixer address in multiple payments. What happens next is another mixer address sends 0.99999 to the intended address.
 What he does is then looks in future blocks for an address that received a total amount of 0.99999 and bam he gets it.

I have a system in mind that I can share with the atcsecure if he wants but it should rather be done in an irc page where we can have a flowing conversation.

Yes so in this release we are NOT splitting the output, the code will be in v1.37, v1.37 will split the outputs randomly as well to stop this type of analysis

this is an easy fix

I see, so I will wait for v1.37 to do further test. I reserved 10 XCs to do this kind of test. Keep moving, thanks.

[chaeplin]

To:
XXJCmtW5GEbRRuCh1zhm9WmS1srAuvLSS8
Amount: 3.5 XC

TX 1
Status: 0/unconfirmed, broadcast through 8 nodes
Date: 6/3/2014 10:29
To: XGp6HDkdBjwQunrH2kozC5C4fkcdN8WtpZ
Debit: -0.60939 XC
Transaction fee: -0.00001 XC
Net amount: -0.6094 XC
Transaction ID: 762a501de8291ad89e7fabaea30d0a37c8def9be99eb08305ef02f372e4a204b

TX 2
Status: 0/unconfirmed, broadcast through 11 nodes
Date: 6/3/2014 10:29
To: XGp6HDkdBjwQunrH2kozC5C4fkcdN8WtpZ
Debit: -0.25943 XC
Transaction fee: -0.00001 XC
Net amount: -0.25944 XC
Transaction ID: 79047709d2c3d75f503cabc15a94307bb5fdef6ef62b55d34685aec401c68927

TX3
Status: 1/unconfirmed, broadcast through 11 nodes
Date: 6/3/2014 10:29
To: XGp6HDkdBjwQunrH2kozC5C4fkcdN8WtpZ
Debit: -2.63118 XC
Transaction fee: -0.00001 XC
Net amount: -2.63119 XC
Transaction ID: 1e60d662de180030af137fb918129050017a8db58e21999950fb72d468ee7c28



I will give info on this shortly.

At least 4 confirmation needed.

5 of 6 now

probably stupid being that I sent the coins form that address.....  bah.

As tx is given, to easy.


Used XM4f4GbzaCnMphTKitAYMSX8vdkUPrwYuQ
change XUUgYHRfqd3bcNRLqgHKvhKBD3HnjGuTTL

[PeterPalmBeach]

XC officially listed on http://cryptocoinstats.com

[vemdoctor9]

This coin is crap.  sorry.

[studio1one]

just home.

Good stuff.

Nice to see people being proactive and positive and not just shouting abuse and opinion.

[chaeplin]

What chaplin is doing is very basic. He is vetting the blockchain for the transaction amount -0.00001 transaction fee.
Just as an example:
So lets say an amount of 1 XC was sent on block 2135. It will be split and sent to 1 mixer address in multiple payments. What happens next is another mixer address sends 0.99999 to the intended address.
 What he does is then looks in future blocks for an address that received a total amount of 0.99999 and bam he gets it.

I have a system in mind that I can share with the atcsecure if he wants but it should rather be done in an irc page where we can have a flowing conversation.

Yes so in this release we are NOT splitting the output, the code will be in v1.37, v1.37 will split the outputs randomly as well to stop this type of analysis

this is an easy fix

I would not only split the output between several xnodes but also split the input too. So allowing the total amount to be sent to multiple addresses and not fix it just to one. This will exponentially increase the difficulty of running such an analysis with every address used to the point of unfeasability and statistical true anonymity. Another feature would be to relay from xnode to xnode for a random or user selected amount of blocks depending on how "much" privacy they want.

I am not vetting.

[studio1one]

This coin is crap.  sorry.

oops,


missed that post when I posted my last comment.

Oh well, there's always one.

[studio1one]

I guess at this stage I won't bother doing another test until code is updated.

[atcsecure]

chaeplin,

thank you for the test results, but my big question aside from the pattern issue, are you seeing a direct link on the block chain?

thanks

atcsecure

[yetiripper]

split the outputs randomly

Is this the multi-path part of the protocol?

it is the first part, the 2nd part is using multiple mixers going through another setup of multiple mixers, it will use a TTL type metric, so you can specify how many hops (mixers) to use

My dick came and a huge fountain formed

In that order?

[chaeplin]

chaeplin,

thank you for the test results, but my big question aside from the pattern issue, are you seeing a direct link on the block chain?

thanks

atcsecure

Yes Direct Link.

[provenceday]

how about we set a public test day when next version update?

community can have a big bonus for this, such as 10BTC or 5K XC coin?

[chaeplin]

What chaplin is doing is very basic. He is vetting the blockchain for the transaction amount -0.00001 transaction fee.
Just as an example:
So lets say an amount of 1 XC was sent on block 2135. It will be split and sent to 1 mixer address in multiple payments. What happens next is another mixer address sends 0.99999 to the intended address.
 What he does is then looks in future blocks for an address that received a total amount of 0.99999 and bam he gets it.

I have a system in mind that I can share with the atcsecure if he wants but it should rather be done in an irc page where we can have a flowing conversation.

Yes so in this release we are NOT splitting the output, the code will be in v1.37, v1.37 will split the outputs randomly as well to stop this type of analysis

this is an easy fix

I would not only split the output between several xnodes but also split the input too. So allowing the total amount to be sent to multiple addresses and not fix it just to one. This will exponentially increase the difficulty of running such an analysis with every address used to the point of unfeasability and statistical true anonymity. Another feature would be to relay from xnode to xnode for a random or user selected amount of blocks depending on how "much" privacy they want.

I am not vetting.

So what are you doing?
The only link I can see is the total sum.

Design flaw...

[atcsecure]

chaeplin,

thank you for the test results, but my big question aside from the pattern issue, are you seeing a direct link on the block chain?

thanks

atcsecure

Yes Direct Link.

can you post that data?

thanks

atcsecure

[Teka]

This coin is crap.  sorry.

Well crap on the internet is like $20 so I would be more than happy if our coin starts selling for that much.

[atcsecure]

What chaplin is doing is very basic. He is vetting the blockchain for the transaction amount -0.00001 transaction fee.
Just as an example:
So lets say an amount of 1 XC was sent on block 2135. It will be split and sent to 1 mixer address in multiple payments. What happens next is another mixer address sends 0.99999 to the intended address.
 What he does is then looks in future blocks for an address that received a total amount of 0.99999 and bam he gets it.

I have a system in mind that I can share with the atcsecure if he wants but it should rather be done in an irc page where we can have a flowing conversation.

Yes so in this release we are NOT splitting the output, the code will be in v1.37, v1.37 will split the outputs randomly as well to stop this type of analysis

this is an easy fix

I would not only split the output between several xnodes but also split the input too. So allowing the total amount to be sent to multiple addresses and not fix it just to one. This will exponentially increase the difficulty of running such an analysis with every address used to the point of unfeasability and statistical true anonymity. Another feature would be to relay from xnode to xnode for a random or user selected amount of blocks depending on how "much" privacy they want.

I am not vetting.

So what are you doing?
The only link I can see is the total sum.

Design flaw...

it is not a design flaw, the code is already in place to split transactions as it is done on the inputs, the function just isn't being called at the moment

[BADASS]

https://i.imgur.com/ujB8qYz.gif

[chaeplin]

chaeplin,

thank you for the test results, but my big question aside from the pattern issue, are you seeing a direct link on the block chain?

thanks

atcsecure

Yes Direct Link.

can you post that data?

thanks

atcsecure

Sorry, You are the Dev. You should know it.