|
KryptoFoo
|
 |
July 27, 2014, 07:31:02 AM
Last edit: July 27, 2014, 08:06:26 AM by KryptoFoo |
|
Looking for more information about keycoin. What is the anon solution implemented for keycoin, and what sets it apart from other anon coins on the market (especially darkcoin, cloak, xc)?
Edit: is there a white paper?
TIA
|
|
|
|
|
|
KryptoFoo
|
|
July 27, 2014, 08:03:41 AM |
|
Not really knowing much about this coin's technology, I am reluctant to support it just yet. At least I think the name is great (but hey what's is a name). I couldn't help but notice the logos the dev had posted, it seems more obvious to drop the keyhole right into the work "keycoin"... I would also change that font on "security is key" looks pretty janky.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
child_harold
|
|
July 27, 2014, 09:49:36 AM |
|
My Grandma uses KeyCoin anonymous sending to book her shady holidays! Love you Nana!  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
mlord1010
|
|
July 27, 2014, 12:16:35 PM |
|
This coin is brand new. Even if that post is 100% true we are in the infant stages of the coin. Progress will be what drives this coin. My target is roughly 200k. |
|
|
|
|
pbremen01
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
July 27, 2014, 12:27:35 PM |
|
This coin is brand new. Even if that post is 100% true we are in the infant stages of the coin. Progress will be what drives this coin. My target is roughly 200k. Yeah, these are certainly infant stages of this coin. But devs said that anon was done. So why did developers launch anonymity feature if it clearly doesn't work (assuming this reddit post is 100% correct)? Did they at least test it? Did someone at least review their solution and concepts behind it? |
|
|
|
|
|
mlord1010
|
|
July 27, 2014, 12:41:15 PM |
|
This coin is brand new. Even if that post is 100% true we are in the infant stages of the coin. Progress will be what drives this coin. My target is roughly 200k. I'm no software engineer, but what this reddit post tells me, is the only person who can use this method to see who sent the money is the person that received the money. The whole point of anon is so that OTHERS cannot decipher who you sent the money to. But again, this coin is 2 weeks old. There is plenty of time for growth without you trying to panic crypt, xc, and key investors. Yeah, these are certainly infant stages of this coin. But devs said that anon was done. So why did developers launch anonymity feature if it clearly doesn't work (assuming this reddit post is 100% correct)? Did they at least test it? Did someone at least review their solution and concepts behind it? Darkcoin, xc, crypt, monero, They all offer anon tech that hasn't been proven to be uncrackable. These products are still in development. |
|
|
|
|
pbremen01
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
July 27, 2014, 12:53:41 PM |
|
This coin is brand new. Even if that post is 100% true we are in the infant stages of the coin. Progress will be what drives this coin. My target is roughly 200k. I'm no software engineer, but what this reddit post tells me, is the only person who can use this method to see who sent the money is the person that received the money. The whole point of anon is so that OTHERS cannot decipher who you sent the money to. But again, this coin is 2 weeks old. There is plenty of time for growth without you trying to panic crypt, xc, and key investors. Yeah, these are certainly infant stages of this coin. But devs said that anon was done. So why did developers launch anonymity feature if it clearly doesn't work (assuming this reddit post is 100% correct)? Did they at least test it? Did someone at least review their solution and concepts behind it? Darkcoin, xc, crypt, monero, They all offer anon tech that hasn't been proven to be uncrackable. These products are still in development. Yes, I know that they're still in development. And there is nothing wrong with this. But keycoin launched anonymity feature that can be "broken" with just eyeballing the blockchain and with piece of paper and pencil (again assuming that post is true - I haven't checked for myself because anon feature doesn't work in my wallet). You don't even have to have access to the source code of the mixer or to the protocol specs. This just shows that developers may grossly underestimate intelligence of the people that may be interested in this coin. They obviously think that the "sheep" will "buy" any kind of anonymity that they're trying to "sell". |
|
|
|
|
|
SushiChef
|
|
July 27, 2014, 12:56:40 PM |
|
They obviously think that the "sheep" will "buy" any kind of anonymity that they're trying to "sell".
Already advised them to look into a different niche with this coin.. Don't think they will listen |
|
|
|
|
|
Petr1fied
|
|
July 27, 2014, 01:11:39 PM |
|
This coin is brand new. Even if that post is 100% true we are in the infant stages of the coin. Progress will be what drives this coin. My target is roughly 200k. Yeah, these are certainly infant stages of this coin. But devs said that anon was done. So why did developers launch anonymity feature if it clearly doesn't work (assuming this reddit post is 100% correct)? Did they at least test it? Did someone at least review their solution and concepts behind it? The method outlined in that reddit post seems incorrect based upon my own test but it does sound like the wallet in question only had a single input to begin with. In my case it spent the final amount in 3 completely separate random values in the first instance, these were spent from 3 completely separate inputs received by 3 completely separate wallet addresses on my client. Is it possible to find where the coins came from by looking back in the blockchain and adding up smaller values trying to find the original wallet address(es)? I'd have to say, perhaps. But trying to figure this out will get much harder when there are a lot of transactions moving around. One area of improvement the developers could look to undertake would be to create 3 separate deposit addresses for the account that the randomized values go to. That way there is no record of the 3 randomized values going to the exact same deposit address but they will still go to the exact same account. |
|
|
|
|
|
RichardT
|
|
July 27, 2014, 01:16:08 PM |
|
But keycoin launched anonymity feature that can be "broken" with just eyeballing the blockchain and with piece of paper and pencil (again assuming that post is true - I haven't checked for myself because anon feature doesn't work in my wallet). You don't even have to have access to the source code of the mixer or to the protocol specs.
This just shows that developers may grossly underestimate intelligence of the people that may be interested in this coin. They obviously think that the "sheep" will "buy" any kind of anonymity that they're trying to "sell".
That's a pretty big accusation there for a guy who hasn't checked anything himself and is only relying on a reddit post. I understand that criticism is good, but no need to say things like that about the devs. Like others have said, keycoin is new. So time will tell. |
|
|
|
|
pbremen01
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
July 27, 2014, 01:20:41 PM |
|
But keycoin launched anonymity feature that can be "broken" with just eyeballing the blockchain and with piece of paper and pencil (again assuming that post is true - I haven't checked for myself because anon feature doesn't work in my wallet). You don't even have to have access to the source code of the mixer or to the protocol specs.
This just shows that developers may grossly underestimate intelligence of the people that may be interested in this coin. They obviously think that the "sheep" will "buy" any kind of anonymity that they're trying to "sell".
That's a pretty big accusation there for a guy who hasn't checked anything himself and is only relying on a reddit post. I understand that criticism is good, but no need to say things like that about the devs. Like others have said, keycoin is new. So time will tell. Ok, I agree. But I can't check anything for myself because the anonymity doesn't work in my client and other people seem to have similar problems. |
|
|
|
|
Djinou94
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 27, 2014, 01:22:49 PM |
|
It's working for me
Great anon
|
|
|
|
|
pbremen01
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
July 27, 2014, 01:34:41 PM |
|
This coin is brand new. Even if that post is 100% true we are in the infant stages of the coin. Progress will be what drives this coin. My target is roughly 200k. Yeah, these are certainly infant stages of this coin. But devs said that anon was done. So why did developers launch anonymity feature if it clearly doesn't work (assuming this reddit post is 100% correct)? Did they at least test it? Did someone at least review their solution and concepts behind it? The method outlined in that reddit post seems incorrect based upon my own test but it does sound like the wallet in question only had a single input to begin with. In my case it spent the final amount in 3 completely separate random values in the first instance, these were spent from 3 completely separate inputs received by 3 completely separate wallet addresses on my client. Is it possible to find where the coins came from by looking back in the blockchain and adding up smaller values trying to find the original wallet address(es)? I'd have to say, perhaps. But trying to figure this out will get much harder when there are a lot of transactions moving around. One area of improvement the developers could look to undertake would be to create 3 separate deposit addresses for the account that the randomized values go to. That way there is no record of the 3 randomized values going to the exact same deposit address but they will still go to the exact same account. I don't think that the problem lies in the number of inputs. Imagine mixer as a big black box. Nobody knows what is happening there. You send X coins to the mixer. The recipient must receive Y coins. The remaining R=X-Y coins you receive at "change" addresses (one or more). So R = R_1+R_2+...+R_n (in case of KeyCoin it seems that R = R_1, i.e. there is only one change address). So on the blockchain you can always find transactions that have outputs X, Y, R_1,....,R_n and the following equation holds: X = Y + R_1 + R_2 + .... + R_n. (this equation assumes that the mixer isn't stealing part of your coins). So if you can find such transactions in vicinity (block height is not far away) of the transaction that sent Y coins to recipient, then the addresses (or inputs) that were used to send X coins belong to the original sender. Of course you may find different transactions that satisfy equation X = Y + R_1+R_2+....+R_n, but the probability may be low (depends on actual implementation and the number of transactions with different amounts in outputs). This is general problem with such mixers. This can be ameliorated in such implementations where mixer "steals" some random amount of coins from you (and yes, such mixers exists). |
|
|
|
|
|
mlord1010
|
|
July 27, 2014, 01:38:37 PM |
|
What's the point in these posts. Do you want a job or do you want to fud? 99% of us have no idea what you're talking about in the formula. This is not a lets discuss advanced anon thread.
|
|
|
|
|
dijclarwin
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 48
Merit: 0
|
|
July 27, 2014, 01:43:02 PM |
|
What's the point in these posts. Do you want a job or do you want to fud? 99% of us have no idea what you're talking about in the formula. This is not a lets discuss advanced anon thread.
All you need to understand his post is basic school algebra, not that difficult. I would also like to know the mechanics of KEY's anon. Remember this coin was advertised as having working anon which reflects the recent rise in its price. Also the centralization issue is also problematic and I am wondering how the devs plan to address this point in the future. |
|
|
|
|
Daggoo
Member
Offline
Activity: 65
Merit: 10
|
|
July 27, 2014, 01:47:57 PM |
|
What's the point in these posts. Do you want a job or do you want to fud? 99% of us have no idea what you're talking about in the formula. This is not a lets discuss advanced anon thread.
All you need to understand his post is basic school algebra, not that difficult. I would also like to know the mechanics of KEY's anon. Remember this coin was advertised as having working anon which reflects the recent rise in its price. Also the centralization issue is also problematic and I am wondering how the devs plan to address this point in the future. +1 I think most of us want to see real working anon before buying in to the latest, new anon coin. |
|
|
|
|
|
Petr1fied
|
|
July 27, 2014, 01:57:34 PM |
|
pbremen01, I gave you a link to my anonymous test the other day. You still haven't actually responded with my wallet address: Prove your math works already. |
|
|
|
|
pbremen01
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
July 27, 2014, 02:12:36 PM |
|
pbremen01, I gave you a link to my anonymous test the other day. You still haven't actually responded with my wallet address: Prove your math works already. I don't have time for tracing your original address. You can do it for yourself or hire someone to do it for you if you're interested. You can't expect that some random people on the internet will do work for you for free. Sorry, but my math is too simple to be "proven". My math works because of this simple principle: if the mixer is not stealing your coins, then the amount of the coins you send to the mixer must be equal to the amount of coins that mixer sends to the recipient and to the change addresses. If this is not true and the mixer operators are rational, then they're stealing your coins. |
|
|
|
|
|
