[Ultracoin] [Est. Feb 2014] ~ ASIC Resistant & Ultrafast 6 Second Transactions!

[usukan]

Hi wtfc30

In Waves they presented a decentralized 2FA prototype (under Conferance and events):
https://blog.wavesplatform.com/waves-weekly-no-17-d3858e39812f#.ormmd7xnv
"The other event is hackathon http://hack4people.ru/ that took place at Digital October over the weekend, November 11–13. Waves team presented decentralized 2FA prototype during the hackathon, the source code is available already on GitHub."
Here is the link on youtube for that, to be honest I don't really understand what they did, but maybe it' working.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHrt2f1YTl0

WAVES is a completely different protocol (a Hybrid Scorex etc with diff relationships between nodes) - Its a world away from any QT wallet or any other coin at present. They are not even distantly related.  Their 2FA prototype would not work on a QT wallet - bitcoin/UTC or even ETH (and other wallets not based on the WAVES platform) etc.  

I have seen one suggestion that QT wallet coins (Bitcoin) could implement 2FA in Jan 2015 - but here we are in late 2016 and nothing has happened in this space.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=188501.msg10257539#msg10257539

Try and contact this "Poramin Insom" (ex Vertcoin - Last Active:   May 17, 2015, 08:30:33 AM) guy and see if the code has been used and successful if you want?

The bottom line (Mike Hearn) was that a good hardware wallet was by far the best solution - since 2fa still relies on an uncompromised PC/mobile.  Ultracoin added to for example Trezor or other hardware wallet.

Don't forget that Bitfinix 2FA accounts got hacked. 2FA is not the panacea.

Suggestion if you are ultra security conscious:
 
1 - Save your wallet.dat files to 3-4 high quality USB sticks (backups). 
2 - Delete them from any computers that go online.
3 - Store them at several locations in fire/waterproof boxes. 

You can restore at any time - but make sure you run virus/malware programs to ensure your device is clean - before you restore and transact.  Better still - buy a new clean device if its risk justified , sync, run virus/malware and then restore wallet.dat

4 - If you do any transactions - update your wallet.dat backups.
5 - Repeat 1-3

alternatively - just extract your private keys and store as in 3 above (paper or engraved titanium wallet)



Cheers - usukan

[1715548509]

1715548509

[1715548509]

1715548509

[1715548509]

1715548509

[wtfc360]

Hi Usukan, yea I', sorry about the qoute line, got it wrong, my bad. No intention to make it look like your words, sorry!
 

If I'm not mistaken I believe it was Kracko that was doing the android wallet.

usukan - I suspect this was pre Kracko - but maybe wrong, tried it when first out but stopped working and deleted it - whatever - Kracko has vapourised...........

By the way, did anyone see this about Bittrex?
https://bittrex.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/231701788

usukan - This is standard stuff. If you don't have 2FA and are not verified - you should expect just that.  It protects YOU really.

And by the way I still would like the wallet to have 2FA if possible...(for the next fork that would be maybe)

usukan - this is not my quote - its yours. As I said "With 2FA on a QT wallet - I have never heard of that solution.  2FA relies on some centralised party - so online wallets can have 2FA - but not QT.  Maybe Coinomi can have 2FA?" but I see that at present Coinomi does not seem to have 2FA.

[wtfc360]

Hi again Usukan!

Ok, I'll drop it the 2FA, we should not focus on this at the moment or maybe ever again 
Let's focus on all the other exciting stuff we can do with UTC now that we have a really well working and stable wallet and it looks like more connections to the network and even some more activity here from the community.

Hi wtfc30

In Waves they presented a decentralized 2FA prototype (under Conferance and events):
https://blog.wavesplatform.com/waves-weekly-no-17-d3858e39812f#.ormmd7xnv
"The other event is hackathon http://hack4people.ru/ that took place at Digital October over the weekend, November 11–13. Waves team presented decentralized 2FA prototype during the hackathon, the source code is available already on GitHub."
Here is the link on youtube for that, to be honest I don't really understand what they did, but maybe it' working.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHrt2f1YTl0

WAVES is a completely different protocol (a Hybrid Scorex etc with diff relationships between nodes) - Its a world away from any QT wallet or any other coin at present. They are not even distantly related.  Their 2FA prototype would not work on a QT wallet - bitcoin/UTC or even ETH (and other wallets not based on the WAVES platform) etc.  

I have seen one suggestion that QT wallet coins (Bitcoin) could implement 2FA in Jan 2015 - but here we are in late 2016 and nothing has happened in this space.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=188501.msg10257539#msg10257539

Try and contact this "Poramin Insom" (ex Vertcoin - Last Active:   May 17, 2015, 08:30:33 AM) guy and see if the code has been used and successful if you want?

The bottom line (Mike Hearn) was that a good hardware wallet was by far the best solution - since 2fa still relies on an uncompromised PC/mobile.  Ultracoin added to for example Trezor or other hardware wallet.



Cheers - usukan

[usukan]

Hi again Usukan!

Ok, I'll drop it the 2FA, we should not focus on this at the moment or maybe ever again 
Let's focus on all the other exciting stuff we can do with UTC now that we have a really well working and stable wallet and it looks like more connections to the network and even some more activity here from the community.

Hi wtfc30

In Waves they presented a decentralized 2FA prototype (under Conferance and events):
https://blog.wavesplatform.com/waves-weekly-no-17-d3858e39812f#.ormmd7xnv
"The other event is hackathon http://hack4people.ru/ that took place at Digital October over the weekend, November 11–13. Waves team presented decentralized 2FA prototype during the hackathon, the source code is available already on GitHub."
Here is the link on youtube for that, to be honest I don't really understand what they did, but maybe it' working.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHrt2f1YTl0

WAVES is a completely different protocol (a Hybrid Scorex etc with diff relationships between nodes) - Its a world away from any QT wallet or any other coin at present. They are not even distantly related.  Their 2FA prototype would not work on a QT wallet - bitcoin/UTC or even ETH (and other wallets not based on the WAVES platform) etc.  

I have seen one suggestion that QT wallet coins (Bitcoin) could implement 2FA in Jan 2015 - but here we are in late 2016 and nothing has happened in this space.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=188501.msg10257539#msg10257539

Try and contact this "Poramin Insom" (ex Vertcoin - Last Active:   May 17, 2015, 08:30:33 AM) guy and see if the code has been used and successful if you want?

The bottom line (Mike Hearn) was that a good hardware wallet was by far the best solution - since 2fa still relies on an uncompromised PC/mobile.  Ultracoin added to for example Trezor or other hardware wallet.



Cheers - usukan

Hi wtfc30

see above suggestion - we are cross posting

Don't forget that Bitfinix 2FA accounts got hacked. 2FA is not the panacea.

Suggestion if you are ultra security conscious:
 
1 - Save your wallet.dat files to 3-4 high quality USB sticks (backups). 
2 - Delete them from any computers that go online.
3 - Store them at several locations in fire/waterproof boxes. 

You can restore at any time - but make sure you run virus/malware programs to ensure your device is clean - before you restore and transact.  Better still - buy a new clean device if its risk justified , sync, run virus/malware and then restore wallet.dat

4 - If you do any transactions - update your wallet.dat backups.
5 - Repeat 1-3

alternatively - just extract your private keys and store as in 3 above (paper or engraved titanium wallet)

[bret]

In order for 2FA to work in QT the private keys would need to carry with them meta data about the 2FA which sounds like a nightmare. It would probably open up privacy concerns as it would be extremely easy to determine what keys are grouped into a wallet. You wouldn't need a central authority, but each private key would need the 2FA data associated with it so that the wallet could verify the 2FA code.


Wouldn't a strong password / pass phrase work just as well as 2FA for the wallet? That is really all 2FA protects you from, is weak / exposed passwords.


Correct me if I am wrong on any of the above points.

[usukan]

In order for 2FA to work in QT the private keys would need to carry with them meta data about the 2FA which sounds like a nightmare. It would probably open up privacy concerns as it would be extremely easy to determine what keys are grouped into a wallet. You wouldn't need a central authority, but each private key would need the 2FA data associated with it so that the wallet could verify the 2FA code.


Wouldn't a strong password / pass phrase work just as well as 2FA for the wallet? That is really all 2FA protects you from, is weak / exposed passwords.


Correct me if I am wrong on any of the above points.

thanks for that bret - sounds like you know far more about this than me.

Spotted this story on 2FA which may interest some folk.

https://blog.trezor.io/why-you-should-never-use-google-authenticator-again-e166d09d4324#.kynb4p2wn

Cheers - usukan

[usukan]

COINOMI

here is the reply from Coinomi which details their package for adding a coin and providing a wallet service for Ultracoin that covers Windows/Mac desktops, Android, and iOS.

https://coinomi.com/

Hello Usukan,

Thank you for your interest in Coinomi.

We can perform the integration for you for a one-time fee of $1,500 which also includes automatic porting to other platforms (eg iOS, Desktops, etc) as they become available (desktop editions for Windows, Linux and MacOS are already being tested by our team). Then it's $25/server/month for a reccommended minimum of 2 servers that will run the back-end wallets for Ultracoin.

Please let us know if this works for you.

Kind regards,
Coinomi Support.

So its USD 1,500 upfront - then a minimum of USD 600 per year (for 2 servers)

USD 2,100 (approx 2.8 BTC) for the first year - then USD 600/year after that.


Community - Please discuss


Cheers - usukan

[sambiohazard]

that seems a bit too high to me, i think we should first get some new investors and liquidity. Regarding the WAVES platform, it has to be a token swap to go on their platform, anyways it is still in development and there asset exchange is still months away. I think komodo platform's model of notarization to bitcoin blockchain for any  altcoin via their platform is much more easy to transition to.

Regarding the 2FA debate, SMS/mobile or mail based 2FA is very weak and easily hacked, otoh Google Authenticator or hardware 2FA like Yubikey is very secure. Kraken wrote an excellent article regarding this.

http://blog.kraken.com/post/153209105847/security-advisory-mobile-phones

[wtfc360]

Thanks everyone for the input re 2FA, I now realise it would not bring more security for the wallet other than in my imagination.
Re coinomi, yes it was rather steep price for the service, if the community think we should go ahead with this option we need to finance it. I can stand for 10 % of the cost.
If we won't go forward with coinomi what other project should we focus on?
Thanks Usukan for getting the info from coinomi.

[usukan]

that seems a bit too high to me, i think we should first get some new investors and liquidity. Regarding the WAVES platform, it has to be a token swap to go on their platform, anyways it is still in development and there asset exchange is still months away. I think komodo platform's model of notarization to bitcoin blockchain for any  altcoin via their platform is much more easy to transition to.

Regarding the 2FA debate, SMS/mobile or mail based 2FA is very weak and easily hacked, otoh Google Authenticator or hardware 2FA like Yubikey is very secure. Kraken wrote an excellent article regarding this.

http://blog.kraken.com/post/153209105847/security-advisory-mobile-phones

thanks sambiohazard

The new investors and liquidity is the chicken/egg problem.  There must be good reasons for new investors to come to Ultracoin.

please think about these points with respect to Coinomi:

- consider the cost to pay devs to set up a Mac wallet - ?
- Set up an android wallet and
- set up an iOS wallet

is this going to cost USD 1500?

 - cost to have 2 extra full nodes (24/7)

We need more full and dedicated 24/7 nodes - will this cost  USD 600 per year?



Waves DEX (Decentralised Exchange) - this is not a WAVES asset - its a separate exchange like Polo or Bittrex - so yes any coin or asset can list if Waves release to intentions.

I am not up to speed with Komodo - Their DEX is described broadly here:   https://komodoplatform.com/dex-whitepaper/
As I understand it other blockchains can link via the Supernet. The Iguana power - Iguana Core is another SuperNET innovation that will use the Komodo blockchain. It is a software framework that provides APIs for linking multiple blockchains into a single super network. It also enables developers to create decentralized applications using the same set of APIs. Jl777 points out that Iguana Core interfaces with Komodo and bitcoin.  This has promise.

I brought Supernet to UTC attention in Sept 2014
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=727023.msg8663215;topicseen#msg8663215

Cheers - usukan

[usukan]

Thanks everyone for the input re 2FA, I now realise it would not bring more security for the wallet other than in my imagination.
Re coinomi, yes it was rather steep price for the service, if the community think we should go ahead with this option we need to finance it. I can stand for 10 % of the cost.
If we won't go forward with coinomi what other project should we focus on?
Thanks Usukan for getting the info from coinomi.

Thanks wtfc30

[wtfc360]

I think it will be difficult to find someone to make all the wallets and nodes for android/ios instead of buying the complete package from coinomi, first to find someone who can make it, and make it good and stable, within a short period of time and to do it cheaper.
If you know someone, fine let's take the dude.
Otherwise I think we need to put up the money (if we want to do it).
I think of it like this. Here we have an amazing opportunity to shape this coin into anything we want it to be, completely unrestricted. We choose. We can make it into anything we like. We can take good functions from any other coin and implement it, use any other platform to integrate UTC in them. Be flexible and adapt. We can not possible do it all by ourselves, at least I can't do it. And no one is going to just give us all the stuff we want for free. So since I'm no tech guy I think that; Ok, I can contribute with what I can, some funds, it's not a lot if you spread the costs, but still someone have to put up the funds or nothing will happen by itself.
I'm I rich? Nope, have family and kids, probably like many of you guys. Still I think it is worth to contribute because with this small donation I can shape the future of this coin, it's amazing I think. With this coin there will be another alternative to the fiat money system that we all dislike.
So basically, with small economic effort we can make a huge advancement for this coin. I know we don't have millions of dollars in ICO and sponsors, not sure we need them, yes I would also be happy if someone else paid for everything but then you have less to say about anything about what you think, well you can say but no one will really care. Anything we make better for this coin will maybe help attract investors in the long run, but I don't think it will be easy to find investors to just buy UTC, if you do know about some investors please step forward! To be honest I don't think any bank would be interested, they will make their on block chain and force people to use only theirs, so UTC would have to be for the people somehow.
And if we don't do coinomi, we do something else and maybe come back later to coinomi, but anything we do will probably cost money/BTC.
By the way is Presstab interested in doing more job for UTC or did he get burned by all the hassle?

@ Presstab, thanks for all your help, you have done a great job, I think you saved UTC. If we won't see you again good luck with your other projects and welcome back!

@ Steven, nice to have you back, well done with the fork and wallet up-date, now all seems a lot smoother, thanks!

[pugman]

Give up the ghost guys! Jesus!! Why would anyone want to buy this coin anymore? It's like Betamax trying to re launch now! You are way behind with no funds or dev. Don't waste 100's of hours of your time flogging a dead horse.  Take your loss on your chin

[bret]

Give up the ghost guys! Jesus!! Why would anyone want to buy this coin anymore? It's like Betamax trying to re launch now! You are way behind with no funds or dev. Don't waste 100's of hours of your time flogging a dead horse.  Take your loss on your chin

Why would you tell anyone to drop interest in something they have passion about? Maybe you see this coin as dead, maybe others see this as an opportunity. Clearly the community still exists. Not sure how people discussing a coin you are no longer interested in concerns you or prompts you to such negative emotion. You can completely ignore this coin and go on with your life and vice versa. Thanks for the advice, but no thanks. If the coin was going to die it would have done so before the last hard fork.

This is just the beginning for this coin, it has plenty of potential.

Appreciate the trolling though, shows a lot about the quality of your character.

[nanoprobe]

Why would you tell anyone to drop interest in something they have passion about? Maybe you see this coin as dead, maybe others see this as an opportunity. Clearly the community still exists. Not sure how people discussing a coin you are no longer interested in concerns you or prompts you to such negative emotion. You can completely ignore this coin and go on with your life and vice versa. Thanks for the advice, but no thanks. If the coin was going to die it would have done so before the last hard fork.

This is just the beginning for this coin, it has plenty of potential.

Appreciate the trolling though, shows a lot about the quality of your character.

Don't feed the troll by quoting them. Just put them on ignore.

[sambiohazard]

i cant contribute with a lot of funds so i can't say what to do with coinomi. I think more people will be running fullnodes if we can somehow incorporate pruning and somehow control the UTXO size. Currently wallet consumes 900 MB to a gig of RAM which makes running it 24/7 very difficult. Bad thing is staking encourages people to have more UTXOs so they can stake more frequently, i think we can control some of it if we can improve splitting of coins during staking. You can look at code of Jumbucks(https://github.com/jyap808/jumbucks), they have pretty efficient staking code, best i have seen with conventional PoS.

[Vita1ico]

No synchronization wallet after installation v07.4.1-9

[usukan]

No synchronization wallet after installation v07.4.1-9

its wrong wallet

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=727023.msg16876612#msg16876612


WALLET UPDATE REQUIRED

Ultracoin is hardforking to a new and much improved wallet. This new wallet addresses many issues including the diff re-targeting causing trouble for miners and includes more efficient staking plus increased staking rewards (new wallet after fork - 5.6% PA).

The fork is set for block number 1,824,237 - a few weeks ago now.

You should download, install and run the new wallet - preferably before the fork date.  The old wallet will not function correctly after the fork.


The new wallet files can be downloaded from here:

https://mega.nz/#F!nAVymCQa!wdJ4DMaULSptCqC5BX8fCw

This link has downloads for both 32x and 64x Windows installations.

The simplest installation of the new wallet is via running the appropriate setup.exe for your Windows operating system - either 32x or 64x i.e. "UltraCoin-v1.0.0.0-Win64-Setup.exe" or "UltraCoin-v1.0.0.0-Win32-Setup.exe"

This applies if you want to install a NEW Ultracoin wallet - OR if you want to update an old installation.

So - if you have a Win64 operating system - just download and run "UltraCoin-v1.0.0.0-Win64-Setup.exe"

Once the installation has completed - you need to be sure to run the correct ultracoin-qt.exe so the NEW wallet opens (i.e. don't use your old desktop shortcut).

Best create a new desktop shortcut - as follows

- Navigate to C/Program Files/Ultracoin folder
- Find the file ultracoin-qt.exe
- Create a shortcut to this file - and put it on your desktop.

Use this new shortcut to run the new wallet (and best to delete your old desktop shortcut)


As always - be sure to back up and save your wallet files (wallet.dat) to several other storage devices.

If you know what you are doing - you can use the .zip files shown in the MEGA download link (i.e. ultracoin-qt-v1.0.0.0-Win64.zip) to manually configure your own wallet installation.

[usukan]

i cant contribute with a lot of funds so i can't say what to do with coinomi. I think more people will be running fullnodes if we can somehow incorporate pruning and somehow control the UTXO size. Currently wallet consumes 900 MB to a gig of RAM which makes running it 24/7 very difficult. Bad thing is staking encourages people to have more UTXOs so they can stake more frequently, i think we can control some of it if we can improve splitting of coins during staking. You can look at code of Jumbucks(https://github.com/jyap808/jumbucks), they have pretty efficient staking code, best i have seen with conventional PoS.

Thanks sambiohazard - I can run nodes no probs on a range of machines from pretty low spec - but yes there is always room for improvement. Staking seems good from my observations but I know what you are talking about. Best to stake your wallets say once a month - not continuously. But the network can handle it if you don't.

Hey - I am certainly not keen to do another fork for a while        - if its not broken - don't feck with it - is my thinking  - until we need to add some nice new features.
You may not appreciate the blood it took to get this one back and working properly.

The UltraCoin network is running A+++ after the fork - everything is working as planned.

It's efficient, fast and reliable for transactions - staking is working just great and mining is retargeting diff exactly as required. Wallets have 5-8+ peers/nodes and are syncing fine.

To put it in a practical perspecive - I could transfer 100k UTC to Bittrex, sell at market, buy back the BTC equivalent in UTC and have that back confirmed in my UTC wallet in about 15 minutes.  Try that on with BTC?  Try that on ETC - even Parity and Geth won't sync again with state cleaning (yes MEW would perhaps work).  I won't do it though because I would forfeit a few too many UTC.

I think more full nodes will come as we grow and Coinomi integration would be useful here.  Nevertheless the community is supplying sufficient node support at present.


Cheers - usukan

[sambiohazard]

i cant contribute with a lot of funds so i can't say what to do with coinomi. I think more people will be running fullnodes if we can somehow incorporate pruning and somehow control the UTXO size. Currently wallet consumes 900 MB to a gig of RAM which makes running it 24/7 very difficult. Bad thing is staking encourages people to have more UTXOs so they can stake more frequently, i think we can control some of it if we can improve splitting of coins during staking. You can look at code of Jumbucks(https://github.com/jyap808/jumbucks), they have pretty efficient staking code, best i have seen with conventional PoS.

Thanks sambiohazard - I can run nodes no probs on a range of machines from pretty low spec - but yes there is always room for improvement. Staking seems good from my observations but I know what you are talking about. Best to stake your wallets say once a month - not continuously.

Hey - I am certainly not keen to do another fork for a while        - if its not broken don't feck with it is my thinking  - until we need to add some nice new features.


Cheers - usukan

Fair enough, although i think we have to move forward to get rid of stagnation of past year or so and generate investor confidence. Also i am not sure if introducing pruning and improving PoS will be hard forks. We need to get all important forks done while community is small, later it would be very difficult.