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

[hoertest]

Dev can deny.

Here is point.

Mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb is used for sender.



One time.

Every input to mixer got NEW address.


Matched....

Are you serious? Where did the mixer get the coins from? who clicked the send button?

From sender, with NEW address.

Thats not the Sender , AAAAHHHHHHH !!!!!

[sukottosan_d]

Dev can deny.

Here is point.

Mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb is used for sender.



One time.

Every input to mixer got NEW address.


Matched....

Are you serious? Where did the mixer get the coins from? who clicked the send button?

From sender, with NEW address.

Okay... but you still don't know who the original sender is, correct?  Isn't that the point of anonymous transfers -- to mask the original sender's address?

Urm, that's the same as just generating a new bitcoin address and sending a transaction.

[braxx]

new fuds are coming!

do you have whitepaper, open-source?

I'm just asking for some info..
I know DRK fanboys are also pretty trollish. I was looking for information because I'd expect it to be available.
If it isn't, that's fine, I just thought it would be.

I get why you guys are defensive...but geez.
Some of you already jumped on me because I'm always in the DRK thread...which is true.
Not hiding it.
Except, DRK was the first and only crypto I've ever participated in - the community was good, the profits were good and are good - so I stayed.
Trying to get more involved in stuff - wanted to research and see if I can see what chaeplin does on the same level ....

But this is definitely not a productive place for anyone from the outside.

sukottosan...
as a follower of the thread I can tell you there is a reason why the official xc-thread is now a moderated thread...
FUD & Trolling from dark on the original thread were tremendous... even official drk twitter account was used for trolling...

The guy's here are very carefull with newcomers who are suddenly coming over from dark...

[chaeplin]

Dev can deny.

Here is point.

Mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb is used for sender.



One time.

Every input to mixer got NEW address.


Matched....

Are you serious? Where did the mixer get the coins from? who clicked the send button?

From sender, with NEW address.

Okay... but you still don't know who the original sender is, correct?  Isn't that the point of anonymous transfers -- to mask the original sender's address?

Mixer identified.
Input of mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb == output from sender XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will not be used again for any sender.

So XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw == XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb.
Compare output, count blocks, check explorer, input of XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will be user for output for another sender.
Can find related output address.

That's what i am doing in analysis aka mapping.

[cyberhacker]

as a follower of the thread I can tell you there is a reason why the official xc-thread is now a moderated thread...
FUD & Trolling from dark on the original thread were tremendous... even official drk twitter account was used for trolling...

The guy's here are very carefull with newcomers who are suddenly coming over from dark...

lol.

actually i am fking sick of personal attack to XC Dev.

that is unacceptable.

i do not wanna point out their sick names

[sukottosan_d]

new fuds are coming!

do you have whitepaper, open-source?

I'm just asking for some info..
I know DRK fanboys are also pretty trollish. I was looking for information because I'd expect it to be available.
If it isn't, that's fine, I just thought it would be.

I get why you guys are defensive...but geez.
Some of you already jumped on me because I'm always in the DRK thread...which is true.
Not hiding it.
Except, DRK was the first and only crypto I've ever participated in - the community was good, the profits were good and are good - so I stayed.
Trying to get more involved in stuff - wanted to research and see if I can see what chaeplin does on the same level ....

But this is definitely not a productive place for anyone from the outside.

sukottosan...
as a follower of the thread I can tell you there is a reason why the official xc-thread is now a moderated thread...
FUD & Trolling from dark on the original thread were tremendous... even official drk twitter account was used for trolling...

The guy's here are very carefull with newcomers who are suddenly coming over from dark...

Well, I apologize for my sudden entry.
I am evaluating XC for personal reasons and I do things in sudden bursts...
I'll go away for weeks at a time and then do 1000 pages of research in two days....
So I guess me jumping it looks timely....yes, it did correspond to XC attention...but I'm really just looking for answers, not looking to do the FUD thing...got interested because of the debate and wanted to look at the problem myself.

[mav137]

new fuds are coming!

do you have whitepaper, open-source?

I'm just asking for some info..
I know DRK fanboys are also pretty trollish. I was looking for information because I'd expect it to be available.
If it isn't, that's fine, I just thought it would be.

I get why you guys are defensive...but geez.
Some of you already jumped on me because I'm always in the DRK thread...which is true.
Not hiding it.
Except, DRK was the first and only crypto I've ever participated in - the community was good, the profits were good and are good - so I stayed.
Trying to get more involved in stuff - wanted to research and see if I can see what chaeplin does on the same level ....

But this is definitely not a productive place for anyone from the outside.

I apologize for the community defensiveness, it has been very hard to stay positive under the influences / trolls that these guys have been receiving Have a look at the old and now closed unmanaged topic, it appears this board as a whole is not a productive place to announce new innovative technology.

Either way, there will be pushing back when XC gets pushed. XC is a coin to take into account. The community support is great here and the Dev iseven better. Such a shame he had to spend his hours here today with these challanges. Talent like that should not be wasted.

The coin is V1 and in Beta. A lot of promises have been made and are worked up to. With this anonymity already working, the V2 will be even more mindblowing.  

[greyskies]

All we have here is DRK troll Chaeplin with his broken english not making sense and going around in circles whilst still not able to establish the original users sender address.

[gen369]

Dev can deny.

Here is point.

Mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb is used for sender.



One time.

Every input to mixer got NEW address.


Matched....

Are you serious? Where did the mixer get the coins from? who clicked the send button?

From sender, with NEW address.

of course you can find the sender address used by mixer as it has a direct link to the receiver

but the point is what is the original users sender address?

It looks to me that chaeplin just wants to grab your attention as much as possible so you would waste your time answering him. He just proved that he doesn't know how to find the original sender address. He only showed the mixer sender address and that's where his huge investigation ends...Exactly as it should by design

[chaeplin]

All we have here is DRK troll Chaeplin with his broken english not making sense and going around in circles whilst still not able to establish the original users sender address.

Mixer identified.
Input of mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb == output from sender XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will not be used again for any sender.

So XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw == XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb.
Compare output, count blocks, check explorer, input of XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will be user for output for another sender.
Can find related output address.

That's what i am doing in analysis aka mapping.

[cyberhacker]

I'm just asking for some info..
I know DRK fanboys are also pretty trollish. I was looking for information because I'd expect it to be available.
If it isn't, that's fine, I just thought it would be.

I get why you guys are defensive...but geez.
Some of you already jumped on me because I'm always in the DRK thread...which is true.
Not hiding it.
Except, DRK was the first and only crypto I've ever participated in - the community was good, the profits were good and are good - so I stayed.
Trying to get more involved in stuff - wanted to research and see if I can see what chaeplin does on the same level ....

But this is definitely not a productive place for anyone from the outside.

sorry if any offense.

welcome any productive questions.

Thanks a lot.

[KimmyF]

All we have here is DRK troll Chaeplin with his broken english not making sense and going around in circles whilst still not able to establish the original users sender address.

Mixer identified.
Input of mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb == output from sender XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will not be used again for any sender.

So XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw == XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb.
Compare output, count blocks, check explorer, input of XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will be user for output for another sender.
Can find related output address.

That's what i am doing in analysis aka mapping.

GTFO: The guy has a lot of knowledge, who cares about his english. Facts are facts & all that count

[cyberhacker]

All we have here is DRK troll Chaeplin with his broken english not making sense and going around in circles whilst still not able to establish the original users sender address.

Mixer identified.
Input of mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb == output from sender XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will not be used again for any sender.

So XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw == XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb.
Compare output, count blocks, check explorer, input of XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will be user for output for another sender.
Can find related output address.

That's what i am doing in analysis aka mapping.

GTFO: The guy has a lot of knowledge, who cares about his english. Facts are facts & all that count

+1

without this man we can't get this far so soon.  

but he destroy the price uptrend indeed

[sukottosan_d]

Dev can deny.

Here is point.

Mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb is used for sender.



One time.

Every input to mixer got NEW address.


Matched....

Are you serious? Where did the mixer get the coins from? who clicked the send button?

From sender, with NEW address.

Okay... but you still don't know who the original sender is, correct?  Isn't that the point of anonymous transfers -- to mask the original sender's address?

Mixer identified.
Input of mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb == output from sender XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will not be used again for any sender.

So XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw == XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb.
Compare output, count blocks, check explorer, input of XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will be user for output for another sender.
Can find related output address.

That's what i am doing in analysis aka mapping.

I don't understand what is wrong with chaeplin's analysis here.
He proves a sender is tied to one mixer.... and then to an output.

You can change the wallet address, the anonymity has to assume the sender's wallet can be identified and addresses can be pulled from that...
You can change an address in your bitcoin wallet already and send from a new address....but that's not anonymity because, say...a search warrant was enacted against you...they can just get that info from your machine - or maybe they pull your address from a known transaction (ex. transaction with an online store that has it tied to your account with them).
So..bitcoin has that level of anonymity already.
The solution has to assume this is possible and still make the transactions anonymous regardless.


Please, can someone explain what piece I am missing?...and this isn't FUD...I'm actually asking. I must be missing something, right?

[Teka]

All we have here is DRK troll Chaeplin with his broken english not making sense and going around in circles whilst still not able to establish the original users sender address.

Mixer identified.
Input of mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb == output from sender XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will not be used again for any sender.

So XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw == XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb.
Compare output, count blocks, check explorer, input of XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will be user for output for another sender.
Can find related output address.

That's what i am doing in analysis aka mapping.

GTFO: The guy has a lot of knowledge, who cares about his english. Facts are facts & all that count

English is not my 1st language so I agree with the first aspect of your point. However so far he has only proven that he can find the mixer address and that the system works.

[greyskies]

I don't understand what is wrong with chaeplin's analysis here.
He proves a sender is tied to one mixer.... and then to an output.

You can change the wallet address, the anonymity has to assume the sender's wallet can be identified and addresses can be pulled from that...
You can change an address in your bitcoin wallet already and send from a new address....but that's not anonymity because, say...a search warrant was enacted against you...they can just get that info from your machine - or maybe they pull your address from a known transaction (ex. transaction with an online store that has it tied to your account with them).
So..bitcoin has that level of anonymity already.
The solution has to assume this is possible and still make the transactions anonymous regardless.


Please, can someone explain what piece I am missing?...and this isn't FUD...I'm actually asking. I must be missing something, right?

So you mean it's on the same level of anonymity as DRK?

Except DRK requires nodes which need to be set up on VPS's and doesn't offer encryption?

Ok.

[Junkey]

Let me give a non tech breakdown of what chaplin is saying with the example of snail mail.  He is seeing the mail man deliver the mail and shouts, "Oh there it is, the guy sending the mail. I know where it comes from!"  He doesn't seem to understand that the mailman isn't the starting point of the transaction, he is just the middle man.  He still doesn't know who gave the mailman the letter b/c there is no return to address on it.  He just seems to not under stand it on the most basic level.

[evtrmm]

Dev can deny.

Here is point.

Mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb is used for sender.



One time.

Every input to mixer got NEW address.


Matched....

Are you serious? Where did the mixer get the coins from? who clicked the send button?

From sender, with NEW address.

Okay... but you still don't know who the original sender is, correct?  Isn't that the point of anonymous transfers -- to mask the original sender's address?

Urm, that's the same as just generating a new bitcoin address and sending a transaction.

"Sendfrommixer" MAIN
MAIN = XM4f4GbzaCnMphTKitAYMSX8vdkUPrwYuQ not XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb

That is the whole argument here.  Even though Main was empty, it still sent from MAIN, but from an imposter address.  

You can only envision where it goes from here.  
Steps in the right direction.

Being that Main only had 1 transaction sent to it, it does stand out pretty substantially once you pin it down.  but once numerous transactions are sent to that address, it will be highly undetectable.

[atcsecure]

All we have here is DRK troll Chaeplin with his broken english not making sense and going around in circles whilst still not able to establish the original users sender address.

Mixer identified.
Input of mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb == output from sender XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will not be used again for any sender.

So XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw == XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb.
Compare output, count blocks, check explorer, input of XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will be user for output for another sender.
Can find related output address.

That's what i am doing in analysis aka mapping.

I appreciate the analysis mapping as it provides valuable feedback, for the record "input of XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will be user for output for another sender" is not ALWAYS accurate as the mixer selects different resources for sending outbound..

[KimmyF]

All we have here is DRK troll Chaeplin with his broken english not making sense and going around in circles whilst still not able to establish the original users sender address.

Mixer identified.
Input of mixer address XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb == output from sender XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will not be used again for any sender.

So XQaYnWevqYVfg7j75qr2YR38R3xbb5xjyw == XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb.
Compare output, count blocks, check explorer, input of XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb will be user for output for another sender.
Can find related output address.

That's what i am doing in analysis aka mapping.

The guy has a lot of knowledge, who cares about his english. Facts are facts & all that count

English is not my 1st language so I agree with the first aspect of your point. However so far he has only proven that he can find the mixer address and that the system works.

Excuse me, english is not my first language also. Just do not like personal attacks, thats weak.
Still trying to learn: He links 3 different steps in 1 story: 2 addresses to the same mixer wallet in the middle and 1 incomming & 1 outgoing based on amount.
See no prove in there they belong to the same transaction. That mixer could be busy with many other active transactions. In court it will not stand up & as this chain get more and more used this so called link gets weaker and weaker