Why Poloniex Has Rejected SuperCoin

[maryvale]

This is called SLOPPY CODING you noobs.

Code:

if (dAmount <= 0.0 || dAmount > 150000000.0)

Code:

static const int64_t MAX_MONEY = 150000000 * COIN;
static const int64_t POW_MAX_MONEY = 50000000 * COIN; 

This is how to do it, without hardcoding values

Code:

if (dAmount <= 0.0 || dAmount > MAX_MONEY)

But then, too much greed to see the truth  

That value (150 million) is left over from SUPER's initial specs, prior to the recent fork. That line of code is innocuous. Read the thread, Polo-shill.

+1

MAX_MONEY is non issue, this has been repeated multiple times in the thread.

At this point Busoni stuck his neck out and made a post on code he himself did not fully understand at all. Unfortunately for him his comments were incorrect and the code is clean, looks like he already knows this, based on his backpedaling posts once it was verified by other parties that it was incorrect.  

Its just Amateur moves, all new entrepreneurs make stupid mistakes like this early in their career, it either makes them or breaks them.

The take away here is, if you discover a "securtiy hole' prior to disclosing it publicly, one may review all the code that is affected in their software ecosystem. The entire process of disclosing security holes must be take serious[1], especially when you are dealing with high volume of BTC.  He could of just said, "we found out super coin has funky code, and upon further research we found out that 70% of the other coins listed on our exchange suffer from the same venerability, we will look into the matter". Off course if he the above statement  massive panic would ensue, and it would be difficult for poloneix recover, but not impossible. Tough decisions.

If busoni was acting in good faith of the community as he has repeated many times in this thread, then he would just clean up his OP, apologize and say that his initial comments were way off with his findings, it was dumb to post with out it being verified by multiple sources,  and that he did not hire an expert in to conduct the coder review. Or he can just ignore it, and pray that we all forget in a few days how unprofessional their exchange currently looks to the community.

 [1] https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2007/01/schneier_full_disclo.html

Again, the facts are listed here:

I showed how the MAX_MONEY is used in the code:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652351.msg7315515#msg7315515

and how total coin is calculated:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652351.msg7315840#msg7315840

Busoni made irresponsible claims on SUPER, he should apologize to the community. This was an event that degraded a lot Poloniex. Correct it now, otherwise it will just give people impression that Poloniex is very incompetent.

[1714162145]

1714162145

[1714162145]

1714162145

[1714162145]

1714162145

[1714162145]

1714162145

[KingArbinV]

Code:

static const int64_t MAX_MONEY = 150000000 * COIN;
static const int64_t POW_MAX_MONEY = 50000000 * COIN; 

There is a huge misconception out there that MAX_MONEY sets the total coin count for a coin. This is false. MAX_MONEY sets the maximum amount of coins that can be sent in a single transaction over a network. It is customary to typically set this to the maximum coins that will be created but it is not necessary.

We have played around and tested this to verify it on the DigiByte testnet before. We made sure this was the case.

The actual reward is determined here between lines 1033 & 1082: https://github.com/supercoinproject/supercoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp

Code:

// miner's coin base reward
int64_t GetProofOfWorkReward(int nHeight, int64_t nFees, const CBlockIndex* pindex)
{
	int64_t nSubsidy = 512 * COIN;

	if(nHeight == 1)
		nSubsidy = INITIAL_OFFERING_PERCENTAGE * POW_MAX_MONEY;

	if(nHeight > LAST_POW_BLOCK)
		return 0;

	int nPoWHeight = GetPowHeight(pindex) + 1;
	printf(">> nHeight = %d, nPoWHeight = %d\n", nHeight, nPoWHeight);

	int nReduceFactor = 0;
	if(nPoWHeight < SWITCHOVER_POW_BLOCK)
	{
		nReduceFactor = nPoWHeight / 43200;

		if(nReduceFactor > 9)		
			nSubsidy = nMinSubsidy;
		else
			nSubsidy >>= nReduceFactor;
	}
	else
	{
		if(nPoWHeight < 19200)
			nSubsidy = 512 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 28800)
			nSubsidy = 256 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 38400)
			nSubsidy = 128 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 48000)
			nSubsidy = 64 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 57600)
			nSubsidy = 32 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 67200)
			nSubsidy = 16 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 76800)
			nSubsidy = 8 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 86400)
			nSubsidy = 4 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 96000)
			nSubsidy = 2 * COIN;
		else
			nSubsidy = 1 * COIN;
	}

    return nSubsidy + nFees;
}

To find the exact coin coin count you would need to do the math and add everything up in there.

For a comparison this is where Bitcoins maximum coin supply is determined. Once again you have to calculate it out to prove it is 21 million.

Code:

int64_t GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64_t nFees)
{
    int64_t nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
    int halvings = nHeight / Params().SubsidyHalvingInterval();

    // Force block reward to zero when right shift is undefined.
    if (halvings >= 64)
        return nFees;

    // Subsidy is cut in half every 210,000 blocks which will occur approximately every 4 years.
    nSubsidy >>= halvings;

    return nSubsidy + nFees;
}

EDIT: We are not defending Supercoin (had never heard of them until this post) nor have we done the exact math in their code. We simply wanted to point out a common misconception to avoid future issues for everyone.

Hah glad you posted it first, much better than what I was gonna write about it, but to put it in an idiots guide fashion:

Send over 150,000,000 coins and you get an error.

^^^ This is all MAX_MONEY does ^^^

[SirChiko]

tl dr;

PoloniEx owner can't read code.

lol.

He probably just doesn't have enought time?

[Cohle]

tl dr;

PoloniEx owner can't read code.

lol.

He probably just doesn't have enought time?

Yet he had time to smear SUPER.

SUPER has a non moderated ANN with over 100 FUD free pages. Its dev team is active and engaged with that community. Busoni has unfairly stigmatised it. The innuendo over dodgy code (now debunked by others) continues to be perpetrated by Polo mods in their trollbox and it's clear the sheep who hero worship them don't venture beyond that cesspool to gather their own information in order to formulate their own opinions.

[chesthing]

Supercoin in mid 2ks, will be in teens within a couple days then to hundreds. Sorry bagholders, should have sold in the 7ks. Next time put a little thought into what the developer is offering - hell he even admitted his system doesn't stop cheats, can't get more clear than that.

[Spoetnik]

I would like to point out that I did not personally review the code, as many people seem to think. The person who did has very high standards and was not thrilled with what he saw, and he was overzealous in his criticisms. When I made this post, I firmly believed that the maximum supply was inflated. My intention with going public before contacting the devs was to make sure they did not have a chance to cover up the mistake or take advantage of the issue.

It is my responsibility to ensure that these issues are addressed correctly, so no fingers should be pointed anywhere but at me. I see now that I should have had another reviewer confirm the findings, and investigated sufficiently to make sure I understood all of the code myself before proceeding. I apologize for this misstep. There are still some parts of the code we're concerned about, so our investigations will continue, and I will talk to the devs privately about the anon feature.

This whole raising the standards for coins thing is in an early stage, and we are constantly improving our process. We believe strongly in integrity and transparency, and it has always been my intention to use Poloniex's position to improve the quality of crypto.

You do realize what you have caused, it was reckless. I believed you had looked at the code. WTF  13BTC down the drain on your bullshit, FU and POLO

it's your own stupidity for investing 13 BTC in a scam coin .
wanna blame someone then look in the mirror..

[Spoetnik]

Stop feeding Spoetnik, he is already a fat troll. Ignore him and don't reply.

define troll..

is it someone that takes the time to make an honest, sincere and articulate post illustrating their opinions ?
i have not just posted "Supercoin sucks"
I looked at the code and compared it and weighed in with my opinion.. is that ok ?

[gts476]

Stop feeding Spoetnik, he is already a fat troll. Ignore him and don't reply.

define troll..

is it someone that takes the time to make an honest, sincere and articulate post illustrating their opinions ?
i have not just posted "Supercoin sucks"
I looked at the code and compared it and weighed in with my opinion.. is that ok ?

define troll..

[daywalkerneo]

I WILL BOYCOTT POLO SINCE THEY ARE STARTING TO BAN PPL TELLING TRUTH

I WILL NEVER TRADE ON POLO!

true i have been watching them bann people now for telling the truth on SC poloniex has no respect from me anymore

[Spoetnik]

I don't see why we shouldn't trust busoni's claim when it's true, explain why was it higher value than the other one then?

Because it has jack shit to do with the max coin supply, it is so irrelevant they didnt bother changing it.

wrong.. that is a lie !
they changed it specifically to that value and this has been pointed out on *almost every page in this topic.
you and the others that keep saying this are spreading lies period .
i know i checked the code AND so did busoni (or his buddy etc)
he proved it already.. proof of this is several pages back (maybe go read it)

seriously you lying scamming bag holder noobs need to stfu with the trolling and lying
you pathetic scammer bag holders are far worse than any coin cloner trying to scam !

you corrupt pathological lying scammers make me sick.

you invest in a scam-coin and the scam coin maker gets caught red handed and you go and lie and troll because your scared your bag will become worthless..

FACT.

end of story.

[gts476]

I don't see why we shouldn't trust busoni's claim when it's true, explain why was it higher value than the other one then?

Because it has jack shit to do with the max coin supply, it is so irrelevant they didnt bother changing it.

wrong.. that is a lie !
they changed it specifically to that value and this has been pointed out on *almost every page in this topic.
you and the others that keep saying this are spreading lies period .
i know i checked the code AND so did busoni (or his buddy etc)
he proved it already.. proof of this is several pages back (maybe go read it)

seriously you lying scamming bag holder noobs need to stfu with the trolling and lying
you pathetic scammer bag holders are far worse than any coin cloner trying to scam !

you corrupt pathological lying scammers make me sick.

you invest in a scam-coin and the scam coin maker gets caught red handed and you go and lie and troll because your scared your bag will become worthless..

FACT.

end of story.

Define troll..

[Spoetnik]

I don't see why we shouldn't trust busoni's claim when it's true, explain why was it higher value than the other one then?

Because it has jack shit to do with the max coin supply, it is so irrelevant they didnt bother changing it.

hey smart guy.. what if i made OTHER changes to the code on the next update increasing the money supply ?

the function that is called that contain that max money static variable is used in a lots of places and what would happen first
is if someone tried to send money that is greater than that setting the transaction would fail to go through.
so it would be a NECESSITY to setup a scam !

most of you here prob have no experience coding in 'c' or even looked at the code but are spouting off.
the fact is this could have been a multi-part scam.. as in parts of malicious code are added in phases so not to set off an alarm.
this Altcoin scene is swiss cheese with scammers running wild 24/7.. hell look what god damn coin it was based on Honor coin of all coins LOLOLOL
I have witnessed coin cloners here update the wallets with scammer code.. i don't want to get into who and what coin etc but trust me i know for a FACT it happens.

You guys need to cut the crap.. most of you know nothing but are repeating 'crap' you *heard.
And the bottom line is do we have proof 100% that something malicious was going on ?
Maybe ? Maybe not.

But it does LOOK fishy.
And if something looks fishy in crypto.. it usually is.

Most of you are gullible and eat up what ever is fed to you and this is just shell account games for control of the lemmings.. the usual Bitcointalk routine.

got a brain ? use it.. or don't not my problem.

[traumschiff]

Supercoin in mid 2ks, will be in teens within a couple days then to hundreds. Sorry bagholders, should have sold in the 7ks. Next time put a little thought into what the developer is offering - hell he even admitted his system doesn't stop cheats, can't get more clear than that.

Reply to my last comment made on you.

Sad stuff that you have your account with the only purpose of spreading fud on coins.

Your life is pathetic.

[bitcoinwonders010]

Supercoin in mid 2ks, will be in teens within a couple days then to hundreds. Sorry bagholders, should have sold in the 7ks. Next time put a little thought into what the developer is offering - hell he even admitted his system doesn't stop cheats, can't get more clear than that.

Reply to my last comment made on you.

Sad stuff that you have your account with the only purpose of spreading fud on coins.

Your life is pathetic.

ignore the troll, i didn't know dumb people like spoetnik can type

[haggis]

I never had Supercoin and probably will never have one, but the shit Spoetnik is talking hurts me physically. Finally ignored. Hope he has no children and never will.

[testcoin]

Code:

static const int64_t MAX_MONEY = 150000000 * COIN;
static const int64_t POW_MAX_MONEY = 50000000 * COIN; 

There is a huge misconception out there that MAX_MONEY sets the total coin count for a coin. This is false. MAX_MONEY sets the maximum amount of coins that can be sent in a single transaction over a network. It is customary to typically set this to the maximum coins that will be created but it is not necessary.

We have played around and tested this to verify it on the DigiByte testnet before. We made sure this was the case.

The actual reward is determined here between lines 1033 & 1082: https://github.com/supercoinproject/supercoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp

Code:

// miner's coin base reward
int64_t GetProofOfWorkReward(int nHeight, int64_t nFees, const CBlockIndex* pindex)
{
	int64_t nSubsidy = 512 * COIN;

	if(nHeight == 1)
		nSubsidy = INITIAL_OFFERING_PERCENTAGE * POW_MAX_MONEY;

	if(nHeight > LAST_POW_BLOCK)
		return 0;

	int nPoWHeight = GetPowHeight(pindex) + 1;
	printf(">> nHeight = %d, nPoWHeight = %d\n", nHeight, nPoWHeight);

	int nReduceFactor = 0;
	if(nPoWHeight < SWITCHOVER_POW_BLOCK)
	{
		nReduceFactor = nPoWHeight / 43200;

		if(nReduceFactor > 9)		
			nSubsidy = nMinSubsidy;
		else
			nSubsidy >>= nReduceFactor;
	}
	else
	{
		if(nPoWHeight < 19200)
			nSubsidy = 512 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 28800)
			nSubsidy = 256 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 38400)
			nSubsidy = 128 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 48000)
			nSubsidy = 64 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 57600)
			nSubsidy = 32 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 67200)
			nSubsidy = 16 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 76800)
			nSubsidy = 8 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 86400)
			nSubsidy = 4 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 96000)
			nSubsidy = 2 * COIN;
		else
			nSubsidy = 1 * COIN;
	}

    return nSubsidy + nFees;
}

To find the exact coin coin count you would need to do the math and add everything up in there.

For a comparison this is where Bitcoins maximum coin supply is determined. Once again you have to calculate it out to prove it is 21 million.

Code:

int64_t GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64_t nFees)
{
    int64_t nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
    int halvings = nHeight / Params().SubsidyHalvingInterval();

    // Force block reward to zero when right shift is undefined.
    if (halvings >= 64)
        return nFees;

    // Subsidy is cut in half every 210,000 blocks which will occur approximately every 4 years.
    nSubsidy >>= halvings;

    return nSubsidy + nFees;
}

EDIT: We are not defending Supercoin (had never heard of them until this post) nor have we done the exact math in their code. We simply wanted to point out a common misconception to avoid future issues for everyone.

Thanks for the information

It's indeed a very common misconception

I'm also new to Supercoin. It appears that it becomes famous now after this incident  

Look like this time Poloniex has given away some free advertising to this coin

[some138]

This is called SLOPPY CODING you noobs.

Code:

if (dAmount <= 0.0 || dAmount > 150000000.0)

Code:

static const int64_t MAX_MONEY = 150000000 * COIN;
static const int64_t POW_MAX_MONEY = 50000000 * COIN; 

This is how to do it, without hardcoding values

Code:

if (dAmount <= 0.0 || dAmount > MAX_MONEY)

But then, too much greed to see the truth  

That value (150 million) is left over from SUPER's initial specs, prior to the recent fork. That line of code is innocuous. Read the thread, Polo-shill.

+1

MAX_MONEY is non issue, this has been repeated multiple times in the thread.

At this point Busoni stuck his neck out and made a post on code he himself did not fully understand at all. Unfortunately for him his comments were incorrect and the code is clean, looks like he already knows this, based on his backpedaling posts once it was verified by other parties that it was incorrect.  

Its just Amateur moves, all new entrepreneurs make stupid mistakes like this early in their career, it either makes them or breaks them.

The take away here is, if you discover a "securtiy hole' prior to disclosing it publicly, one may review all the code that is affected in their software ecosystem. The entire process of disclosing security holes must be take serious[1], especially when you are dealing with high volume of BTC.  He could of just said, "we found out super coin has funky code, and upon further research we found out that 70% of the other coins listed on our exchange suffer from the same venerability, we will look into the matter". Off course if he the above statement  massive panic would ensue, and it would be difficult for poloneix recover, but not impossible. Tough decisions.

If busoni was acting in good faith of the community as he has repeated many times in this thread, then he would just clean up his OP, apologize and say that his initial comments were way off with his findings, it was dumb to post with out it being verified by multiple sources,  and that he did not hire an expert in to conduct the coder review. Or he can just ignore it, and pray that we all forget in a few days how unprofessional their exchange currently looks to the community.

 [1] https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2007/01/schneier_full_disclo.html

Again, the facts are listed here:

I showed how the MAX_MONEY is used in the code:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652351.msg7315515#msg7315515

and how total coin is calculated:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652351.msg7315840#msg7315840

Busoni made irresponsible claims on SUPER, he should apologize to the community. This was an event that degraded a lot Poloniex. Correct it now, otherwise it will just give people impression that Poloniex is very incompetent.

Yes the facts are posted in the 2 above links, why people continue to argue? Nothing to argue, everything is clear! If you understand the code, go read it, otherwise read the above two posts.

[some138]

Code:

static const int64_t MAX_MONEY = 150000000 * COIN;
static const int64_t POW_MAX_MONEY = 50000000 * COIN; 

There is a huge misconception out there that MAX_MONEY sets the total coin count for a coin. This is false. MAX_MONEY sets the maximum amount of coins that can be sent in a single transaction over a network. It is customary to typically set this to the maximum coins that will be created but it is not necessary.

We have played around and tested this to verify it on the DigiByte testnet before. We made sure this was the case.

The actual reward is determined here between lines 1033 & 1082: https://github.com/supercoinproject/supercoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp

Code:

// miner's coin base reward
int64_t GetProofOfWorkReward(int nHeight, int64_t nFees, const CBlockIndex* pindex)
{
	int64_t nSubsidy = 512 * COIN;

	if(nHeight == 1)
		nSubsidy = INITIAL_OFFERING_PERCENTAGE * POW_MAX_MONEY;

	if(nHeight > LAST_POW_BLOCK)
		return 0;

	int nPoWHeight = GetPowHeight(pindex) + 1;
	printf(">> nHeight = %d, nPoWHeight = %d\n", nHeight, nPoWHeight);

	int nReduceFactor = 0;
	if(nPoWHeight < SWITCHOVER_POW_BLOCK)
	{
		nReduceFactor = nPoWHeight / 43200;

		if(nReduceFactor > 9)		
			nSubsidy = nMinSubsidy;
		else
			nSubsidy >>= nReduceFactor;
	}
	else
	{
		if(nPoWHeight < 19200)
			nSubsidy = 512 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 28800)
			nSubsidy = 256 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 38400)
			nSubsidy = 128 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 48000)
			nSubsidy = 64 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 57600)
			nSubsidy = 32 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 67200)
			nSubsidy = 16 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 76800)
			nSubsidy = 8 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 86400)
			nSubsidy = 4 * COIN;
		else if(nPoWHeight < 96000)
			nSubsidy = 2 * COIN;
		else
			nSubsidy = 1 * COIN;
	}

    return nSubsidy + nFees;
}

To find the exact coin coin count you would need to do the math and add everything up in there.

For a comparison this is where Bitcoins maximum coin supply is determined. Once again you have to calculate it out to prove it is 21 million.

Code:

int64_t GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64_t nFees)
{
    int64_t nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
    int halvings = nHeight / Params().SubsidyHalvingInterval();

    // Force block reward to zero when right shift is undefined.
    if (halvings >= 64)
        return nFees;

    // Subsidy is cut in half every 210,000 blocks which will occur approximately every 4 years.
    nSubsidy >>= halvings;

    return nSubsidy + nFees;
}

EDIT: We are not defending Supercoin (had never heard of them until this post) nor have we done the exact math in their code. We simply wanted to point out a common misconception to avoid future issues for everyone.

Thanks for the information

It's indeed a very common misconception

I'm also new to Supercoin. It appears that it becomes famous now after this incident  

Look like this time Poloniex has given away some free advertising to this coin

The facts are there, explained very clearly:

I showed how the MAX_MONEY is used in the code:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652351.msg7315515#msg7315515

and how total coin is calculated:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652351.msg7315840#msg7315840

[maryvale]

I don't see why we shouldn't trust busoni's claim when it's true, explain why was it higher value than the other one then?

Because it has jack shit to do with the max coin supply, it is so irrelevant they didnt bother changing it.

hey smart guy.. what if i made OTHER changes to the code on the next update increasing the money supply ?

the function that is called that contain that max money static variable is used in a lots of places and what would happen first
is if someone tried to send money that is greater than that setting the transaction would fail to go through.
so it would be a NECESSITY to setup a scam !

most of you here prob have no experience coding in 'c' or even looked at the code but are spouting off.
the fact is this could have been a multi-part scam.. as in parts of malicious code are added in phases so not to set off an alarm.
this Altcoin scene is swiss cheese with scammers running wild 24/7.. hell look what god damn coin it was based on Honor coin of all coins LOLOLOL
I have witnessed coin cloners here update the wallets with scammer code.. i don't want to get into who and what coin etc but trust me i know for a FACT it happens.

You guys need to cut the crap.. most of you know nothing but are repeating 'crap' you *heard.
And the bottom line is do we have proof 100% that something malicious was going on ?
Maybe ? Maybe not.

But it does LOOK fishy.
And if something looks fishy in crypto.. it usually is.

Most of you are gullible and eat up what ever is fed to you and this is just shell account games for control of the lemmings.. the usual Bitcointalk routine.

got a brain ? use it.. or don't not my problem.

Spoetnik, I saw you posted often in JPC thread, that is a coin I like too, and I like some of your good posts there. But why fud here? Why not you just look at the facts?

I showed how the MAX_MONEY is used in the code:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652351.msg7315515#msg7315515

and how total coin is calculated:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652351.msg7315840#msg7315840

From these facts, the MAX_MONEY etc are irrelevant to the coins the system will generate. What are your concerns? that the dev will sneak in later and increase the coin system generates? You know this will be a hardfork and requires at least 51% network to agree, right? Also if dev can sneak in some new things into the code, isn't it extremely easy for him to change whatever numbers he wants to change?

From what I see, the guy from Poloniex simply made a mistake, as he or someone he asked to review the code have no idea at all what the code means. That who reviewed the code is either never worked on coin code, or a copy-paster who created some scam coins (only simple copied from other coins) before. This is the fact, no deny of it. Very simple.

[nomad13666]