[ANN][CLOAK] Private, Secure, Untraceable & Decentralized Digital Currency

[Sabai_dee]

Wow !
The way the team is auditing his own coin gives me a big confidence about the seriousness of the project and the team.
It's a big flashing green light for my small stake already in CloakCoin and a obvious reason to make my stack grow in a very short future.

Congrats to the team !

[1714263052]

1714263052

[1714263052]

1714263052

[oaks05]

Congrats on the audit should help with growth this year.

[Duderino123]

Great work!👍 I wonder if there’s any other coin being that transparent...

[deepend]

Its all good and thank you.  If you look at the transactions, it is a thing of beauty.  It almost appears as though a computer is fighting a computer right now.  As if one computer wants to buy and another wants to sell.  I find it quite satisfying actually.  It appears as if one algorithm is sucking another algorithm dry.

[vinnieG]

It's such a good thing that CLOAK did this audit. On the long term this will bring confidence and trust in the tech towards the community. If this tech becomes really solid and truely anonymous, there is no central institution cabable of stopping it (as it is open source). Let this tech be the counter towards more and more central controll and governance.

[yogibaer]

Link to our Redit in the new CLOAK-Design:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Cloak_Coin/

[algreen]

The security audit is the next big step for the Cloak to become a really popular and useful crypto currency. This year I expect a lot of good news and events from the Cloak developers and, of course, a good growth!

[Nathan047]

We're proud to present the long awaited Audit Report! [...]

This is great news, I'm glad to see everything is still moving along well.

[CaptNemo]

Well done cloak team, great success after many years of work.

[lokojones]

excellent move in right direction. please dump some coins and employ more people.

[Ferdo]

Great job cloak team. Unfortunately the timing wasnt ideal since whole market is in red but you cant know these things upfront. Nevertheless, I'm sure cloak will be recognised once market starts to recover. Go cloak

[Drobek]

This is an interesting coin however I had bigger expectations from the audit. Face it, literally the only "positive" thing it mentioned was a sandwich phrase saying that the "basic mechanisms are quite robust" but after that it is all just hammering a large number of specific negative points, some of which do not correspond with the whitepaper.

I understand that lot of us hold bags but can we please be a bit more realistic and not sell this report as a great success?

[Drobek]

The decision to go through the audit was a right one. I believe it would be worthy to have a follow up after the issues pointed out in the report are addressed.

[yogibaer]

This is an interesting coin however I had bigger expectations from the audit. Face it, literally the only "positive" thing it mentioned was a sandwich phrase saying that the "basic mechanisms are quite robust" but after that it is all just hammering a large number of specific negative points, some of which do not correspond with the whitepaper.

I understand that lot of us hold bags but can we please be a bit more realistic and not sell this report as a great success?

I think you misunderstand what an audit is used for. An audit is made to find bugs in the software before it goes live! The idea behind an audit is to make a software product more secure and better. And exactly this is what the audit report did. It revealed the weak points we have to work on. And as you can see we already improved most of the findings.

[R0mi]

Awesome stuff is going on here, awesome audit report!

I applaud the audit, but how many people actually read it?  Stand out items:  no mathematical analysis performed on involved cryptographic algorithms and methods (outside the scope of the audit); Cloaking transactions with few cloakers can be traced, both sender and receiver; reliance on out of date bitcoin and Tor code; random number generator doesn't really work for enigma transactions; source code analysis found multiple instances of reliance out out-of-date and unsafe methods, transaction history stored in an unencrypted format.  Compromise of Anonymity is flagged as a current "high" severity risk factor on cloak transactions with, say, three cloakers.  It is susceptible to a DLL preload attack; page 17 describes the issues resulting from using old and out of date Bitcoin code base; page 20 addresses how the Tor code is out of date and vulnerable to a list of exploits; page 21 several functions found in the source code which leave Cloak vulnerable to buffer overflow attacks.  You can't back up the wallet using the currently accepted best practice of using a seed phrase.  I'll stop there.  To the people that are saying "wow!" I ask again:  did you read the audit report?

The Cloak team replies to a number of these identified shortcomings by simply stating that in the future an upgrade of the wallet software will address these issues.  I hope so.

+1 for the audit, but it seems there is still quite a bit of work to be done to make this world class.

[R0mi]

This is an interesting coin however I had bigger expectations from the audit. Face it, literally the only "positive" thing it mentioned was a sandwich phrase saying that the "basic mechanisms are quite robust" but after that it is all just hammering a large number of specific negative points, some of which do not correspond with the whitepaper.

I understand that lot of us hold bags but can we please be a bit more realistic and not sell this report as a great success?

I think you misunderstand what an audit is used for. An audit is made to find bugs in the software before it goes live! The idea behind an audit is to make a software product more secure and better. And exactly this is what the audit report did. It revealed the weak points we have to work on. And as you can see we already improved most of the findings.

Excuse me, but the audit focused on your current wallet release, which definitely is "live".  That is stated pretty clearly in the first few pages of the report.

[yogibaer]

This is an interesting coin however I had bigger expectations from the audit. Face it, literally the only "positive" thing it mentioned was a sandwich phrase saying that the "basic mechanisms are quite robust" but after that it is all just hammering a large number of specific negative points, some of which do not correspond with the whitepaper.

I understand that lot of us hold bags but can we please be a bit more realistic and not sell this report as a great success?

I think you misunderstand what an audit is used for. An audit is made to find bugs in the software before it goes live! The idea behind an audit is to make a software product more secure and better. And exactly this is what the audit report did. It revealed the weak points we have to work on. And as you can see we already improved most of the findings.

Excuse me, but the audit focused on your current wallet release, which definitely is "live".  That is stated pretty clearly in the first few pages of the report.

Well, the code that was audited is live on github and this is the code for the coming live-wallet release. This code was audited not the current wallet which operates the live-net.

[R0mi]

This is an interesting coin however I had bigger expectations from the audit. Face it, literally the only "positive" thing it mentioned was a sandwich phrase saying that the "basic mechanisms are quite robust" but after that it is all just hammering a large number of specific negative points, some of which do not correspond with the whitepaper.

I understand that lot of us hold bags but can we please be a bit more realistic and not sell this report as a great success?

I think you misunderstand what an audit is used for. An audit is made to find bugs in the software before it goes live! The idea behind an audit is to make a software product more secure and better. And exactly this is what the audit report did. It revealed the weak points we have to work on. And as you can see we already improved most of the findings.

Excuse me, but the audit focused on your current wallet release, which definitely is "live".  That is stated pretty clearly in the first few pages of the report.

Well, the code that was audited is live on github and this is the code for the coming live-wallet release. This code was audited not the current wallet which operates the live-net.

Ah, okay.  So the current wallet/enigma platform is even *more* out of date, and presumably exposed to even more attack vectors, than your latest-greatest recently audited version.  Do I have that about right?

+1 for the audit.  But there is a clearly a lot of work remaining.

[yogibaer]

This is an interesting coin however I had bigger expectations from the audit. Face it, literally the only "positive" thing it mentioned was a sandwich phrase saying that the "basic mechanisms are quite robust" but after that it is all just hammering a large number of specific negative points, some of which do not correspond with the whitepaper.

I understand that lot of us hold bags but can we please be a bit more realistic and not sell this report as a great success?

I think you misunderstand what an audit is used for. An audit is made to find bugs in the software before it goes live! The idea behind an audit is to make a software product more secure and better. And exactly this is what the audit report did. It revealed the weak points we have to work on. And as you can see we already improved most of the findings.

Excuse me, but the audit focused on your current wallet release, which definitely is "live".  That is stated pretty clearly in the first few pages of the report.

Well, the code that was audited is live on github and this is the code for the coming live-wallet release. This code was audited not the current wallet which operates the live-net.

Ah, okay.  So the current wallet/enigma platform is even *more* out of date, and presumably exposed to even more attack vectors, than your latest-greatest recently audited version.  Do I have that about right?

+1 for the audit.  But there is a clearly a lot of work remaining.

Well, the code base is the same. The Cloak-Enigma in the live version is out-dated. The new Cloak-Enigma that was audited is much much more improved than the one on the current live-wallets. That i why we had the audit! Regarding the old Code base, we planed and we already started the move to LTC Base (because of Segwit/Lightning/Atomic Swaps in the future) but this is another big and complex task to be done. It would have caused even more delays in opening the code and having it audited. The next steps what we are doing: Final finish of the current version and release of live-wallet. Then we will go ahead with the move to LTC Base which is one of the major tasks this year! An updated Roadmap is coming out soon, after we are done with releasing the new (currently audited) wallet.

I hope this clarifies the situation a bit. Thanks.

[Duderino123]

This is an interesting coin however I had bigger expectations from the audit. Face it, literally the only "positive" thing it mentioned was a sandwich phrase saying that the "basic mechanisms are quite robust" but after that it is all just hammering a large number of specific negative points, some of which do not correspond with the whitepaper.

I understand that lot of us hold bags but can we please be a bit more realistic and not sell this report as a great success?

I think you're missing the point. Cognosec wasn't able to trace the receiver and they found a theoretical possibility to identify the sender. This problem has been solved BECAUSE OF the audit, which consequently made Cloak better. That IS a success! Other coins didn't put the future of their product at risk by letting a third party review the code. Monero have their own "Monero Research Lab" to make their coin more "trustworthy".
Apart from #1 Cognosec only found minor issues and let's face it - they had to justify their existence.