Monero Announcement - Reading Assignment

Privacy Coins - Ultimate Course
#21
  1. April 25, 2014, 12:38:50 AM, (Read 4612750 times)
  2. around 7
  3. use of proven ‘academic’ cryptography
  4. no need to use transactions with others, split unit denominations for ease of use utxo mixing
1 Like
#22

  • When was the thread published, and how many times has it been read?
    April 25, 2014, 12:38:50 AM, Read 4612934 times.

  • How many ‘core team’ members are there?
    (7) Riccardo “fluffypony” Spagni, luigi1111, NoodleDoodle, smooth, tacotime, Franciso “ArticMine” Cabañas, othe

  • What are the stated benefits over ZeroCoin and ZKP-based approaches?
    Ring signatures are much simpler and more mature, with many peer-reviewed papers published over more than a decade.
    Other issues with ZKP include the RSA private key used to initiate the accumulator, which must be trusted to be destroyed by the generating party.
    It also obscures the entire economy, not just sender/receiver identities. If the ZK system is compromised, then an attacker can continuously spend coins that don’t exist using false proofs. This damage is hidden from everybody due to total blinding and consequently at any given time it’s not possible to know if the network has already been compromised.

  • What are the stated benefits over CoinJoin-based approaches?
    The differences arise in the departure from the Bitcoin protocol, which allows XMR to use new cryptography to provide decentralized and trustless mixing of superior quality. The critical problem with mixing services is the need to trust the operators.
    The CoinJoin-inspired Darkcoin performs mixing with selected “masternodes” since it still uses ordinary signatures that can be mapped one-to-one. The motivation is that a randomly selected node is less likely than a single service to exhibit bad faith (such as keeping logs) . In practice, a few VPS companies host the vast majority of nodes and this approach relies on the integrity and good behavior of these nodes. XMR’s more fundamental cryptographic approach doesn’t have these vulnerabilities and the quality of anonymity is much higher.
    XMR’s ring signatures are also far more secure and convenient than CoinJoin because they mix outputs not transactions. This means a transaction doesn’t involve waiting around for other senders to mix with. Nor is a user restricted to mixing only if others are sending the same amount. Arbitrary amounts can be sent at any time without anyone else’s participation. This feature makes a timing analysis of the blockchain useless.

1 Like
#23
  1. 25th of April 2014. 4612988 times
  2. 7 core team members
  3. Ring sginatures + one-time keys
  4. No need for XMR to trust masternodes or other intermediaries. XMR mixes output no TX.
2 Likes
#24
1. When was the thread published, and how many times has it been read?

Published: April 25, 2014, 12:38:50 AM --Read: 4613028 times

2. How many ‘core team’ members are there?

7: Riccardo “fluffypony” Spagni, luigi1111, NoodleDoodle, smooth, tacotime, Franciso “ArticMine” Cabañas, othe

3. What are the stated benefits over ZeroCoin and ZKP-based approaches?

One-time keys and ring signatures are more mature technologies. ZeroCoin and ZKP are based on new technologies that may be discovered to have weaknesses down the road. Also, in ZeroCoin, you must trust the generator to destroy the RSA private key used to initiate the accumulator. And, in Zerocoin, an attacher could double spend without anyone knowing it.

4. What are the stated benefits over CoinJoin-based approaches?

With Monero, you don’t have to trust a third party to execute mixing. You don’t have to worry about subpoena or malicious intent with respect to the mixing node. Another benefit is that you don’t have to wait for other parties to join a mixing transaction, because ring signatures mix outputs, not transactions.

2 Likes
#25
1. When was the thread published, and how many times has it been read?

April 25, 2014, 12:38:50 AM
4,613,089 views

2. How many ‘core team’ members are there?

(7) Riccardo “fluffypony” Spagni, luigi1111, NoodleDoodle, smooth, tacotime, Franciso “ArticMine” Cabañas, othe

3. What are the stated benefits over ZeroCoin and ZKP-based approaches?

If the Zero Knowledge Proof (ZKP) scheme is hacked there is no way to tell that the system has been compromised because everyone is blind.

4. What are the stated benefits over CoinJoin-based approaches?
  • Because XMR is not limited by the Bitcoin protocol it can mix in a completely decentralized and trustless way
  • It mixes outputs instead so doesn’t need to find other peers to join the transaction
  • CoinJoin does not obfuscate the amount sent so requires peers to be sending the same amount to maximize anonymity, where Monero can mask an arbitrary value by chunking it into smaller values
1 Like
#26
  1. April 25, 2014, 12:38:50 AM (Read 4613202 times)
  2. 7
  3. Ring signatures and single-use keys
  4. Ring signatures mix outputs instead of transactions. A transaction doesn’t have to wait for other users trying to send the same amounts.
1 Like
#27

1. When was the thread published, and how many times has it been read?
The thread was published on April 25th, 2014. It’s been read 4,613,223 times.

2. How many ‘core team’ members are there?
According to the thread, there are 7 “core team” members.

3. What are the stated benefits over ZeroCoin and ZKP-based approaches?
The stated benefits over ZeroCoin and ZKP-based approaches include a more simplistic and straightforward means of retaining anonymity as well as the depth of research that already went into ring signatures (which originated in a 2001 paper).

4. What are the stated benefits over CoinJoin-based approaches?
The stated benefits over CoinJoin-based approaches include not needing to trust the operators of a CoinJoin transaction and, more importantly, XMR mixes outputs instead of transactions (the CoinJoin approach).

1 Like
#28

  1. It was published in April 2014 and was read 4614188 times.

  2. 7

  3. The ring signatures used in monero are mature and well proven. The ZKP technologies stem from recent cryptographic research and may have yet unknown exploits.

  4. CoinJoin methods still include some trust. For example you have to trust that the mixer’s server is not compromised.

1 Like
#29
  1. 25 April 2014 and 4614573 times read
  2. Riccardo “fluffypony” Spagni, luigi1111, NoodleDoodle, smooth, tacotime, Franciso “ArticMine” Cabañas: 6 members
  3. Monero utilises Ring signatures and one times keys
  4. XMR uses a new cryptography with a different protocol than Bitcoin to provide “decentralised and trustless mixing of superior quality”. This happens by mixing outputs, not UTXOs.
2 Likes
#30
  1. When was the thread published, and how many times has it been read?
  • Date: Apr 25, 2014 Times: 4614580
  1. How many ‘core team’ members are there?
  • 7
  1. What are the stated benefits over ZeroCoin and ZKP-based approaches?
  • Ring signatures are much simpler and more mature
  1. What are the stated benefits over CoinJoin-based approaches?
  • A truely decentralized system to perform mixing
  • Ring Signiture is much safer
1 Like
#31

  1. When was the thread published, and how many times has it been read?
    Published april 25 2014; Read 4.614.596 times

  2. How many ‘core team’ members are there?
    7 core team members: Don´t forget “othe” :wink:

  3. What are the stated benefits over ZeroCoin and ZKP-based approaches?
    Monero use ring signatures, which are more simpler and more mature.

  4. What are the stated benefits over CoinJoin-based approaches?
    CoinJoin is more centralized and can be compromised more easily.
    XMR mix outputs, not transactions.

1 Like
#32
  1. April 25, 2014 - 4.6 million times
  2. 6 at that time
    • ZKP approaches are less mature, exploits may come along, Ring signatures much more mature.
  • The initiation process requires an enormous amount of trust, with Monero this process is absent.
  • Because the entire economy is hidden, compromises are hidden as well and could lead to coin creation being undetected.
    • No need to trust mixing operators
  • No need to rely on good behavior of Masternodes
  • Ring signatures are more convenient, because no need to wait for others to join the transaction and no need to restrict to same amounts, all arbitrary amounts can be used.
2 Likes
#33
  1. When was the thread published and how many times has it been read?
  • April 25, 2014, 12:38:50 AM - It has been read 4615349 times.
  1. How many ‘core team’ members are there?
  • 7 Core members
  1. What are the stated benefits over ZeroCoin and ZKP/based approaches?
  • The newer cryptography used by ZeroCoin is not as well proven yet, meaning it’s possible someone might discover an exploit in the future which will break the Coin.
  • RSA private keys must be trusted to be destroyed by the generating pary.
  • ZKP hides the entire economy and not just senders, receivers and transactions. The actual quantity of coins on the blockchain can’t be verified. In theory an attacker could spend coins which don’t exist, and there would be no way for anyone to find out.
  1. What are the stated benefits over CoinJoin/based approaches?
  • XMR is decentralized and trustless.
  • Rind signatures mix outputs, not transactions. Arbitrary amounts can be spent, without anyone else’s participation. This also makes timing analysis attacks useless.
1 Like
#34

  1. It was published April 25th, 2014. Its been read 4.6 million times (!)

  2. The ‘core team’ has seven members.

  3. The main benefit over ZK approaches is that in CryptoNote one is relying on cryptography that is better tested, as it has been around for some years, whereas ZK crypto is new. Also, ZK Proofs require a trusted setup. CryptoNote does not. Lastly, in ZK-based systems the transaction amounts are obscured, so, as the announcement warns, if the ZK system were compromised, one might not be able to observe that the coin’s economics have been tampered with.

  4. XMR is decentralized with cryptography-based privacy as part of the protocol, so there is no worry about information leaking through hacking, negligence, or pressure upon the mixing entity from a government agency. With XMR one also need not trust in the integrity of masternodes in the DarkCoin system. XMR is also superior to CoinJoin in that it is not necessary to wait for others to join in a common transaction, nor is it necessary to use equal amount inputs. One can send any amount.

1 Like
#35

  1. Published on April 25, 2014, 12:38:50 AM, Read 4615508 times

  2. 6 core members

  3. Monero’s use of ring signatures and one time keys which are more secure

  4. Monero mixes outputs rather than transactions which coinjoin does

1 Like
#36

Q1: It was published Apr. 25,2014 close to midnight and has been read 4,615,600 times

Q2: I counted 6 not including the others.

Q3: Monero in comparison to Zerocoin has already undergone years of crypt-analysis and has 10 years of documents to prove it where as ZeroCoin is still fairly new and exploits can come later down the line. Ring signatures and one time keys are much simpler and provide for more privacy without any extra effort on our part.

Q4:In CoinJoin TXs you have to either rely on a central 3rd party to perform the TX for you like Bitlaundry or in Dakrcoins’s case you have to rely on the “randomly” selected mater nodes which are run by a select few companies bringing up the same issue of trust. With Monero’s cryptographic approach those issues are no longer present.

1 Like
#37

  1. The thread was published on April 25 2014, it was read 4615727 times.

  2. Riccardo “fluffypony” Spagni, luigi1111, NoodleDoodle, smooth, tacotime, Franciso “ArticMine” Cabañas, othe --> 7 people

  3. In contrast to ZeroCoin and ZKP, ring signatures are simpler and more advanced, as they have already been examined by many experts in numerous studies over several years which means they are proven for several years (potential risks are minimized). Another problem is the destroyed RSA key which hide the sender and receiver identities as well as the whole “economy”. This results in risks such as spending coins which don´t exist and nobody could recognize it because everything on the network is hidden (in case of a compromised network).
    –> Here, I have a question. What does it mean the network gets compromised? In which way can the ZK system be compromised?

  4. Ring signatures are more secure because they are mixing outputs and not transactions. That being said, the risk that a transaction is not valid because someone failed to sign (because he was too late or whatever) is also reduced. Furthermore you don´t have to find someone who wants so spend exactly the same amount. So, you can send any fund you want at any time. You don´t have to rely on somebody else.

1 Like
#38
  1. What does this have to do with crypto? I can’t find how many times it has been read; here is the publishing date: April 25, 2014, 12:38:50 AM
  2. There are 7 core team members of Monero.
  3. The article states that Monero is better then ZKP and ZeroCoin based privacy because the use of one time keys and ring signatures are much more mature, simpler and have been peer reviewed by many people.
  4. Since XMR is its own blockchain, it was able to add improved cryptography used in their decentralized trustless mixing algorithm. This makes it better then the CoinJoin mixing approach. XMR mixes the the transaction outputs and not whole transaction. This allows for faster mixing since the service is not waiting for other transactions to mix with; it just needs outputs. Timing analysis is also deemed useless because of this as well.
1 Like
#39

Ok, found the number of times read: Read 4615922 times

1 Like
#40

  1. April 2014. As of today: 4616095 reads.

  2. 7

  3. Ring signatures & one-time keys are introduced

  4. Masternodes need not be trusted, also outputs are mixed. Also arbitrary amounts can be sent without anyone else contributing in the relevant timeframe.

1 Like