[XMR] Monero Speculation

[TPTB_need_war]

Why would a phone reset lose my fingerprint hash 

Ask apple.

Are you saying that is a fact? Any citation on that?

[smooth]

Why would a phone reset lose my fingerprint hash 

Ask apple.

Are you saying that is a fact? Any citation on that?

See edit above

[TPTB_need_war]

Since security is only as secure as its weakest point, you can choose to increase the security of a 4 or 6-digit passcode by using a complex alphanumeric passcode. You can do this when creating a passcode by tapping ‘Passcode Options’ and selecting Custom Alphanumeric Code.

Yeah it is getting way off topic and your citations adds more holes to ArticMine's points.

Bottom line is it is very difficult to secure a mass market mobile device.

[lolikop]

This is getting out of topic can we get back to monero speculation pls

[smooth]

Please explain how TouchID with a secure password is dependent on DRM?

Thank you for the link to Apple's support page. Here's what you were asking for:

Every fingerprint is unique, so it is rare that even a small section of two separate fingerprints are alike enough to register as a match for Touch ID. The probability of this happening is 1 in 50,000 for one enrolled finger.

1/50K is small enough to brute force if DRM didn't prevent it. Some of DRM may be implemented in hardware on newer phones though.

If you don't want 1/50K bruteforceability (i.e. you want strong end-to-end security) you have to turn off TouchID.

[TPTB_need_war]

If you don't want 1/50K bruteforceability (i.e. you want strong end-to-end security) you have to turn off TouchID.

And then again my point remains, that open source or not, a long secure password is a PITA and Apple makes that option available.

Sorry I think religion got the better of your judgement.

[smooth]

If you don't want 1/50K bruteforceability (i.e. you want strong end-to-end security) you have to turn off TouchID.

And then again my point remains, that open source or not, a long secure password is a PITA and Apple makes that option available.

We agree on that narrow point. Now back on topic please...

[ArticMine]

...

Please explain how TouchID with a secure password is dependent on DRM?

Apple can't force people to adopt strong security if they have no desire to. Those who have a desire to, will use a secure password and TouchID (or not use Apple device).

I don't see the citations that show me that Apple has forced everyone to accept DRM for their security?

Apple has not forced everyone to accept DRM as their security in the FBI case since a user could use a secure password and not use TouchID. What Apple has done:

1) Discourage the use of strong security by using a numeric password as the default.
2) Give the user a false sense of security by relying on DRM as for security
3) Making the situation far worse by misleading the public during the Apple / FBI case rather than come clean on their security weaknesses

TouchID relies on DRM because it relies on Apple's proprietary software and software installation lock to match the fingerprints. If one changes the software then one may be able to defeat this. This is what the FBI did. Apart for the fact that getting someone's fingerprints is really not that difficult especially if one considers a government adversary. I mean in the FBI case the FBI had access to both the terrorist's fingerprints and the terrorist's corpse.

By the way Apple is not alone here. There is a lot of security theater being pushed on unsuspecting consumers. Furthermore when the security flaws are exposed companies resort in many cases to litigation rather than address the security problems they have created. This is a perfect example involving major vehicle manufacturers. http://blog.caranddriver.com/hackers-crack-key-fob-encryption-used-by-more-than-25-automakers/

Basically if the "security" is proprietary it simply cannot be trusted.

Edit: The bold point is critical to understanding the security of a crypto currency. If the security is proprietary or dependent upon proprietary software then it should not be trusted.

[smfuser]

Details please? Where is the specification for all this stuff? Closed source?

This may answer some of your questions: https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf

[ArticMine]

Well we may start to see a decoupling here from Ethereum. Ethereum is down 12.89% and Monero is down only 3.88%. https://coinmarketcap.com/#USD

[dEBRUYNE]

Well we may start to see a decoupling here from Ethereum. Ethereum is down 12.89% and Monero is down only 3.88%. https://coinmarketcap.com/#USD

We can probably partially thank MAID for that.

[spatula]

Well we may start to see a decoupling here from Ethereum. Ethereum is down 12.89% and Monero is down only 3.88%. https://coinmarketcap.com/#USD

Didn't XMR follow ETH in the last dump? I have my buy orders in, but much lower than this just in case history repeats itself.

[ArticMine]

Well we may start to see a decoupling here from Ethereum. Ethereum is down 12.89% and Monero is down only 3.88%. https://coinmarketcap.com/#USD

Didn't XMR follow ETH in the last dump? I have my buy orders in, but much lower than this just in case history repeats itself.

It has until recently. But now ETH is down 11.19% while XMR is down 0.63%. Also MAID that was following ETH has risen 23.64%. https://coinmarketcap.com/#USD XMR's support at current levels is way stronger than ETH support at current levels so a decoupling is quite possible.

[persiancat]

Well we may start to see a decoupling here from Ethereum. Ethereum is down 12.89% and Monero is down only 3.88%. https://coinmarketcap.com/#USD

Didn't XMR follow ETH in the last dump? I have my buy orders in, but much lower than this just in case history repeats itself.

It has until recently. But now ETH is down 11.19% while XMR is down 0.63%. Also MAID that was following ETH has risen 23.64%. https://coinmarketcap.com/#USD XMR's support at current levels is way stronger than ETH support at current levels so a decoupling is quite possible.

XMR has already "somewhat" decoupled from ETH a few weeks ago.
Not sure if anyone has posted this observation, but XMR/ETH is no longer at 1:10 ratio for some time already.

Michael Novogratz (ex-Fortress Capital) was recently reported to have purchased a significant stake in ETH, citing it as a promising asset (I paraphrase).
One wonders if he has bought more ETH on the way down, or if he has cut his exposure.

[DropDead.Be]

Hope we moon back past 430K from here. If not, we might see 170K soon.
Gentleman prepare your fishing nets.

[TPTB_need_war]

...

Please explain how TouchID with a secure password is dependent on DRM?

Apple can't force people to adopt strong security if they have no desire to. Those who have a desire to, will use a secure password and TouchID (or not use Apple device).

I don't see the citations that show me that Apple has forced everyone to accept DRM for their security?

Apple has not forced everyone to accept DRM as their security in the FBI case since a user could use a secure password and not use TouchID. What Apple has done:

1) Discourage the use of strong security by using a numeric password as the default.
2) Give the user a false sense of security by relying on DRM as for security
3) Making the situation far worse by misleading the public during the Apple / FBI case rather than come clean on their security weaknesses

TouchID relies on DRM because it relies on Apple's proprietary software and software installation lock to match the fingerprints. If one changes the software then one may be able to defeat this. This is what the FBI did. Apart for the fact that getting someone's fingerprints is really not that difficult especially if one considers a government adversary. I mean in the FBI case the FBI had access to both the terrorist's fingerprints and the terrorist's corpse.

By the way Apple is not alone here. There is a lot of security theater being pushed on unsuspecting consumers. Furthermore when the security flaws are exposed companies resort in many cases to litigation rather than address the security problems they have created. This is a perfect example involving major vehicle manufacturers. http://blog.caranddriver.com/hackers-crack-key-fob-encryption-used-by-more-than-25-automakers/

Basically if the "security" is proprietary it simply cannot be trusted.

Edit: The bold point is critical to understanding the security of a crypto currency. If the security is proprietary or dependent upon proprietary software then it should not be trusted.

Not to violate smooth et al's (and my prior acknowledgement) request to stop this line of discussion because it is mostly off topic here, I just want to cap off by saying I agree with ArticMine on every thing, except the reality that consumers won't buy such an honest marketed device that he advocates because as smooth agreed, typing a long password is a PITA and a separate hardware key on a key chain is also considered a PITA (something else to lose) by the masses.

If you are part of the 0.001% who want strong security, that option is available to you on the Apple devices. I don't think it is fair for us to tell Apple how to market their devices such that they can maximize sales. Criticize the masses or better yet accept reality.

I understand the relevance here to Monero is:

1. That Apple bans crypto-currency (CC) wallets. And is able to enforce the ban with DRM unless your jailbreak your device (which voids the warranty).

2. Perhaps Monero folks think that if Apple teaches the masses to be security conscious then more of them will be attuned to the benefits of private CC such as Monero.

3. General aversion to closed source.

My relevant comment to this thread, is this exempifies why Monero can't create JAMBOX. They don't understand marketing.

[pinky]

Selling volume is declining, we also saw some wicks indicating that buyers are still present and closely watching. I am speculating that we might see some buying pressure to 0.003-0.0033 to mess up with shorters and then retest and hopefully double bottom. However we must take into the account that daily trend is still bearish and I would treat it as such. Weekly trend is caught in the range between 0.001-0.004.

[sandiman]

Yeah like Ethereum and Dash and oil companies that pollute, etc...

Things are how they are, however unfortunately..

I am damn glad meritocracy of market value drives nature and not subjective morals. Otherwise we'd be fucked.

Maybe one day you'll understand to stop fighting nature for your irrelevant moral desires.

Whose fault is if they don't keep their computer under proper working order. You want to empower the government to do the job that the individual is unwilling to take responsibility for. And precisely what can the powerless government do about botnets. Useless and non-meritocractic morals are despicable, irrelevant noise like the clanging of pots and pans in protest of reality.

I had to stop my reading here. Since implicit social contract creation and implementation society has been improving significantly. Important to state here that social contract is against state of nature, in which we would be ultimatly directed to make war against each other (to make stuff simple, like if we were monkeys back in the days).

[TPTB_need_war]

Yeah like Ethereum and Dash and oil companies that pollute, etc...

Things are how they are, however unfortunately..

I am damn glad meritocracy of market value drives nature and not subjective morals. Otherwise we'd be fucked.

Maybe one day you'll understand to stop fighting nature for your irrelevant moral desires.

Whose fault is if they don't keep their computer under proper working order. You want to empower the government to do the job that the individual is unwilling to take responsibility for. And precisely what can the powerless government do about botnets. Useless and non-meritocractic morals are despicable, irrelevant noise like the clanging of pots and pans in protest of reality.

I had to stop my reading here. Since implicit social contract creation and implementation society has been improving significantly. Important to state here that social contract is against state of nature, in which we would be ultimatly directed to make war against each other (to make stuff simple, like if we were monkeys back in the days).

You missed the entire point which is the economic argument is not impacted by the moral one. So the moral one is economically irrelevant. Whether the moral argument is relevant in other contexts was not my point, so please don't construct a strawman to attack with, because I consider that to be either disingenuous or idiotic or both. And definitely disrespectful of my scarce time. I take the time to comment here to help someone then they return the favor by sidestepping my point with a strawman (not you), which drags me into a cesspool of talking past each other. Inefficient.

And I entirely disagree with your stated theory (the underlined part), but that is a longer discussion that you could make in the Politics & Society forum. CoinCube is particularly interested in that sort of theoretical discussion.

[sandiman]

Yeah like Ethereum and Dash and oil companies that pollute, etc...

Things are how they are, however unfortunately..

I am damn glad meritocracy of market value drives nature and not subjective morals. Otherwise we'd be fucked.

Maybe one day you'll understand to stop fighting nature for your irrelevant moral desires.

Whose fault is if they don't keep their computer under proper working order. You want to empower the government to do the job that the individual is unwilling to take responsibility for. And precisely what can the powerless government do about botnets. Useless and non-meritocractic morals are despicable, irrelevant noise like the clanging of pots and pans in protest of reality.

I had to stop my reading here. Since implicit social contract creation and implementation society has been improving significantly. Important to state here that social contract is against state of nature, in which we would be ultimatly directed to make war against each other (to make stuff simple, like if we were monkeys back in the days).

You missed the entire point which is the economic argument is not impacted by the moral one. So the moral one is economically irrelevant. Whether the moral argument is relevant in other contexts was not my point, so please don't construct a strawman to attack with, because I consider that to be either disingenuous or idiotic or both. And definitely disrespectful of my scarce time. I take the time to comment here to help someone then they return the favor by sidestepping my point with a strawman (not you), which drags me into a cesspool of talking past each other. Inefficient.

And I entirely disagree with your stated theory (the underlined part), but that is a longer discussion that you could make in the Politics & Society forum. CoinCube is particularly interested in that sort of theoretical discussion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_economy

Actual example : common agricultural policy in europe.

potential example in crypto : legislation over botnets and/or other minning tools which indirectly impact the price.