Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bduerst 3449 days ago
I don't keep tabs on them all, but in terms of technical aspects I think Monero stands the most likely to be a good substitute for the Bitcoin users.

ZCash seems popular, but it's privately-run with a U.S. based company and can pull some strings to assist in de-anonymizing users. They basically claim no liability for it's users which means it may be too comfortable with authorities for Bitcoin users.

Other than that I think Ethereum has the best chance in terms of market traction to take off as a true international currency.

1 comments

How can the Zcash company deanonymize users? I haven't studied their system, but that sounds completely against the design goals. (Not to mention to mention the personality of those Zcash core developers I've worked with in the past at leastauthority.com. But security engineering is about not having to rely on their probity.) I don't understand what you're saying about liability and authorities either.

In online discussions of cryptocurrencies it's clear that many people's financial positions bias their conversational positions. I'm long on all four of these currencies.

From the whitepaper:

>A powerful attacker could potentially fabricate an additional block solely for a targeted user. Spending any coins with respect to the updated Merkle tree in this “poison-pill” block will uniquely identify the targeted user.

If ZCash works with that person or organization, then they're able to deanonymize the inputs on the transaction. As a privately owned U.S. company they can be compelled to do this with authorities.

For most people this doesn't matter, but for the type of user that bitcoin attracts, I think they would care, which is why I think Monero is probably better for them.

Thanks. You're talking about section VI.c of http://zerocash-project.org/media/pdf/zerocash-oakland2014.p...

It's saying if an attacker extends the blockchain just for you, and makes only you know about its forked blockchain, they would then know that if someone creates a transaction against the unique part of that chain, it must've been you. That attack appears to have nothing to do with the Zcash company as an insider -- the software is open source and hosted from Debian, etc. Am I misunderstanding? How does Monero stop an analogous attack?

(The paper continues "To mitigate such attacks, users should check with trusted peers their view of the block chain and, for sensitive transactions, only spend coins relative to blocks further back in the ledger (since creating the illusion for multiple blocks is far harder)." I don't know whether current software does this for you -- that paper's from 2014.)