Louisd’or(codename)- first anonymous PoS, CN-based currency (technical review)

[crypto_zoidberg]

Hello!
I’m glad to announce our project, that we were working on last weeks and keep working on. This is CryptoNote-based currency with first anonymous PoS engine(that use PoW as well).
This is the part of big project (which have codename Louisd’or), that we do for my friends, so this is just technology announce and first rough implementation of CN-based PoS, and working network, this is more like proposal, so i shared this to get public review and feedback about PoS approach we gonna use.
The “Louisd’or” project itself have a wide feature list and have a lot of development ahead, so we have a great team of talented people who worked on this, and expect to release it in the middle of spring.
 
According to my experience in bitcointalk forum, here is a lot of people who like to criticize my work, especially from Monero clan, so you guys is welcome to fight!
We have about 4-5 BTC of bounties for people who gonna find bugs/flaws in design or implementation: most serious critical flaw gonna get 2 BTC, next less critical 1 BTC, next 0.5 BTC and so on.

Brief description link(mini-whitepaper): http://162.243.101.90/lui_share.pdf
Implementation: https://github.com/cryptobender/lui
Notice: Implementation does not completely reflect mini-whitepaper description, it still in development, so i often do some commits and restart test network every 2-3 days. Atm we have network that running about of couple of days and seems to be okay.

Feel free to post any questions and ideas here or to PM.

Zoidberg

[Vadimekb]

Hello!
I’m glad to announce our project, that we were working on last weeks and keep working on. This is CryptoNote-based currency with first anonymous PoS engine(that use PoW as well).

CN based POS!?
Finally!

[djm34]

how fat(er) will become the blockchain with all these additional transaction ?

[crypto_zoidberg]

how fat(er) will become the blockchain with all these additional transaction ?

What additional transactions you mean?

[waxo]

I hope this is not going to be ICO....

[networthsigns]

Good luck.

Let's see how it goes.

[billotronic]

Just to be clear, this is still just testnet?

[crypto_zoidberg]

Just to be clear, this is still just testnet?

Yes, this is definately testnet! And this testnet is usualy restarted every 2-3 days since i add some changes or do some experiments.
Everyone is free to hack or broke this net!

Zoidberg

[presstab]

Awesome project, good work!!

I do have concerns about this though:

Code:

Age of coins Louis d’or does not count the age of coins, as opposed to Peercoin/
Novacoin, and the chances of winning are proportional only to the amount.
The first reason is to make the process of PoS mining more egalitarian, as well
as PoW. Users are free to spend/transfer their money and do not obliged to wait
months to slightly increase their chances to win. The second reason is security
consideration. In order to protect the network we want more ”honest” coins to
participate in PoS mining. Eliminating the age of coins we increase the ”honest
hashrate”, allowing even recently spent coin to produce a block. And last reason
is privacy. For CryptoNote ring signature you need to mix you output among the
other outputs with the same characteristics: amount, age etc. If we had restricted
the age, we would have also bound your privacy.

Seems like removing age might lead to more ability to take over the chain. With coin age, a small sized output can accumulate the same coin weight as a larger sized output with younger age, which gives less power to the larger sized outputs. Although it is also true that large sized outputs will accumulate weight faster....  I do wonder if this is the opposite of egalitarian, seeing as the smaller coin holder will not build as much hashing advantage as the large holder, even if aging occurs.

[prints]

So cool! I <3 cryptonote... I think it's great! Yes, I'm personally also interested in how the blockchain will handle it as well.

If you guys need any help with graphics/branding, I'm in!

[doe1138]

Seems like removing age might lead to more ability to take over the chain. With coin age, a small sized output can accumulate the same coin weight as a larger sized output with younger age, which gives less power to the larger sized outputs.

Quite the contrary. Eliminating age prevents a situation when adversary can "take over the chain" with less than 51% (accumulating his coin age). That the reason why PPC code anyway bounds age by 90 days (and still preserves the benefits for large holders).

[presstab]

Seems like removing age might lead to more ability to take over the chain. With coin age, a small sized output can accumulate the same coin weight as a larger sized output with younger age, which gives less power to the larger sized outputs.

Quite the contrary. Eliminating age prevents a situation when adversary can "take over the chain" with less than 51% (accumulating his coin age). That the reason why PPC code anyway bounds age by 90 days (and still preserves the benefits for large holders).

Thats true, and thats why the max weight accumulation age is put into place.  But it also is not like you would need 51% of the coins in this new model either... you would just need much larger outputs than others that give a large enough advantage to build a chain of 5-20 blocks, or whatever an exchange would consider "confirmed".

This "block scoring" does seem interesting though:

Code:

In order to encourage both PoS and PoW miners and protect from an attack of a powerful
miner/pool (with only one type of power: PoS or PoW) we introduced a penalty
for several blocks of one type in a row.
This rule only affects the local policy of a peer when blockchain fork occurs. He
decides to switch if cumulative score of one branch is larger than another one, as usual.
But every block’s score is reduced if it was preceded by a block of the same type. For
example, a second PoW block in a row will be penaltised by 10%, the third — by
10% 
 10% and so on. On the contrary, a chain like ”PoS - PoW - PoS - PoW . . . ” will
get the full score.

So this appears to mean that if I were to build a chain of 20 PoS blocks in a row each block is adding additional chain trust, although marginally smaller, but still positive trust being built.

Hmmm this scheme is definitely interesting.  Look forward to following this repo.

[pandher]

POS=Unfair Distribution

[Kushedout]

POS=Unfair Distribution

PoW=Unfair distribution. Those with more $$$ always get most of the coins,
PoS= Distribution is not necessarily based on how rich one is.

So its all matter of perspective.

______________________________

Will follow this projects, looks very interesting.

[saddambitcoin]

watching 

[crypto_zoidberg]

Hey folk, seems that it was first success test network launch.
Here is difficulty behaviour graph(just FYI):



Actually redline shows adjusted difficulty that used for cumulative difficulty, that used for switching blockchain. There also blue points of PoW difficulty under red points, but googl's spreadsheets not so flexible to let it shown both.

Next iteration will lead code to more close-to-white-paper imlementation, network will be restarted in next 1-2 days.

Zoidberg

[crypto_zoidberg]

BTW: we still have 4-5 BTC for people who'll find a flaws!




Zoidberg

[rangedriver]

BTW: we still have some 4-5 BTC for people who'll find a flaws!




Zoidberg

"BTW: we still have some 4-5 BTC for people who'll find a flaws!"

should read

"BTW: We still have 4-5 BTC for anyone who finds flaws!"

That'll be 4-5 BTC please.

18YJ3QPWA6XgDLMTfQ8ov6sJXUoSxNcpBw

[crypto_zoidberg]

BTW: we still have some 4-5 BTC for people who'll find a flaws!




Zoidberg

"BTW: we still have some 4-5 BTC for people who'll find a flaws!"

should read

"BTW: We still have 4-5 BTC for anyone who finds flaws!"

That'll be 4-5 BTC please.

18YJ3QPWA6XgDLMTfQ8ov6sJXUoSxNcpBw

Fixed

[anonimus]

watching