2) There is no break down in the encryption but in how it is implemented.
This is in direct contradiction to your original claim that it cannot be fixed without giving up on anonymity. I call bullshit.
In the quote he is talking about encryption.
In your response you are talking about anonymity.
On the Original post he says, "To fix this, anonymity will need to be sacrificed..."
Isn't anonymity and encryption two different things? Where is the contradiction?
The anonymity is expressed in the whitepaper - if anonymity has to be sacrificed then it would be because the maths / crypto in the whitepaper is wrong.
I think the answer to your question in bold is no, here the anonymity and encryption are not two different things.
You think... Not good enough. Fluffpony basically ignored the questions. Can we have someone that knows what they are talking about respond please.
I'd hazard that he misspoke when he said encryption, and he meant "cryptography" instead. Otherwise it makes no sense - there's a keyring flaw and we have to sacrifice anonymity, but the breakdown is not in the encryption but in the implementation thereof? Confused.
Careful. Encryption could mean the one-time ring signature is not broken, rather the way it is implemented perhaps referring to having multiple intersecting ring signatures simultaneously. Afaics the whitepaper did not address the math of such an intersection.
Reading between the lines it sounds like you think that BCX can actually steal wallets remotely. I wont disclose any details to anybody else, but I am curious to know if indeed this is possible. I had assumed that all the wallets are using oneway trapdoor functions that cannot be reversed.
With the cryptonote key images and multiple signers and a lot of hashing power, could it be possible to bruteforce solve a wallet's privatekey?
As I wrote upthread, it might be possible using multiple intersecting rings to use a system of simultaneous equations to find the 'x' private keys that are supposed to be hidden by the non-interactive Zero Knowledge Proof. However, I didn't work through the math to see if my hunch is true.
However by that time, the coins are already spent on the blockchain (unless you can intercept before), so you need the hashrate and or Time Warp Attack to backup the blockchain and double-spend them to yourself.
This wouldn't be the first time I had an insight that gmaxell didn't although he has returned the favor of me a few times too.
I am lazy to do the math because I don't see anyone offering me some considerable amount of money and I doubt I could use the exploit if I found it. If someone puts up a big bounty, I will investigate.
I could be way off course. It is just a hunch.
