Development Update - July 30th

May 2, 2014
151
59
88
Dang this is just plain exciting. Thanks for letting me buy enough at first to be a part of this, and contribute to what I am certain will be part of the future.
Good to see our buyers happy. You understand the future nicely. I said pretty much the same thing the day I signed up here.
I just hope the price stays this low for enough critical mass to adopt because then merchants can participate.
With bitcoin the price rose so prolifically high and suddenly, without the many services we have today. Dark is gonna kill it.
 

Carrot

Member
May 26, 2014
64
21
48
Good to see our buyers happy. You understand the future nicely. I said pretty much the same thing the day I signed up here.
I just hope the price stays this low for enough critical mass to adopt because then merchants can participate.
With bitcoin the price rose so prolifically high and suddenly, without the many services we have today. Dark is gonna kill it.
Yes it will.
 

TsuyokuNaritai

Active Member
May 24, 2014
181
102
103
I would like to see it run on testnet for at least 30 days without any errors at all... Needs to be 100% when its released. Please Evan, no rush.
I agree. Please don't rush, Evan. This is so important.
I agree wholeheartedly with the general sentiment, but for trailblazing software of this complexity, waiting till at least 30 days have passed on testnet without even a minor bug isn't realistic if we want RC4 released this year. There is ALWAYS one more bug.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LonnieDRR and flare

sifo

New Member
Jul 30, 2014
1
0
1
Well it's good not to rush things, but on the other hand... I guess that week after last update whole testnet will go to sleep (little ot no activity) and this way no bug gets discovered.
Let's leave this decision on developers. I'm sure they learned from past and they release it only when sure no major bugs can appear.
 

HammerHedd

Member
Mar 10, 2014
182
34
88
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 able to decode that data to identify that it was the same chunk seen earlier. When the attacker had a lot of nodes, this allowed the attacker to find out what user ip was connecting to service ip, but only when both the first and last nodes were owned by the attacker. The attacker still couldn't read any of the data being sent, they could only see that a connection occurred. Since the attack is about abusing the ability to encode some data into headers, the problem is not with the idea, but the implementation.

In the darkcoin version, the protocol will most likely be much simpler than tor, which results in less places to attempt to hide things, and should be easier to secure. Without a place to stash data, in order to identify an ip to an address, the attacker would have to own all masternodes involved(3 for obfuscation + selected masternode). Since coins are mixed several times before being used, even if the attacker was to get lucky and have a transaction go through only nodes owned by them, it wouldn't likely tell them much, as it would only be one step of mixing they see. For an attacker to be lucky enough to see a whole set of mixing cycles for some coins, they'd have to own a significant portion of all masternodes, which would be very costly.
With this type of attack in mind, albeit unlikely, should we consider a way of verifying that a mastermind is using unmodified (I.e. authentic) code? My thought is that one drk goes open source, someone could modify the code to open all there wrappers on a transaction (just an example) then re wrap it correctly and pass it on while logging the originating IP. I suspect there are already many safeguards against tampering with the transaction itself, but if I was looking for a place to attack the network, it would be in the obfuscation and mixing protocols.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red-Shinobi

LonnieDRR

Member
Jun 24, 2014
103
41
78
Canada
Darksend+ Progress:

We’re making steady progress on Darksend+ and testing is coming closer to an end.




Using coincontrol, you can now see how many times specific inputs have passed through the Darksend process:
Hey Evan and developers... can we please get rid of the term "inputs" in the wallet before its released? Its really confusing to the non computer geek. Anyone who isn't a programmer or following this forum is going to have no clue what an input is. Is there another term you can use that people will recognize? Can we just call them "coins" or "units" instead? See attached pic. Someone would read that and think what the heck is a Darksend Input? Sounds like an incoming deposit from someone else into your wallet. Or maybe you can come up with something simple... "inputs" is confusing. Need to make this SUPER easy for everyone to use :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: coltan
May 2, 2014
151
59
88
/agree. I don't immediately understand it either.

Only DS+balance
Only Non DS+ balance
All Balance

Does the word Balance work to replace?
 

fernando

Powered by Dash
Dash Core Team
Moderator
Foundation Member
May 9, 2014
1,527
2,058
283
Hey Evan and developers... can we please get rid of the term "inputs" in the wallet before its released? Its really confusing to the non computer geek. Anyone who isn't a programmer or following this forum is going to have no clue what an input is. Is there another term you can use that people will recognize? Can we just call them "coins" or "units" instead? See attached pic. Someone would read that and think what the heck is a Darksend Input? Sounds like an incoming deposit from someone else into your wallet. Or maybe you can come up with something simple... "inputs" is confusing. Need to make this SUPER easy for everyone to use :)
I agree that inputs is not a hugely intuitive thing, but it is a well understood concept in the cryptocurrencies world. The target adopters for Darkcoin at this stage are probably people that already use or know about other cryptocurrencies, especially Bitcoin, so it should not a be a big issue.
 

GreyGhost

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jun 4, 2014
303
556
263
Santa Monica, CA
IMHO -- it's too late for "target adopters," for they are in already. I'd rather focus on influencers. that would spread the word and these mostly have no clue what "input" is. No "input" in my Bitcon wallet either :)

Just my 2 cents. Shrug them off freely.
 

fernando

Powered by Dash
Dash Core Team
Moderator
Foundation Member
May 9, 2014
1,527
2,058
283
IMHO -- it's too late for "target adopters," for they are in already. I'd rather focus on influencers. that would spread the word and these mostly have no clue what "input" is. No "input" in my Bitcon wallet either :)

Just my 2 cents. Shrug them off freely.
I wish they were already in :), but I think that is not the case (love your enthusiasm!!!). You just need to compare Bitcoin and Darkcoin by any magnitude to see that we are still small and we have a hard work to do to educate people in Darkcoin. Those already "half educated" (ie, the Bitcoin educated) will be easier to convert.

Anyway, regarding inputs, it is true that having all those features complicates the wallet a bit, but Darksend+ is Darkcoin's main feature!! maybe explaining it better in the wallet GUI would be good, but I believe those three options need to stay because without them you can't have Darksend+ as it is now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stonehedge

stonehedge

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 31, 2014
696
333
233
Spot on fernando. Perhaps better tooltips and maybe even a help file could demystify things for some of the people that need a helping hand.

It would probably be a good idea to direct people to this community for advice if unsure on anything too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fernando

GreyGhost

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jun 4, 2014
303
556
263
Santa Monica, CA
We deal with the people here. (I mean, there, in RL)

No matter would you like to attract early adopters among geeks or enthusiasts among laymen like MHS, one way would be to create a mean looking debit card, the best freaking design ever, with a 3D holographic cardholder name's embellished, this way or another, so every little iPhone user would want to have one on her or his screen.


Don't ever forget - Betamax was way better than VHS but lost. (I know, I know, even typewriters have much better resolution than screens like this one... :) )
 

tiger-HZX

New Member
Apr 28, 2019
9
0
1
20
Darksend+ Progress:

We’re making steady progress on Darksend+ and testing is coming closer to an end.

The GUI now supports sending any amount instantly and anonymously. All you have to do is let the client automatically denominate your funds by leaving it open. Currently mixing depth can be configured with a command line option, but a configuration option in the GUI will be added as work progresses.

The user now has the option to select whether not they would like to send only coins which have been anonymized by Darksend+, only coins which have NOT been anonymized by Darksend+, or a mix of both.



Using coincontrol, you can now see how many times specific inputs have passed through the Darksend process:



Here you can see the client automatically denominating money:



We’re in the process of removing all of the bugs in the software. This was a complete rewrite of the system, which has put us slightly behind schedule for release (a complete rewrite was not what we originally intended to do). As it stands currently, we have a few issues left to address before we can release RC4 on mainnet:

  • Ensure that Darksends have at least 1 of each input and so that unique change addresses are used, further improving anonymity
  • Add functionality for locked wallets to prompt the user to temporarily decrypt the wallet so that funds can be denominated
  • Daemons need to deal with encrypted wallets
  • Rewrite all functions that send money so that they only use denominated money or non-denominated money
  • Track down an unknown bug causing Darksend collateral to be taken from users during the auto-denomination process. Darksend uses collateral to prevent malicious users from joining a Darksend transaction and then failing to sign. In this case, the client is refusing to sign because it believes there is missing data in the transaction when there is not (or the Masternode is not compiling the transaction correctly and the user is correct not to sign).
  • Complete testing on the Masternode voting system
  • Add auto-detection of wallets from pools and exchanges in order to disable Darksend

Considering all of the work that needs to be done, we’re looking at a release in early August.

IP Obfuscation:

IP Obfuscation is a critical part of the anonymity package that Darkcoin will bring to bear. Though completion and release of RC4 is our primary concern at the moment, we do have a working roadmap for the implementation of IP obfuscation.

Here’s how it works:

Anyone on the Darkcoin network will be able to communicate securely by using the Masternode network and our encrypted transit system. A user who would like to transmit a payment securely will encrypt the message in such a way that only specific Masternodes can decrypt it.

The user’s client will select three Masternodes, then use the privkey from each of those nodes to wrap the message it wishes to send in three successive encrypted containers. These containers can only be decrypted by their associated Masternodes.

Once wrapped in these three containers, the client will send the encrypted package to the Masternode that corresponds to the outermost encryption layer (Masternode 1). Upon receiving it, Masternode 1 will decrypt the outermost layer in order to learn the identity of the second Masternode in the sequence. Masternode 1 will then relay the message to Masternode 2, which will decrypt the 2nd encryption layer and learn the identity of the third Masternode in the sequence. Masternode 2 forwards the package on to Masternode 3, which decrypts the innermost encryption layer, gaining access to message itself. Masternode 3 then broadcasts the message to the network, and far as the network is concerned, that is where the message originated.




With this envelope encryption system, Masternode 1 is not able to determine which Masternode will ultimately broadcast the message. Similarly, Masternode 3 is unable to determine the identity of either the first Masternode in the sequence or of the original sender.

Darkcoin.io Overhaul:

We’ve been looking at ways to keep the official website darkcoin.io more up to date. Fernando (from the darkcointalk boards) is heading up an effort to overhaul the site, with the following goals in mind:

  • Move the site from Github to Wordpress
  • Bring the theme in line with current Darkcoin properties
  • Engage more people to maintain and update the website. By using Wordpress, we hope to enable non-developers to work on the site so that devs can concentrate on coding Darkcoin.
  • Streamline the overall structure of darkcoin.io
  • Aim for release of the new site with a timescale measured in weeks vs. months
Please feel free to join the discussion and offer your feedback here: http://goo.gl/LkqrlZ

Wallet Overhaul:

DRKLord, Minotaur, Raze et al continue their efforts on refinement of the Darkcoin wallet UI, and they are closing in on a completed design. Its release will likely be separate from RC4. You can follow their efforts and offer your feedback here: http://goo.gl/1yFUEb.
Can I ask a question how to recognize a DarkSend trx before Protocol version 70213 ? 70213 added a 5th denomination, what are the denominations before 70213?