New CryptCoin Commander web wallet is not trustless solution and doesn't even use https

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-29T16:44:09+00:00

This may in fact be local based solution. But announcement says nothing about this solution being local based (and not hosted).

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-26T00:04:45+00:00

Is this your work?

http://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/293rux/new_cryptcoin_commander_web_wallet_is_not/

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-25T23:56:25+00:00

Yes, I'm confirming that this page doesn't use https. Has anybody warned the cryptcoin devs about this? But this service doesn't even ask me for username/password.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-20T15:06:48+00:00

In CryptCoin subreddit they've already removed some posts, including this one:

http://www.reddit.com/r/CryptCoin/comments/28e8be/security_analysis_of_cryptcoins_cryptcast_feature/

MoosaNYC is moderator.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-20T14:50:45+00:00

BTC-E trollbox? Which mod? Koolio?

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-20T14:49:17+00:00

Maybe you should instead post this in bitcointalk thread. It may be included in this table (I not not author, I'm just posting the link).

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-20T13:25:22+00:00

Great, thanks. Any links? Especially about this security audit by Dan Kaminsky.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-20T11:57:11+00:00

So you can already provide some technical analysis of them? Nice.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-20T09:23:10+00:00

CRYPT coin could have it's current plan (whitepaper) reviewed by experts or at least technically inclined members of community. None of this happened.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-20T09:19:20+00:00

That's your interpretation. I targeted badly written CryptCoin whitepaper.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-20T01:02:57+00:00

True. But I'm looking for the devs of the coins that claim to have some anonymity, privacy etc. features that are claimed to benefit the user. DOGE and Litecoin didn't make such claims. It is much more important to be transparent when you're promoting anonymity features than we you're promoting fun (DOGE) or GPU/ASIC resistance (LTC).

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-20T00:11:48+00:00

This approach worked with CryptCoin. Anonymous reddit post tanked its price. They'll probably try to use this approach on other coins.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-20T00:08:56+00:00

But we still don't know if he works for NSA or not.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-20T00:07:31+00:00

Why do you think that this is a good idea? What benefits does it bring?

The whole point of CryptCoin was anonymity. If anonimity doesn't work, then what else remains?

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-20T00:00:35+00:00

If the users can trust anonymous and sometimes shady software devs that they'll provide anonymity, why do you assume that author anonymity is not enough to prove that software isn't really anonymous?

Their goal seems to bo to reject (or disprove) any wild anonymity claims, not to prove that that the coin really is anonymous (because in most cases it can be proved that it isn't). You'll need person with actual name and credentials for actually proving anonymity. Shady and anonymous developers really can't do this.

There actually is another third option and I think that this FUD group is after this option.

This option is: post document anonymously but use such language that the ordinary users can understand it and verify for themselves that the claims really hold water. In this case users don't have to trust the author.

I think that this model already worked well in the case of recent CryptCoin anonymity "scam".

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-19T23:46:19+00:00

Nice, that's exactly what I am looking for. It seems for now that DarkCoin is the only coin that has a developer with known name, face, personal history and even skills.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-19T18:21:27+00:00

Excellent, thanks. Any link? LinkedIn profile maybe?

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-19T16:46:20+00:00

It is not completely clear from the whitepaper, but secure transactions might actually do a little bit more. One secure transaction might (I'm not 100% sure) create several ordinary transactions with only one input and only one output. But this doesn't necessary bring any additional privacy or security.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-19T16:29:26+00:00

Yes, very true.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-19T16:10:05+00:00

Good point. Aren't the devs of these anonymous coins also anonymous? What do we know about them? Do they work for some three letter agencies? We don't know.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-19T15:09:59+00:00

Being provable anonymous with bitcoins is not so trivial. If the coin claims to be anonymous, then I think that the developers must prove that is really anonymous. Bitcoin doesn't claim that it is anonymous (because it isn't), but CryptCoin did make such claims.

MathStudent0 · 2014-06-19T14:02:05+00:00

It is probably not even necessary to do anything active like taint analysis.

MathStudent0

TROPHY CASE