Vertcoin has had a stealth implementation as part of it for a while,
which is good.

But (as an advocate of anonymity) I don't see the allure of zerocoin.
It seems to come with a host of problems, which it is hoped that the
zerocash project will ameliorate.

As I've commented before, NXTcash offers zerocoin integration, but
does not provide anonymity:
https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20141031.012126.1133cf37.en.html

In addition, Anoncoin (which I have strong hopes for in its future,
but which I won't use at the present), has some shortcomings which I
think are correctible. (Some of the problems Anoncoin has are not
because of Anoncoin developers at all actually, but rather are due to
the limitations of zerocoin itself, but it does have some development
issues too - a big one being the multiple accumulator issue).
Some issues:
- -A single accumulator (n*x) is more secure than multiple small (n x
bit) accumulators presently relied upon in Anoncoin,

- - zerocoin proofs are heavy (> 45 kb),
& in zerocash a tx can be under 1 kb,

- - At present, there are 13 3840 bit accumulators in Anoncoin with
zerocoin implementation, increasing potential attack surface. The
limit from zerocoin seems to be where a(i) is increased beyond 3840,
Zerocoin itself gets in your way with an approximate 20% hazard of
problems.

- - Possibility exists for mod n cryptanalysis issues to arise where bit
length = critical bit value

The "lightness" of what will soon emerge from zerocash, and its more
provably secure angle, makes me think that zerocash upon its release
will be setting a standard that others should meet or exceed, IMHO.






Matthew Holt wrote:
> It looks like Anoncoin Zercoin final release has been delayed by
> another three months yet again. ZeroVert
> <https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=846471.0> was released
> yesterday that claims to offer Zerocoin and merge-mines with
> Vertcoin. With the intention to eventually merge into a Vertcoin
> sidechain. Although currently the wallet is closed source for now.
> And in their BTT OP they're throwing around some of the names of
> the original Vertcoin development team, but I'm yet to read of any
> confirmation from them on the matter.
>
> On 29 September 2014 14:35, Caleb James DeLisle
> <calebjamesdelisle@???
>> wrote:
>
>> If paranoid people can lead to better development of cool math,
>> I'm all for it. Of course I don't think anonymity has any real
>> future, afterall how can I elect you if I don't know your name,
>> but that's just me... /hippy
>>
>>
>> On 09/29/2014 02:57 PM, Troy Benjegerdes wrote:
>>> If you are all really serious about anonymity, and not actually
>>> employed
>> by
>>> intelligence agencies, then there needs to be a lot more
>>> political
>> activism
>>> and **people running for office**.
>>>
>>>
>> http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/u-s-military-probing-digital-currencies-terror-fight-n212371
>>>
>>>
>>
Focusing on the cryptography is like studying the cracks in the pavement
>>> and you end up as a bug on the windshield of an oil tanker
>>> convoy.
>>>
>>> Get in front of the political discussion, or get out of the
>>> kitchen, or you are going to be part of the stew.
>>>
>>> I'll be happy to help the intelligence agencies track down
>>> 'anonymous' currencies, and charge them a lot of money so I can
>>> afford to buy myself a nice congressional seat, and then
>>> actually do something about it.
>>>
>>> The biggest provably anonymous currency system is
>>> high-frequency trading, and you might accomplish more by
>>> emulating that instead of anonymous code from anonymous
>>> developers that's not very anonymous.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 08:51:03AM +0200, Caleb James DeLisle
>>> wrote:
>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
- --
>> Caleb James DeLisle XWiki SAS calebjamesdelisle@???
>> _______________________________________________ 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
>

- --
http://abis.io ~
"a protocol concept to enable decentralization
and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
https://keybase.io/odinn