These questions can be answered with yes/no. Based on the answers, we can figure out the status of the fix thereby eliminating speculations and ambiguities.
That is, the answer is yes. The fix, a change of the underlying source code, has been completed and committed into a local test branch...
Can someone from the dev team please answer the following questions regarding the fix of InstantSend with yes/no:
1) Has the fix been completed and qa'ed on 30 aug 2017?
2) Is the work on the fix still in progress as of 24 sep 2017?
3) Is the work on the fix still in progress today?
Thanks for the feedback.
Could you also please answer the following questions with yes/no?
1) Has the fix been completed and qa'ed on 30 sep 2017?
2) Is work on the fix still in progress as of 24 sep 2017?
3) Is work on the fix still in progress as of today?
What is the status of the fix ?
30 aug: fix completed and qa'ed (according to AndyDark)
24 sep: work on fixing in progress (1st annual dash conference)
anyway, when would it be safe to use InstaSend?
Otoh owns more than 6 masternodes. So, it is not unrealistic to conduct such an attack ...
if you have 1000 DASH, then you, indeed, do not need to transfer that collateral to the hosting service as the service would be running dashd and you would be just starting the masternode. The service could scam just the hosting fee.
However, if you have less than 1000 DASH, then you would need...
public adddress of mn1 -> A -> D
public adddress of mn2 -> B -> D
public adddress of mn3 -> C -> D
means that mn1, mn2 and mn3 could belong to the same person.
Problem #1: a simple analysis above could reveal/indicate that a group of masternodes is controlled by one entity (which compromises...
1) A, B and C received the rewards from the public addresses of masternodes mn1, mn2, and mn3
2) you make 3 separate transactions: A->D, B->D and C->D
then it does not, indeed, prove that the three masternodes belong to the same person, but it does not exclude it either (probability is...
Any idea of how many masternodes are being run by FBI?
I think they will try to develop an analysis and deanonymization tool. For instance, based on potentially weak mixing and spending habits I described yesterday in Support.
takeaways: 1) may require personal information such name and job title and Browser ID (!!!!!!!!)
2) based on VMWare which is not opensource
have no more questions ;)))))
Imagine you have three masternodes, mn1, mn2 and mn3. The collateral for all three is in one wallet (wallet1). You have a second wallet for mixing (wallet2).
You send the masternode rewards from mn1 to A in wallet2 and mix the funds. You will end up with a non-anonymous leftover in A.
I have a simple question about what to do with leftovers after mixing funds (dead change).
Imagine I received DASH to address A in my wallet and immediately started to mix them. After creating denominations and after completing the mixing process, I can have some amount of non-anonymous...
As a follow up on the randomness of the selection: if a masternode was "unlucky" in the last round, does that mean that it will be "luckier" in future rounds so that on average each masternode has the same expected payment?
Thanks for your reply!
But what if Last Paid (from dashd) is "Never/Unknown" but Last Paid (from blocks) shows the last payment that was 10 days ago? Is everything OK in this case? Status is "Active (100%)".
What does a red background mean in Masternode information?
The masternode has been paid several times but Last Paid (from dashd) is "Never/Unknown". Does it indicate a problem with the masternode?
What is the meaning of "missed" and "hijacked" in Total Paid (Last month)?