As I understand it, the Ring Signature stuff is really boring cryptography
at this point, everybody understands everything there is to know about it,
no surprises to come up.
RSA Accumulators are really interesting new ground in the cryptography field,
we should support this work, but we should also recognize that we might make
a new discovery which is in the form of "oh that doesn't actually work".


On 09/29/2014 07:13 AM, Matthew Holt wrote:
> I'm not a member of the Anoncoin team I am just interested in the basic
> cryptology of anonymous transaction techniques. Of which ring-signatures
> looks the strongest of what's publically available today. While it looks
> like in theory that Zerocoin offers stronger anonymity in general effect.
> I am also not a number theorist but the Anoncoin devs claim to have
> improved on Sanders RSA UFO technique to better suit their Zerocoin
> implementation (reference)
> <https://wiki.anoncoin.net/RSA_UFO#Anoncoin.27s_improvements_on_the_Sander_RSA_UFO_concept>.
>
>
> MH
>
> On 29 September 2014 04:59, Odinn Cyberguerrilla <
> odinn.cyberguerrilla@???> wrote:
>
>> While I consider this good news (and I've experimented with Anoncoin in
>> its early stages), I do have some questions - I hope they'll be understood
>> purely as constructive questions intended to improve any processes which
>> you are undertaking.
>>
>> 1) As I have long been aware of, there have been differences between
>> original zerocoin developers and the anoncoin team relating to how zero
>> could or should be implemented within Anoncoin. In particular, the
>> following public thread (highlighted at a particular point in the
>> discussion) was helpful in understanding these differences:
>> https://twitter.com/secparam/status/449619152685522944
>>
>> Please note that I have cc'd secparam's public e-mail address as shown on
>> github here so hopefully there will be a response.
>>
>> When last I checked, I didn't see a clear resolution to this issue. Not
>> that there isn't one, it seemed that there was. But it was obvious to me,
>> that @secparam had identified clear problems that would need to be
>> addressed, and the development that the Anoncoin team had done since March
>> of 2014 to the present, didn't seem to address those core issues that
>> secparam had brought up.
>>
>> 2) Why not wait until November (or more likely, December) 2014, which is
>> when zerocash supposedly will be released, then you have some options to
>> compare?
>>
>> 3) I suggest avoiding use of wild statements. I acknowledge that I use
>> them from time to time... my latest was to post onto a Bitcoin Core release
>> thread, that the words, 'Bitcoin Core Release' could be turned into a
>> two-word anagram: 'Deliberate Coercions.'
>> However, that was all in fun, and that said, I just wish to avoid the use
>> of wild statements generally. What I refer to here is that statement in
>> which someone in Anoncoin said, and I quote in part,
>>
>> "Even more anonymous than the Ring-signature"
>>
>> I could say all kind of things about that statement. But it does seem
>> like a wild statement to make a claim that something you are testing is
>> "even more anonymous than" anything. State what it does and how it does
>> it. Invite people to test it and accept criticism. A serious issue with
>> Foundation-oriented work is that it can easily cultivate a walled-garden
>> sort of thinking where very little if any criticism is allowed. Thus
>> begins downfall. Thus begins problems.
>>
>> Again, I hope only for the best in development of Anoncoin and would like
>> to see things succeed, but I am concerned that the technical issues are not
>> yet addressed and hope that there is some more productive collaboration
>> between authors of different projects in the near future.
>>
>> Other general thoughts:
>>
>> https://github.com/Gnos1s/ufo_server - details on this should be more
>> front and center on pages such as Anoncoin's primary page
>> https://github.com/Anoncoin/anoncoin - make it easier to find. Link to
>> this is buried on waaaaaaaaaay low right hand of Anoncoin's primary page
>> under Downloads at https://anoncoin.net/index.php/downloads -- the
>> github just needs to be a lot easier to find.
>>
>>
>> -Odinn
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2014-09-28 07:54, Matthew Holt wrote:
>>
>>> Anoncoin <https://anoncoin.net> will soon be implementing the Zerocoin
>>> <https://wiki.anoncoin.net/Zerocoin> protocol. Which has long been
>>> considered the true holy grail of cryptocoin transaction anonymity IMHO.
>>> Even more anonymous than the Ring-signature
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_signature> technique of the
>>> Cryptonote
>>> protocol coins like Monero. The Anoncoin devs aim to have it on their
>>> test-net by October the 15th
>>> <https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=227287.msg8997381#msg8997381>
>>> and
>>> their main-net by November the 1st. They hope to manage to implement
>>> Zerocoin in a trustless manner using an RSA UFO's
>>> <https://wiki.anoncoin.net/RSA_UFO> technique.
>>>
>>> In the future though with Bitcoin side-chains it may be possible to have a
>>> Bitcoin Zerocoin side-chain to move bitcoin in and out of in a trustless
>>> p2p manner. Although it currently looks like we're still way off Bitcoin
>>> side-chains yet. So even further for a Bitcoin Zerocoin side-chain.
>>> Although Anoncoin are still on target for putting Zerocoin on their
>>> main-net by November the 1st.
>>>
>>> MH
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>