This message was too old and has been purged

[Kuriso]

You people realize that when you make a purchase with your anon coins, if you are buying something that has to be shipped, which would be most of your online purchases, they have your fucking address!  Unless you are doing face to face transactions with no personal information exchanged AND you are wearing a mask while doing it, you're not going to be anonymous.....  There's a whole host of potential what if's and hypothetical situations that can be dreamed up and thrown around.  That's not what this thread was about.  Prove the transactions themselves are traceable or shut the fuck up.

Scratch that. Still not anonymous enough.  Even if you are wearing a mask you better be driving a stolen car so it cant be tracked back to you.  Make sure you do 4 loops around a city block (personal ring signatures and 1 more than required by XMR) while ditching the stolen car for a new one and making sure no one is following you.  At this point, if you don't suspect someone is following you, proceed to your real car and then do 4 more personal ring signatures.  After these steps are successfully taken, proceed home.  

For an added layer of security, make sure one of the cars you ditch is in a tunnel or under a bridge so the drones and spy satellites can't watch you.  Make sure you have a pair of gloves on too so you don't leave finger prints inside those stolen cars.

[onemorexmr]

You people realize that when you make a purchase with your anon coins, if you are buying something that has to be shipped, which would be most of your online purchases, they have your fucking address!  Unless you are doing face to face transactions with no personal information exchanged AND you are wearing a mask while doing it, you're not going to be anonymous.....  There's a whole host of potential what if's and hypothetical situations that can be dreamed up and thrown around.  That's not what this thread was about.  Prove the transactions themselves are traceable or shut the fuck up.

Scratch that. Still not anonymous enough.  Even if you are wearing a mask you better be driving a stolen car so it cant be tracked back to you.  Make sure you do 4 loops around a city block (personal ring signatures and 1 more than required by XMR) while ditching the stolen car for a new one and making sure no one is following you.  At this point, if you don't suspect someone is following you, proceed to your real car and then do 4 more personal ring signatures.  After these steps are successfully taken, proceed home.  

For an added layer of security, make sure one of the cars you ditch is in a tunnel or under a bridge so the drones and spy satellites can't watch you.  Make sure you have a pair of gloves on too so you don't leave finger prints inside those stolen cars.

for funs sake: a drkler needs to steal mutliple cars before he even can go out

[Lukas_Jackson]

You people realize that when you make a purchase with your anon coins, if you are buying something that has to be shipped, which would be most of your online purchases, they have your fucking address!  Unless you are doing face to face transactions with no personal information exchanged AND you are wearing a mask while doing it, you're not going to be anonymous.....  There's a whole host of potential what if's and hypothetical situations that can be dreamed up and thrown around.  That's not what this thread was about.  Prove the transactions themselves are traceable or shut the fuck up.

Scratch that. Still not anonymous enough.  Even if you are wearing a mask you better be driving a stolen car so it cant be tracked back to you.  Make sure you do 4 loops around a city block (personal ring signatures and 1 more than required by XMR) while ditching the stolen car for a new one and making sure no one is following you.  At this point, if you don't suspect someone is following you, proceed to your real car and then do 4 more personal ring signatures.  After these steps are successfully taken, proceed home.  

For an added layer of security, make sure one of the cars you ditch is in a tunnel or under a bridge so the drones and spy satellites can't watch you.  Make sure you have a pair of gloves on too so you don't leave finger prints inside those stolen cars.

for funs sake: a drkler needs to steal mutliple cars before he even can go out

From A to Z please...after 16 rounds

[onemorexmr]

for funs sake: a drkler needs to steal mutliple cars before he even can go out

From A to Z please...after 16 rounds

i really like that comparison.... stealing a car is dangerous and you may get caught.

fits perfectly to masternodes

[Kuriso]

for funs sake: a drkler needs to steal mutliple cars before he even can go out

From A to Z please...after 16 rounds

i really like that comparison.... stealing a car is dangerous and you may get caught.

fits perfectly to masternodes

Applies to any anon coin.  You think monero is any different?  Tell me how monero provides anonymity for my personal information when I have to provide it for shipping.  Show me how monero provides protections for face to face transactions.  How does monero protect my browser traffic?  It doesn't do any of that nor does any other coin.  That's the point.  So why do your monero shills constantly deflect and muddy the water with all of these different situations?

Focus on the purpose of this thread.  Prove the transactions themselves are traceable.

[tacotime]

It’s significant to this debate that Darkcoin had ring signatures on its roadmap and decided against implementing them (for now) because of adverse practical issues associated with their use - in particular the bloat problem.

DRK's solution is also O(n) in size and thus has the same relative amount of bloat, as I stated earlier in the thread... The only real reason I can see that DRK stuck to their CoinJoin model was because so much effort had already been made into writing a method of trying to decentralize CoinJoins, and because implementing ring signatures is a giant pain in the ass (you need to keep track of a whole separate database where you keep outputs of the same age in order of their incidence in the blockchain, for one).

[barwizi]

It’s significant to this debate that Darkcoin had ring signatures on its roadmap and decided against implementing them (for now) because of adverse practical issues associated with their use - in particular the bloat problem.

DRK's solution is also O(n) in size and thus has the same relative amount of bloat, as I stated earlier in the thread... The only real reason I can see that DRK stuck to their CoinJoin model was because so much effort had already been made into writing a method of trying to decentralize CoinJoins, and because implementing ring signatures is a giant pain in the ass (you need to keep track of a whole separate database where you keep outputs of the same age in order of their incidence in the blockchain, for one).

Hmm, but the question is can a transaction be traced?

I have heard that SDC tried to apply ring signatures, how does their bloat compare?

[Joshuar]

for funs sake: a drkler needs to steal mutliple cars before he even can go out

From A to Z please...after 16 rounds

i really like that comparison.... stealing a car is dangerous and you may get caught.

fits perfectly to masternodes

Applies to any anon coin.  You think monero is any different?  Tell me how monero provides anonymity for my personal information when I have to provide it for shipping.  Show me how monero provides protections for face to face transactions.  How does monero protect my browser traffic?  It doesn't do any of that nor does any other coin.  That's the point.  So why do your monero shills constantly deflect and muddy the water with all of these different situations?

Focus on the purpose of this thread.  Prove the transactions themselves are traceable.

That's quite silly. The discussion is about the anonymous currency's protocol, not other external factors(Like shipping information) that would de-anonymize you.

[Kuriso]

It’s significant to this debate that Darkcoin had ring signatures on its roadmap and decided against implementing them (for now) because of adverse practical issues associated with their use - in particular the bloat problem.

DRK's solution is also O(n) in size and thus has the same relative amount of bloat, as I stated earlier in the thread... The only real reason I can see that DRK stuck to their CoinJoin model was because so much effort had already been made into writing a method of trying to decentralize CoinJoins, and because implementing ring signatures is a giant pain in the ass (you need to keep track of a whole separate database where you keep outputs of the same age in order of their incidence in the blockchain, for one).

Hmm, but the question is can a transaction be traced?

I have heard that SDC tried to apply ring signatures, how does their bloat compare?

child_harold and smooth talking about SDC ring sigs: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=745352.msg10688532#msg10688532

[Kuriso]

for funs sake: a drkler needs to steal mutliple cars before he even can go out

From A to Z please...after 16 rounds

i really like that comparison.... stealing a car is dangerous and you may get caught.

fits perfectly to masternodes

Applies to any anon coin.  You think monero is any different?  Tell me how monero provides anonymity for my personal information when I have to provide it for shipping.  Show me how monero provides protections for face to face transactions.  How does monero protect my browser traffic?  It doesn't do any of that nor does any other coin.  That's the point.  So why do your monero shills constantly deflect and muddy the water with all of these different situations?

Focus on the purpose of this thread.  Prove the transactions themselves are traceable.

That's quite silly. The discussion is about the anonymous currency's protocol, not other external factors(Like shipping information) that would de-anonymize you.

Sure it's silly but go back a few post and see where RenegadeMan ask smooth (or anyone else) to prove the transaction is traceable and smooth continues to shift the conversation and talks about tracking his web browsing in an attempt to tie that to tracking anon transactions.  I had a bit of fun and attempted to point out that's there's several more realistic problems with anonymity.  The coin tech is just 1 layer of the puzzle.

I digress....  That's not what this thread was started for.  The thread suggest that the transactions are traceable.  With the block explorer no less.  So far its been proven wrong yet shills and fud-artist continue to tell you its possible by going off on completely different scenarios. Again, focus on the purpose of this thread.  Prove the transactions themselves are traceable.

[Este Nuno]

Isn't bloat kind of a non-issue at this point considering even Bitcoin itself is likely going to be moving towards 20mb blocks and beyond? In a sense Bitcoin's existence and continued growth of its blockchain will demonstrate whether or not bloat is really going to be a limiting factor.

[bitcreditscc]

Isn't bloat kind of a non-issue at this point considering even Bitcoin itself is likely going to be moving towards 20mb blocks and beyond? In a sense Bitcoin's existence and continued growth of its blockchain will demonstrate whether or not bloat is really going to be a limiting factor.

Actually, that is MAX block size. For now  most blocks will remain the same size. ~ 1 MB

[Johnny Mnemonic]

He isn't asking you to track his web traffic so why are you asking him to track yours?  Why is it not possible for you guys to directly answer a question or take a challenge?  He's asking you to track coins sent from one address to another.  Who the fuck cares about the rest of your net traffic.  Break the anonymous transaction.  

You sure are good at playing dumb. But just in case you're not:

Smooth's point is that just because your system is secure against regular folk doesn't mean it's invulnerable to greater threats with more access and resources (ISPs, large corporations, governments, etc.).

Just like you can't deanonymize smooth's web browsing, he can't identify your transactions. Does that imply either are truly anonymous or secure? Nope.

Is this starting to make sense to you?

This is why "put up or shut up" is an argument for retards: Link my bitcoin address to my identity. Go ahead, Kuriso. Can't you do it? If not, then I guess we don't even need darkcoin, right?

[RenegadeMan]

You people realize that when you make a purchase with your anon coins, if you are buying something that has to be shipped, which would be most of your online purchases, they have your fucking address!  Unless you are doing face to face transactions with no personal information exchanged AND you are wearing a mask while doing it, you're not going to be anonymous....

Totally.
It’s significant to this debate that Darkcoin had ring signatures on its roadmap and decided against implementing them (for now) because of adverse practical issues associated with their use - in particular the bloat problem.

Cryptonote fanatics (In particular, Monero devs) have their heads stuck so far down the cryptography manhole that they’ve lost sight of all monetary objectives other than “hiding from the NSA”, which isn’t even a monetary objective. A bit like a formula 1 car designer that becomes so obsessed with the tyre tread that they forget to make the car light and get lapped in the first round (as Monero has been by Darkcoin).

We’re talking about money here. The goal is to address a particular monetary property - fungibility, the only property in which Bitcoin is deficient - as well as financial privacy and to do that at least as well as the current fiat banking system (which is not the least bit opaque as far as NSA et al are concerned).

At this moment, Darkcoin’s implementation of anonymity suits a cryptocurrency far better than cryptonote does because it supports all immediate commercial design objectives and leaves options open for the future. In addition to that, it supports the oldest boost to reliability known to man - multiple redundancy. If you want commercial privacy, use a standard number of rounds. If you want super anonymity just put it through the full 16 rounds.

Contrary to what highly conflicted Monero coin developers would have you believe, useful modern cryptography was not invented 4 years ago, it was invented about 70 years ago and a myriad of successful implementations of every conceivable type have been in use ever since. More specific monetary-oriented cryptographic algorithms came along in the eighties so even those have been around for 30 years. Also contrary to what conflicted Monero devs would have you believe, there is more than 1 solution that satisfies the design objectives of a bitcoin-based currency which addresses the fungibility and privacy issue. Success will not go to the solution that has the most modern cryptography - or even the most secure - but the one that best addresses all of the priorities across the board.

For me, that is Darkcoin by a mile right now.

Whatever amounts of sand get thrown in its devs’ and its community’s face over hypothetical security scenarios it still has way more forethought and relevance across the whole offering. In addition, having read all of the challenges in this thread I think its security model is well in excess of what’s needed for the role it has to fulfil. A far more realistic weakness than ‘NSA tracing your transactions’ for example is simply some 3rd party buying up the coin supply and that’s something that applies to all coins / mining power / you name it.

Cryptographic priorities aren’t the  biggest issue here - monetary ones are. So before deciding what’s the optimal design cryptographically you need to decide what’s the optimal one monetarily and how much difference a legacy compliant blockchain makes because everything else flows from there.

What's it Worth ?
Monero staff have made a clusterfuck of a PR job for their coin in this thread by attacking Darkcoin’s anonymity approach because it’s a straw man. The real question is not Darkcoin’s anonymity approach, it’s its legacy compliance approach and how much that’s worth. A year ago that wasn’t clear but now it’s crystal clear - Bitcoin’s marketcap has continued to prevail over all alts. Darkcoin’s cap was sustained, Monero’s tanked. None of the alts have made a dent in Bitcoin’s cap despite being more advanced technically. So legacy compliance IS worth something big according to the market and in that regard it will accept the optimal anonymity solution if it wants a high-privacy version of it.

So critics can keep on pulling on that (it’s not secure !!) chain - it won’t matter because Darkcoin has the right solution for what it’s trying to do at the moment and it’s only likely to consolidate from here according to the conclusions of last year’s alt-coin arms race.

And, as you can see from Toknormal's brilliant analysis above (tremendously well articulated and he even knows how to use grammar properly.....my kind of guy) we have highly intelligent people within the Darkcoin community who are constantly thinking through the bigger picture on how all this stuff hangs together and what the higher level considerations are to making an anonymous digital currency.

This (Toknormal's observance of the need for focus on sound monetary objectives) is what separates Darkcoin from Monero and the other 13 or so wannabe anon coins and why Darkcoin's market cap is more than 5½ times that of Monero. We're thinking about, and considering, the overall landscape of qualities, attributes and the robustness/integrity of the architecture against the commercialisation and real-world adoption issues rather than taking this "head down the cryptography manhole" approach that has you caught up in pedanticism and the never ending need for obtuse muddying of this thread's main point. And, I would put it to you smooth and others, it's what's getting so far up your collective noses that you need to partake in such obviously childish attempts to discredit Darkcoin, the Darkcoin devs and community.

As per previous postings and what people are constantly pointing out. Demonstrate how the anon transactions can be deanonymized and traced or STFU!

[RenegadeMan]

He isn't asking you to track his web traffic so why are you asking him to track yours?  Why is it not possible for you guys to directly answer a question or take a challenge?  He's asking you to track coins sent from one address to another.  Who the fuck cares about the rest of your net traffic.  Break the anonymous transaction.  

You sure are good at playing dumb. But just in case you're not:

Smooth's point is that just because your system is secure against regular folk doesn't mean it's invulnerable to greater threats with more access and resources (ISPs, large corporations, governments, etc.).

Just like you can't deanonymize smooth's web browsing, he can't identify your transactions. Does that imply either are truly anonymous or secure? Nope.

Is this starting to make sense to you?

This is why "put up or shut up" is an argument for retards: Link my bitcoin address to my identity. Go ahead, Kuriso. Can't you do it? If not, then I guess we don't even need darkcoin, right?

Just more of the same. FFS! You people are unbelievably determined to keep moving the conversation off onto a tangential angle away from the issue at hand to a whole raft of other hypothetical possibilities that are so far out in "one in ten trillion" land it's a pointless exercise.

No one is saying Darkcoin's anon is "for regular folk", its anonymity is ANONYMITY.....period.

Demonstrate to us HOW Darkcoin's anonymity can be broken.

It's simple.....it's what this thread is about.....it's what's troubling you all just SOOO MUCH!

Do it.....or SHUT UP.....that's the whole point of this thread and all your other stuff is just rhetoric and a never ending attempt to discredit Darkcoin.

Lame....so lame.

[kadrek]

He isn't asking you to track his web traffic so why are you asking him to track yours?  Why is it not possible for you guys to directly answer a question or take a challenge?  He's asking you to track coins sent from one address to another.  Who the fuck cares about the rest of your net traffic.  Break the anonymous transaction.  

You sure are good at playing dumb. But just in case you're not:

Smooth's point is that just because your system is secure against regular folk doesn't mean it's invulnerable to greater threats with more access and resources (ISPs, large corporations, governments, etc.).

Just like you can't deanonymize smooth's web browsing, he can't identify your transactions. Does that imply either are truly anonymous or secure? Nope.

Is this starting to make sense to you?

This is why "put up or shut up" is an argument for retards: Link my bitcoin address to my identity. Go ahead, Kuriso. Can't you do it? If not, then I guess we don't even need darkcoin, right?

Just more of the same. FFS! You people are unbelievably determined to keep moving the conversation off onto a tangential angle away from the issue at hand to a whole raft of other hypothetical possibilities that are so far out in "one in ten trillion" land it's a pointless exercise.

No one is saying Darkcoin's anon is "for regular folk", its anonymity is ANONYMITY.....period.

Demonstrate to us HOW Darkcoin's anonymity can be broken.

It's simple.....it's what this thread is about.....it's what's troubling you all just SOOO MUCH!

Do it.....or SHUT UP.....that's the whole point of this thread and all your other stuff is just rhetoric and a never ending attempt to discredit Darkcoin.

Lame....so lame.

Exactly this.

[ArticMine]

The weak point would be to regulate the masternodes as MSBs. Collect enough data from enough masternodes and over time one could start to unravel DRK transactions even with blinded masternodes. How resistant are blinded masternodes to this type of Sybil attack?  

[Kuriso]

He isn't asking you to track his web traffic so why are you asking him to track yours?  Why is it not possible for you guys to directly answer a question or take a challenge?  He's asking you to track coins sent from one address to another.  Who the fuck cares about the rest of your net traffic.  Break the anonymous transaction.  

You sure are good at playing dumb. But just in case you're not:

Smooth's point is that just because your system is secure against regular folk doesn't mean it's invulnerable to greater threats with more access and resources (ISPs, large corporations, governments, etc.).

Just like you can't deanonymize smooth's web browsing, he can't identify your transactions. Does that imply either are truly anonymous or secure? Nope.

Is this starting to make sense to you?

This is why "put up or shut up" is an argument for retards: Link my bitcoin address to my identity. Go ahead, Kuriso. Can't you do it? If not, then I guess we don't even need darkcoin, right?

I do try to dumb it down a bit.  Most people only read at a 7th grade level.  Do you fit into this category?

Did you respond to my previous post before reading the rest of the posts made?  Who here has claimed to be able to track an address to a personal identity?  I surely never have but this could happen when: a) you decide to buy something and have to provide personal information like shipping, b) your ISP or gov agency tracks traffic from your IP to an IP that is associated with an anon coin that's on a watch list, c) face to face transactions where you are not wearing a mask and driving your own car .  Any of the 3 possibilities are a problem for any and every coin.  

I digress again.... The OP and the purpose of this thread was to confirm or debunk the "... possible proof ..." that DRK's transactions were traceable.  The OP suggests that the transactions are traceable.  With the block explorer no less.  So far its been proven wrong yet shills and fud'sters continue to say its possible by going off on completely different scenarios.  Again, focus on the purpose of this thread.  Prove the transactions themselves are traceable.

This is where the "put up or shut up" argument becomes VERY valid.  If DRK's darksend transactions are traceable, prove it or STFU and move on.

[illodin]

The weak point would be to regulate the masternodes as MSBs.

Masternodes are not transacting coins. They can be ran in any country, not just in the USA. And moreover, I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.

Collect enough data from enough masternodes and over time one could start to unravel DRK transactions even with blinded masternodes. How resistant are blinded masternodes to this type of Sybil attack?  

What is enough data? I'd say they are extremely resistant. You'd probably need to collect the data from 95% of the masternodes depending on the rounds of mixing used to get any hope of unraveling anything, and the 1000 DRK requirement for running a masternode is exactly for that purpose. To get it expensive enough to gain large enough percentage.

[ArticMine]

Collect enough data from enough masternodes and over time one could start to unravel DRK transactions even with blinded masternodes. How resistant are blinded masternodes to this type of Sybil attack?  

What is enough data? I'd say they are extremely resistant. You'd probably need to collect the data from 95% of the masternodes to get any hope of unraveling anything, and the 1000 DRK requirement for running a masternode is exactly for that purpose. To get it expensive enough to gain large enough percentage.

The question becomes what happens when one trades time for the percentage of compromised masternodes? Over a short period of time yes it may take 95% of the masternodes, but what happens where the attacker collects data over say a period of 6 months or longer using a much smaller percentage of compromised masternodes. I am talking here of a regulator or a group of regulators who persuade a fraction of the masternodes to provide the regulator(s) with data at essentially no cost to the compromised masternodes. All of this is of course separate from an attack on the proof of stake aspect of DRK (the 1000 DRK masternode requirement) using "borrowed" stake.