Search results

This may be a concern for darksend 1, but I don't really see it being applicable for darksend+. DS+ keeps a pool of pre-mixed coins in other addresses already broken down into various standard denominations, and sends a couple to the recipient. In this scenario, there isn't a 20 input being...

I find this ( http://test.explorer.darkcoin.qa/tx/bd3050f0424cf6511e0afb8c8fb2eee7e8665871b2280d8bd08a9082a214d284 ) transaction to be rather interesting. mj2kvkF4TMFtqRhbDtBk6i92FMMo1KqmU5 is used as both an input AND an output in the same denominate, which seems to defeat part of the point in...

It can vary depending on the size of the transaction data, so there is no simple answer for this. The attack you are referring to is not likely. In that attack, malicious nodes nodes were encoding identifiers into a spot in the header of data being sent. Other malicious nodes would later be...

The coins will be mixed at intervals until they've been mixed a certain amount of times, then they will just sit. Standard fees apply to mixing I think. Masternode 1 will know where the user is connecting from, but won't know anything about what drk addresses are involved, as it is only...

Space isn't just a problem for fitting all the algorithms on one board. Even fitting the individual algorithms(512 bit sha3 candidates) alone on boards get poor performance as they can't be unrolled enough and still fit on affordable boards.

Wow, that was anticlimactic. Looks like they slapped on an alias system and added stealth addresses, and are trying to pitch it as something major.

Space is at a premium on fpgas. Unlike gpus, which process the same instruction on many cores at a time, each part of the fpga only operates on one thing at a time, essentially having a stream of data going through the code, so to get good performance, code has to be unrolled when possible...

He's already stated in the thread that he's considering ditching that coin to make another one that's a fork of stealthcoin. It's already hard to take anything seriously that has a 48 hour mining period, but that just really shows his colors right there.

If someone had many nodes running at the time of the transaction, they might be able to see where the transaction was broadcasted from, however that likely could be hidden with tor.

It was determined that the sha3 candidates are too complicated for affordable fpgas. Even single hash pow functions using sha3 candidates can't be sufficiently unrolled to produce high enough hash rates. Implementing all 11 used in x11 would require a massive fpga, and the results would be poor...

The miner most likely isn't specifying what port it's using locally when creating a socket, so it's probably random each time. You really sure that's what the qos is asking for?

I would assume TCP and whatever port the p2pool is listening on; probably 7903

Considering it's not good enough to simply give out the balances, as transactions have to reference their inputs, downloading a list of all unspent inputs every time a wallet is opened is likely far more data than the user wants to download, and could put too much stress on those serving it...

Extra transactions will cause extra bloat. Fortunately, space is cheap, and the blockchain isn't growing that quickly, so it's unlikely to become unmanageable any time soon. If it truly did get too large(keep in mind that bitcoin's blockchain is only up to about 20GB, which although annoying to...

The coins are never in the control of the masternodes, so you'll still have them. Here is the process: Your client sends what transaction it wants to do to the masternode. The mastenode crafts a transaction joining multiple peoples' transactions together, however it needs all of them to sign off...

Completely with you on this one. I was disappointed to see that quick send wasn't on any of the options.

Don't know if this is related to your problem, but 14.6 beta breaks lasybear's sgminer. If you are using 14.4 or 14.6 beta use djm's sgminer: https://github.com/djm34/sph-sgminer_x11mod If you are using lower, stick with lasybear's sgminer.

Could you make this semi-random? If you let everyone set whatever they want in the wallet from 2-8, almost all people will either select 2 for speed, or 8 for more stealth, and nothing in between. This would give a fairly decent assumption an attacker might be able to find a way to leverage when...

IMO this needs another button up top, maybe a tools drop down next to settings or something. In the current mockup I'd have no idea where to go to verify a signed message.

It's actually better than that. Since masternodes group transactions, and they all use the same input size of 10 coins, at that one moment 3 addresses get 10 coins poorer each, and 6 addresses get richer.