[XMR] Monero Speculation

[Febo]

Optional Fungability will never keep you safe.

I hear this a lot but it's an absolutely unsubstantiated claim.

We have several other strong privacy coins which, unlike Monero, have never been severely broken.
Remember that before the last network update most transactions are able to be linked and traced. The issues may have been fixed for new transactions but it leaves a big fat scar on the reputation of Monero and it's users over the past years are still at risk from their past transactions. Or as Spagni likes to say to discredit privacy altcoins "lives could be at stake here."

Take ZCash, Dash or Pivx. They may not be private by default, but none of their private transactions have ever been linked or or traced.
It would seem mandatory fungibility didn't help Monero one bit in the past.

There are many papers claiming that optional private transactions cant make coin fungible.

I do not believe there was anyone that broke Monero privacy. If you know anyone I can make an transaction that he will unveil and made it transparent for everyone to see.  I do believe  this is impossible since theory says so.


On other hand theory and researches claim the opposite for the other coins you mention and main reason is their optional privacy.  You need to understand that blockchain analysis will improve with huge leaps and soon many will be able to prove this theory with a click.   Monero also had optional privacy until 2016. Luckily blockchain analysis was not so advanced back then to worry anyone.

That's a good joke... https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.04299/
I recommend you read it thoroughly, because the implications are quite serious. Much of it has recently been improved upon, but the issues are not completely resolved and implications of transactions up to 2017 will haunt users for a long time i suspect...

Until 2017 Monero had optional privacy, since you could use Ring size 0.  So you could basically chose to use private transactions or transparent. That is how Monero was from launch in 2014. And this paper you posted is just one of the papers that explain us in theory how optional privacy dont work. There are many such papers. Some were made in Monero Research Lab in 2014.  Optional privacy is not real privacy and already is or will be broken in practice.

Nothing will hunt any user unless ignorant. Everyone that used Monero in 2014-2016 and read those Monero research papers, or read this forum, should know that optional privacy Monero had dont give him 100% privacy. Same as anyone that used DASH from 2014 till now should know this fact. That his transaction ( although he chose to be private) can be right now or will with advanced block chain analysis made totally transparent.  
But also anyone that used Monero in 2014-2016 should knew that using Monero gives him best chances to have private transaction.

[1714173962]

1714173962

[1714173962]

1714173962

[1714173962]

1714173962

[1714173962]

1714173962

[1714173962]

1714173962

[1714173962]

1714173962

[Hueristic]

That's a good joke... https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.04299/
I recommend you read it thoroughly, because the implications are quite serious. Much of it has recently been improved upon, but the issues are not completely resolved and implications of transactions up to 2017 will haunt users for a long time i suspect...

Andrew Miller is supported in part by the Initia-
tive for Cryptocurrencies and Contracts, and is a board
member of the Zcash Foundation.

Umm yeah so...


I especially like how they conclude that 25% of all transactions are of a malicious nature yet have no proof whatsoever? did they pull that out of their ass or was 26% sounding too high?

BTW, how has that Trusted setup system in Zcrap been working out for you guys?

[cryptokwuk]

Optional Fungability will never keep you safe.

I hear this a lot but it's an absolutely unsubstantiated claim.

We have several other strong privacy coins which, unlike Monero, have never been severely broken.
Remember that before the last network update most transactions are able to be linked and traced. The issues may have been fixed for new transactions but it leaves a big fat scar on the reputation of Monero and it's users over the past years are still at risk from their past transactions. Or as Spagni likes to say to discredit privacy altcoins "lives could be at stake here."

Take ZCash, Dash or Pivx. They may not be private by default, but none of their private transactions have ever been linked or or traced.
It would seem mandatory fungibility didn't help Monero one bit in the past.

There are many papers claiming that optional private transactions cant make coin fungible.

I do not believe there was anyone that broke Monero privacy. If you know anyone I can make an transaction that he will unveil and made it transparent for everyone to see.  I do believe  this is impossible since theory says so.


On other hand theory and researches claim the opposite for the other coins you mention and main reason is their optional privacy.  You need to understand that blockchain analysis will improve with huge leaps and soon many will be able to prove this theory with a click.   Monero also had optional privacy until 2016. Luckily blockchain analysis was not so advanced back then to worry anyone.

That's a good joke... https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.04299/
I recommend you read it thoroughly, because the implications are quite serious. Much of it has recently been improved upon, but the issues are not completely resolved and implications of transactions up to 2017 will haunt users for a long time i suspect...

Until 2017 Monero had optional privacy, since you could use Ring size 0.  So you could basically chose to use private transactions or transparent. That is how Monero was from launch in 2014. And this paper you posted is just one of the papers that explain us in theory how optional privacy dont work. There are many such papers. Some were made in Monero Research Lab in 2014.  Optional privacy is not real privacy and already is or will be broken in practice.

Nothing will hunt any user unless ignorant. Everyone that used Monero in 2014-2016 and read those Monero research papers, or read this forum, should know that optional privacy Monero had dont give him 100% privacy. Same as anyone that used DASH from 2014 till now should know this fact. That his transaction ( although he chose to be private) can be right now or will with advanced block chain analysis made totally transparent.  
But also anyone that used Monero in 2014-2016 should knew that using Monero gives him best chances to have private transaction.

Nice twisting of the facts.
The 0-mixin transactions compromised the transactions that had to be private as they were selected as mixin outputs for the ring. Meaning that all default private transactions were not private at all because people were using 0-mixin. This is a vulnerability no matter how you twist it.
0-mixin should never have been allowed to be selected as mixin in the first place. How development could have missed that simple logic eludes me completely.

[Febo]

Optional Fungability will never keep you safe.

I hear this a lot but it's an absolutely unsubstantiated claim.

We have several other strong privacy coins which, unlike Monero, have never been severely broken.
Remember that before the last network update most transactions are able to be linked and traced. The issues may have been fixed for new transactions but it leaves a big fat scar on the reputation of Monero and it's users over the past years are still at risk from their past transactions. Or as Spagni likes to say to discredit privacy altcoins "lives could be at stake here."

Take ZCash, Dash or Pivx. They may not be private by default, but none of their private transactions have ever been linked or or traced.
It would seem mandatory fungibility didn't help Monero one bit in the past.

There are many papers claiming that optional private transactions cant make coin fungible.

I do not believe there was anyone that broke Monero privacy. If you know anyone I can make an transaction that he will unveil and made it transparent for everyone to see.  I do believe  this is impossible since theory says so.


On other hand theory and researches claim the opposite for the other coins you mention and main reason is their optional privacy.  You need to understand that blockchain analysis will improve with huge leaps and soon many will be able to prove this theory with a click.   Monero also had optional privacy until 2016. Luckily blockchain analysis was not so advanced back then to worry anyone.

That's a good joke... https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.04299/
I recommend you read it thoroughly, because the implications are quite serious. Much of it has recently been improved upon, but the issues are not completely resolved and implications of transactions up to 2017 will haunt users for a long time i suspect...

Until 2017 Monero had optional privacy, since you could use Ring size 0.  So you could basically chose to use private transactions or transparent. That is how Monero was from launch in 2014. And this paper you posted is just one of the papers that explain us in theory how optional privacy dont work. There are many such papers. Some were made in Monero Research Lab in 2014.  Optional privacy is not real privacy and already is or will be broken in practice.

Nothing will hunt any user unless ignorant. Everyone that used Monero in 2014-2016 and read those Monero research papers, or read this forum, should know that optional privacy Monero had dont give him 100% privacy. Same as anyone that used DASH from 2014 till now should know this fact. That his transaction ( although he chose to be private) can be right now or will with advanced block chain analysis made totally transparent.  
But also anyone that used Monero in 2014-2016 should knew that using Monero gives him best chances to have private transaction.

Nice twisting of the facts.
The 0-mixin transactions compromised the transactions that had to be private as they were selected as mixin outputs for the ring. Meaning that all default private transactions were not private at all because people were using 0-mixin. This is a vulnerability no matter how you twist it.
0-mixin should never have been allowed to be selected as mixin in the first place. How development could have missed that simple logic eludes me completely.

Hello. You can read that in 2014 MRL papers and in this thread from 2014. All transactions has to be private to have good anonymity. Using ring size 0 was not perfect but was how Monero was build in 2014 and released by thakful for today. This was a feature not an bug or vulnerability from 2014-2016 and such feature is still in DASH and ZCash.

[alfredobitcoin11]

There was a system for cloud mining for Monero. It could be MinerGate. Does anyone use it? How much do they earn? Can they provide information?

[Hueristic]

There was a system for cloud mining for Monero. It could be MinerGate. Does anyone use it? How much do they earn? Can they provide information?

Minergate is considered a scammy pool.

[smooth]

Optional Fungability will never keep you safe.

I hear this a lot but it's an absolutely unsubstantiated claim.

We have several other strong privacy coins which, unlike Monero, have never been severely broken.
Remember that before the last network update most transactions are able to be linked and traced. The issues may have been fixed for new transactions but it leaves a big fat scar on the reputation of Monero and it's users over the past years are still at risk from their past transactions. Or as Spagni likes to say to discredit privacy altcoins "lives could be at stake here."

Take ZCash, Dash or Pivx. They may not be private by default, but none of their private transactions have ever been linked or or traced.
It would seem mandatory fungibility didn't help Monero one bit in the past.

There are many papers claiming that optional private transactions cant make coin fungible.

I do not believe there was anyone that broke Monero privacy. If you know anyone I can make an transaction that he will unveil and made it transparent for everyone to see.  I do believe  this is impossible since theory says so.


On other hand theory and researches claim the opposite for the other coins you mention and main reason is their optional privacy.  You need to understand that blockchain analysis will improve with huge leaps and soon many will be able to prove this theory with a click.   Monero also had optional privacy until 2016. Luckily blockchain analysis was not so advanced back then to worry anyone.

That's a good joke... https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.04299/
I recommend you read it thoroughly, because the implications are quite serious. Much of it has recently been improved upon, but the issues are not completely resolved and implications of transactions up to 2017 will haunt users for a long time i suspect...

Until 2017 Monero had optional privacy, since you could use Ring size 0.  So you could basically chose to use private transactions or transparent. That is how Monero was from launch in 2014. And this paper you posted is just one of the papers that explain us in theory how optional privacy dont work. There are many such papers. Some were made in Monero Research Lab in 2014.  Optional privacy is not real privacy and already is or will be broken in practice.

Nothing will hunt any user unless ignorant. Everyone that used Monero in 2014-2016 and read those Monero research papers, or read this forum, should know that optional privacy Monero had dont give him 100% privacy. Same as anyone that used DASH from 2014 till now should know this fact. That his transaction ( although he chose to be private) can be right now or will with advanced block chain analysis made totally transparent.  
But also anyone that used Monero in 2014-2016 should knew that using Monero gives him best chances to have private transaction.

Nice twisting of the facts.
The 0-mixin transactions compromised the transactions that had to be private as they were selected as mixin outputs for the ring. Meaning that all default private transactions were not private at all because people were using 0-mixin. This is a vulnerability no matter how you twist it.
0-mixin should never have been allowed to be selected as mixin in the first place. How development could have missed that simple logic eludes me completely.

Hello. You can read that in 2014 MRL papers and in this thread from 2014. All transactions has to be private to have good anonymity. Using ring size 0 was not perfect but was how Monero was build in 2014 and released by thakful for today. This was a feature not an bug or vulnerability from 2014-2016 and such feature is still in DASH and ZCash.

Exactly. Development didn't "miss" it. Development (if by which he means Monero development, and not the original Bytecoin scammers, who BTW share with Zcash the record of having pushed out an unsafe and not-ready-for-prime-time system as a money grab) were the ones who discovered it, characterized it mathematically, published it, and immediately put a minimum mix hard fork on the roadmap.

[Globb0]

Also we all knew the coin was in early development and we patiently awaited more amazing features which actually materialised not just empty promises.

We are the early adopters its open source there were no secrets.

[tokeweed]

Ffs...  Is the Dash vs Monero thing still alive?  I think it has been proven that all negative said about Monero was all FUD and nonesense.  I even fell for it back in the day when it was under 5 bucks.  5 BUCKS!  I would have held starting back then if only I knew better instead trading in and out of it.

[Billy Bunter]

I'll admit it. I've woken up to better-looking charts.

[generalizethis]

Ffs...  Is the Dash vs Monero thing still alive?  I think it has been proven that all negative said about Monero was all FUD and nonesense.  I even fell for it back in the day when it was under 5 bucks.  5 BUCKS!  I would have held starting back then if only I knew better instead trading in and out of it.

Not really--dash just sort of gave up on the privacy narrative. I think ICEbreaker still pushes it, but he's like that Japanese soldier stuck on an island for thirty years who thought WWII was still ongoing.

[Billy Bunter]

Ffs...  Is the Dash vs Monero thing still alive?  I think it has been proven that all negative said about Monero was all FUD and nonesense.  I even fell for it back in the day when it was under 5 bucks.  5 BUCKS!  I would have held starting back then if only I knew better instead trading in and out of it.

Not really--dash just sort of gave up on the privacy narrative. I think ICEbreaker still pushes it, but he's like that Japanese soldier stuck on an island for thirty years who thought WWII was still ongoing.

Which makes me wonder: what is Dash's USP these days?

[generalizethis]

Ffs...  Is the Dash vs Monero thing still alive?  I think it has been proven that all negative said about Monero was all FUD and nonesense.  I even fell for it back in the day when it was under 5 bucks.  5 BUCKS!  I would have held starting back then if only I knew better instead trading in and out of it.

Not really--dash just sort of gave up on the privacy narrative. I think ICEbreaker still pushes it, but he's like that Japanese soldier stuck on an island for thirty years who thought WWII was still ongoing.

Which makes me wonder: what is Dash's USP these days?

"Better than Bitcoin!" "Decentralized goverance!" seem the reasons given, though how either survive the least bit of scrutinity is beyond me. TBH I always thought Evan should just be honest and say, "Look, idiots will pay you money to use the network, more than they pay miners, so just buy, set up a masternode and watch the greater fools rush in."

Though then the reality sets-in that it's a game of stake holder chicken, so maybe not the best sales pitch.

[Billy Bunter]

Ffs...  Is the Dash vs Monero thing still alive?  I think it has been proven that all negative said about Monero was all FUD and nonesense.  I even fell for it back in the day when it was under 5 bucks.  5 BUCKS!  I would have held starting back then if only I knew better instead trading in and out of it.

Not really--dash just sort of gave up on the privacy narrative. I think ICEbreaker still pushes it, but he's like that Japanese soldier stuck on an island for thirty years who thought WWII was still ongoing.

Which makes me wonder: what is Dash's USP these days?

"Better than Bitcoin!" "Decentralized goverance!" seem the reasons given, though how either survive the least bit of scrutinity is beyond me. TBH I always thought Evan should just be honest and say, "Look, idiots will pay you money to use the network, more than they pay miners, so just buy, set up a masternode and watch the greater fools rush in."

Though then the reality sets-in that it's a game of stake holder chicken, so maybe not the best sales pitch.

Yes - I'd forgotten those points. They all seem so quaint these days.

[mambamanagement]

I'll admit it. I've woken up to better-looking charts.

it’s gotta start going up soon doesn’t it?

[Billy Bunter]

I'll admit it. I've woken up to better-looking charts.

it’s gotta start going up soon doesn’t it?

One would hope (pray?)

[Hueristic]

Ffs...  Is the Dash vs Monero thing still alive?  I think it has been proven that all negative said about Monero was all FUD and nonesense.  I even fell for it back in the day when it was under 5 bucks.  5 BUCKS!  I would have held starting back then if only I knew better instead trading in and out of it.

Not really--dash just sort of gave up on the privacy narrative. I think ICEbreaker still pushes it, but he's like that Japanese soldier stuck on an island for thirty years who thought WWII was still ongoing.

Oh shit, that was a good analogy!

I'll admit it. I've woken up to better-looking charts.

it’s gotta start going up soon doesn’t it?

Inevitably.

[Febo]

Ffs...  Is the Dash vs Monero thing still alive?  I think it has been proven that all negative said about Monero was all FUD and nonesense.  I even fell for it back in the day when it was under 5 bucks.  5 BUCKS!  I would have held starting back then if only I knew better instead trading in and out of it.

I know that cryptokwuk is just trolling. He dont care and he know that Monero is best anon coin out there. But I will correct anyone that post those research papers and claim there was a bug or a flaw in Monero. It was not! That is how Monero worked back then. Later it got developed to what is now and Monero will continue to develop.  We should not say one year from now that Monero had a flaw or a bug in 2018  because back then there was no Kovri and someone could somehow find your IP when you are making a Monero transaction. 

[billknight]

XMR is a potential coin and has incredible price increases in 2017. I am still investing in XMR now. Surely the end of this year, the price of XMR will increase to $ 390 again. Hopefully, my prediction is correct

[rusmuoney023]

If they work as per theory, zk-snarks offer a larger anonymity set.  Only time will tell if defects of design or implementation, or of covert intent, demolish this merit.