<jollyboy> "ofrnxmr: I mean, what files and..." <- read wallet2.cpp

Why is majeaticbank shill fudding bout cake again?

Its almost like @moneroprophet is paid to make himself look dumb as hell

Why do i post this in community? Because i imagine Majestic still sponsors this account, and without saying it, this account is ahilling elitewallet + majeaticbank integration

If they were being remotely honest, theyd bring up how "thats simply how 3rd party services work". And in the case of changenow or trocador + changenow, or cake + changenow, or cake + trocador + changenow, you are subject to changenow's terms

(nice that nitter still works) thanks for sharing. Are these things displayed on kycnot.me?

kycnot.me/exchange/changenow should pluja add these points here? And should mobile wallets point people here to make an informed decision on what swapper to use

Swappers are cex

Trocador lists which swappers require what info

and some swappers arent available over tor etc

Its not "changenow"

its every regulated money service biz

TOS obviously state that youre subject to privacy policies of and third party service that you use

If you want an informed decision:

a) use swaps that allow tor. Like trocador

b) dont complain if you dont read the tos, privacy plicy or eula

Cake doesnt send anything to anyone unless you make use of the service.

there is a "privacy" menu of cake where you can disable third party services, or only use ones that cannot collect info (onion exchanges and fiat api)

Elitewallet gets its fiat exchange rates _directly_ from coingecko.

so, i guess "elitewallet is sending your ip to coingecko!! 🤬" lol

Cake allows fiat rates to be pulled over onion. Allows using trocador with tor-only exchanges (so changenow gets disabled when selectinf tor only)

Tldr: "my wallet suck, so im going to pay someone to shit on the person im copy pasting from"

talk about sniffing the network? Go sniff elitewalle. Shits a joke

with maximum privacy settings:

cake connections: onion fiat api or off (optional), onion exchanges (on demand), onion node or my node, nothing else

elitewallet: clearnet coingecko fiat api, clearnet majesticbank exchange, elitewallet.sc proxy, my node, onion node doesnt work with "eliteproxy"

kayabanerve[m]: This proposal gives an empty "Overview" page for me. Is this intended? Other proposals typically seem to explain the CCS there.

Or is there a mechanism to copy over the body of the CCS proposal to the "Overview" page that somehow fails here?

`this CCS does not ... guarantee any continued development.`

kaya, you get to leave when you RIP! (ask sarang)

rbrunner: Simple answer

I made a mistake

One sec :p Sorry. Will fix

Thanks for the headss up

s/headss/heads/

rbrunner: Kaya formatting issue. The "changes" tab has the fulk details

Added desc, sorry for forgetting

"kaya, you get to leave when you RIP! (ask sarang)" That's too high for me.

ofrnxmr: I plan to make a PR for continuing the work in a week or two

Don't worry ;)

Much better now with overview, thanks

I have a question about this: "I spent a month and a half working on full chain membership proofs for Monero"

What's the Q?

Your description sounds like the total work was more than these 6 weeks of programming proper.

If yes, can you maybe estimate the total?

I ask because I predict that if people strictly understand "about USD 40k for 6 weeks" they may have second thoughts whether that has merit.

To put it bluntly, sorry.

Hours/rates like everyone else

I think since end of march

I spent roughly 6 straight weeks on the programming of this attempt, with my hours which exceed the standard week. In the past, I have not only done research yet other attempts. The other attempts didn't pan out, and most prior research was externally rewarded on a work exchange.

Yes, that's what I expected. An estimate of the total would be good, IMHO, otherwise people will slap you with an incredibly high rate per hour and maybe oppose

There was research post-exchange I'd have to tally, though I'd rather the emphasis be on the work itself. Not only is it a full implementation of BP+, it's also a ZK framework for arbitrary circuits, curve trees, and the application of divisors. I can say that this amount of work, on the market, would've been many times more expensive.

I believe my hourly estimate, when I did my initial guess of hours (ignoring interim research), was $110/h.

Hours/rates for the work provided by (i think 2) jberman/Liam . Have you paid them out of pocket already?

rbrunner: Not me

Yes, that's why I almost beg you add something more than just that 6 hour number at the top and then the USD 50k at the end :)

*6 week

:(

This is "how to lose devs 101"

Pay geonic 25k Noooooo problem

From my understanding, that is ~1.6x the average CCS rate due to the specialty and amount of work produced, yet also ~half Cypher Stack's going rate for Aaron (I'd have to check, I'm unsure it's static per hour), and a fraction of the competitive ZK market.

Tell sarang to repay tryptych and and overafe from bp++

Question kaya, who's not mj, about his contributions

*Not to say those aren't worth it, to say this isn't a ridiculous amount. As for including the hourly rate, I can, yet was initially advised against it since it exceeds the more frequent rates.

"~1.6x the average CCS rate" That's perfectly fine for such outstanding, pioneering work. But give that info the CCS. All IMHO, of course.

Give monero a future? For 2x the cost of geonics movie? PITCHFORRRKKKKS

but pay the scammers.

plowsof11: jberman I am liable to pay upon the proposal passing or failing, a burden I assumed and take responsibility for. If the proposal passes, I will not touch my current funds. If it fails, I will have to, as I understood when I hired them.

Which pitchforks? We are among friends here, and I deeply care for this CCS, and want it to succeed. That's why I speak out.

Liam understands that my attempt to be thankful is part of my request for retroactive funding. The two are connected.

rbrunner, the pitchforks rhat dont come out when peopleare scamming

Only honest contributors get scrutinized

Yes, and there is no scam here wide and far, right? Just a CCS that I think you can easily "read wrongly"

Not appreciating Eagen's contributions with BP++ and EC IP would be sub-optimal IMO, especially as we want a continued relationship

Correct. No scam here. But we fund scam ccs' by getting bullied into shutting up

Look, it's easy. If there is a total of, say, 12 weeks of work in this already, for the love of god don't write SIX

At rates of 25k for absolutely 0 expected ROI

I also debated the BP+ authors, yet then I'd have to debate BP. I also debated curve trees' authors, yet had a series of thoughts there. If we fallback to their VCS scheme, or its massively relevant to the developed VCS scheme, I may change my mind and make a future CCS/send a thanks out of pockeet.

ofrnxmr: rbrunner Not to be rude, yet the CCS meta doesn't have to be on the table here. We can argue about it later :p

rbrunner: but but kaya issssssuper kaya

rbrunner: Tbf, I don't take weekends and work ~10h a day, ignoring the days I pull all nighters.

So it's 6 yet it's 6 of my weeks.

remenber, kaya isnt 55 years old

Whatwever, I step down from my soapbox, I have made my point. I am 60, I know how people tend to misunderstand things.

And is on a mission

The prior research, which wasn't covered under the work exchange, is comparatively marginal. It's definitely not another 6 weeks.

Yeah, I know that with the mission firsthand from Prague :)

Was an exciting experience

All meant in a very positive sense

My mission was to look cute af and serve the community 😎

Lol

:P Happy to answer questions about the current proposal. I don't believe I'm owed anything, else I wouldn't have made the code FOSS, except perhaps the opportunity to let the community decide if I'm worth donating to by being listed as a CCS.

i dont look at hours. I look at ROI.

50k, when we pay 20k for peer reviews and 25k for movies, is fair.

we still need audits on the 50kv so another 20k here and there. Maybe we shouldstop buying movies w cant watch, then we have more money for actual contributoins

But if it is declined, which I would object to and not prefer (obviously), I do still plan to continue my contributions.

I would buy this for 50k any day. Even if kayabanerve used magic to conjure it up in a single afternoon. But many people don't know how much it's worth.

Don't get me started on that movie ...

much more than 50.. id think

i can edit to 500k don't worry

/s :p

I would buy this for 310 XMR...if it's proven to be a sound cryptographic protocol.

Yes, but that's *exactly* how it can work if people themselves can't judge.

Ooo did a ccs for 300 xmr and never claimed most of it. He did work that was almost never reviewed

Rucknium: VCS is actively being worked on, with proofs. That will let us define our instantiation of Curve Trees, which at the core, is a merkle tree proof embedded into a pair of Bulletproofs. Bulletproofs is proven. Merkle tree proofs are... I have no idea how they wouldn't be proven.

And I believe Zcash formalized/proved Pedersen hashes.

7760 and 7999 in limbo for a year and still in limbo to this day, respectively

Curve trees have so security proofs AFAIK

no*

The only remaining part is a few basic gadgets in curve trees, the divisor work, and formal verification of it.

Wouldnt be the first tome we paid for code that we didnt implement (im saying, we shouldnt implement it without proofs/audits etc)

I'm somewhat arguing CT doesn't exist, solely a Merkle tree proof where H=Pedersen, embedded in a BP.

Which isn't to say that's good enough. It's to say I don't believe it's a blocker while security work is being done in parallel and already catalogued.

I think that's part of this package, a certain risk that we, the Monero community, buy something that will later explode. Probably a small risk.

Maybe even if it explodes first, the second model, after fix, will fly.

If divisors explode, we can revert back to their ECC gadgets. That said, divisors have existed for decades and are decently researched. They're not new. Their usage here is novel.

If BP+ VCS explodes, BP VCS. If that, then we know the piece needed and can make it an open research issue.

rbrunner: thanks for asking the question that resulted in clarification which helps the unwashed masses (that's me) understand what this is :)

And like, we have 2500xmr for monero.com. priorities lol

nioc: Mind clarifying your commnts/questions?

Just so I can better understand how to edit this

I just saw the hrs and $ as initially stated. I have no other questions. Hopefully you will be able to expand your wardrobe :)

I think rbrunner has already asked the relevant questions <3

Happy to be useful, nioc :)

basically 6 weeks is more like 12 weeks so there is no question about the $$

ofrnmxr[m]: We hear you, and maybe feel much of the same dismay, but I think many people don't have that knowledge about background and past happenings

next meeting in this channel is Sat Aug 5 15:00 UTC

41400 / my hourly estimate < $100

plowsof11: please merge :D

I've brought up the issue of putting carts before horses many times. I don't see others really caring about it, so I'll stop bringing it up. If new cryptography goes on Monero mainnet without mathematical security proofs, reviews of those security proofs, and code audits, I'll re-evaluate my continued contributions to the project.

Is the payment to Liam a token of appreciation? (Would be good to know what entices them) same for jberman

I have been quoted 4k/day for consultancy. I just want to have some data points

(not from them lol)

maybe I am mistaken but I believe for several years now all improvements that needed proofs and audits have gotten them

Rucknium[m]: I am fully with you here, as far as I can see. We seem to disagree how imminent the danger of bringing unproven things to mainnet through a hardfork is.

Rucknium: I can promise you that I won't sign off on deploying this without: 1) Review of the application of divisors 2) A proven and reviewed VCS scheme 3) Multiple audits 4) A better understanding of what should be audited, what should be formally verified, and further criteria established on those bounds.

The question whether we should start to develop unproven things looks like a quite different one to me.

kayabanerve: Thanks, but don't we need security proofs of soundness of the protocol as a whole, not just parts?

plowsof: The gift to Eagen was my own nominated amount and not representative of any work performed for Monero nor work in the future implied. The deal with Berman is set.

Rucknium: I'm legitimately unsure if we need proofs of soundness or formal verification, hence my #4.

Security proofs are not my field, and it may be either are viable yet the latter is a better fit.

<plowsof11> "I have been quoted 4k/day for..." <- I pay plowsof this much everytime i dm him

This anyway comes on top of many such things we still need for Seraphis. Which is not controversial as far as I understand.

nioc: Probably things are on less solid ground than you think:

With Seraphis, we've stated that's going the proof route and Spark demonstrates the proving of a comparable protocol. We also need Seraphis proofs.

> In this work, we provide the first rigorous security analysis for RingCT (as given in Zero to Monero, v2.0.0, 2020) in its entirety. This is in contrast to prior works that provided security arguments for only parts of RingCT. To this end, we provide the first holistic security model for Monero’s RingCT. In our model, we then prove the security of RingCT.

Cremers, C., Loss, J., & Wagner, B. 2023. "A holistic security analysis of Monero transactions." moneroresearch.info/index.php?actio…n=resource_RESOURCEVIEW_CORE&id=171

kayabanerve[m]: Haha plowsof, thata you again right

That's from earlier this year, after mainnet RingCT implementation

You mean RingCT was also introduced a tad early ...? :)

While RCT wasn't proven as a composition, I believe MLSAG and CLSAG were, as were the range proofs.

Don't forget the original Cryptonote implementation had a cryptographic counterfeiting flaw. And the original RingCT proposal was also flawed.

And the stakes are higher today, so the standards should be higher, too

> And the original RingCT proposal was also flawed.

Can you be more specific here?

rbrunner: Yes, frankly

> so the standards should be higher, too

agreed

kayabanerve: Yes...

'The original RCT proposal being flawed' only makes me think of the idea to use a range proof which wasn't Borromean based

Right, ASNL

That had a faulty proof IIRC :/

I don't see much controversy here then. It may just tempt us heavily if the code is finished, and runs, but the proofs are still on the way.

RingCT was introduced when Monero was young and before we started paying for external audits

> Hi, the paper states that it is a sketch of a proof (

oof

nioc: obviously we should've had an ico /s

That would be *much* easier, lol

Just let the funds rain down on us

Very interesting blog post about that ASNL thing, and the info in the Reddit thread to put it into perspective. Didn't know this episode of Monero history yet.

IMHO, people have less caution about new cryptography since they don't know the history of critical failures and they don't understand much of formal mathematics.

I've researched the history. I know (some of) formal mathematics. I try to point these things out. But I said I would stop giving this perspectives.

Yes. I think it would be a good idea to make that episode known wider in the broad context of adding so much new stuff, exactly to warn.

I still strongly suspect things are much less dire than your gut feeling tells you right now.

Personally I don't see any clear danger of doing something really reckless with Monero mainnet anytime soon.

If you want more episodes, start on page 12 :) github.com/Rucknium/presentations/b…ucknium-Monerotopia-2023-Slides.pdf

Ah, the case studies there?

Yes.

Not just Monero, but similar protocols.

Yeah, nice collection.

We really don't want to feature in the next iteration of this slide deck :)

No kidding

kayabanerve[m]: this might be a stupid question, but where does the actual output of the work that has been done reside? Is it sitting in a repository somewhere, or is the knowledge in the form of pre-prints (and content therein) linked at the top of the CCS proposal?

midipoet: github.com/kayabaNerve/full-chain-membership-proofs/

Thanks

That also already has a healthy issue tracker

And another stupid question, so please bear with me, will the contributors to that repository get anything (other than the specified payments to berman and liam)? It shows there were 10 (though maybe this is less than 10 actual people).

midipoet: It's a fork of Serai. The FCMP work has no direct contributors other than myself and Berman.

... to the best of my memory, at least. I can't remember if there's some minor commit from someone else, yet I don't believe so.

good to know. thanks.

Which also means a lot of the libs it's built with were audited already. All the relevant ones are MIT licensed.

Ah, I was wondering how far back the commits go. "Fork of Serai" explains that.

personally, i don't see any issue with this going to funding. retrospective funding is relatively novel, but it could be argued that it improves certain barriers/aspects of the CCS process (some you mention in the proposal). There isn't any particular rule against retrospective funding either, as far as i understand. I do think that there should be specific "milestones" for the payments intended to be made to berman and

liam, and then one for the remaining balance to you (just so that it is explicitly clear where funds are going). I also think that providing approximate hours spent that match the "milestone 3" payment to you, as per your advertised hourly rate, would help digestion of cost/benefit.

midipoet: For Berman, I believe I noted their work was reducing multiplications in their section. Are you advocating for a dedicated milestone instead of it being lumped in under BP+ impl?

For Eagen, I'm unsure a specific milestone can be legitimately created.

Berman did kayabaNerve/full-chain-membership-proofs caeac8f and kayabaNerve/full-chain-membership-proofs #9 for context

kayabanerve[m]: O

> <@kayabanerve:matrix.org> For Eagen, I'm unsure a specific milestone can be legitimately created.

* I'd just want to be explicitly clear Eagen was never contracted by nor obligated to the Monero project, and this is a gift of appreciation for their work in general as they are bound by a traditional employment contract which I don't want to disrupt

Though I do believe we can contract them, as I asked about that a while ago

I don't even know if its a milestone, just something that details explicitly the amounts being paid to others, and then the remaining to you. Payment 1: 3.6k to berman for... Payment 2: 5k to liam for... Payment 3: 41.4k to kayaba for 414 hours (approximately 6 weeks at my workrate) at $100p/h.

... Isn't that the current funds breakdown section?

Amount quoted 50k

j-berman obligation (3600)

Eagen 5k

With all that, my rate 100 an hour

There is also technically milestones at the top since plowsof recommended so breaking down work

Sorry if I'm being a bit dense here, just unsure the feedback

Yeah, i suppose it is. Perhaps it's just a formatting thing, bullet points and bold text or something.

Might also be because the text/explanations that come before are pretty demanding, so by the end it's hard to parse the money bit in an easy manner.

Revuo Monero Issue 180: July 20 - 27, 2023. revuo-xmr.com/issue-180.html

just skimmed over the conversation, but now I want to know more about the 25k monero movie

"ofrnxmr[m]: 50k, when we pay 20k for peer reviews and 25k for movies, is fair."

SNeedlewoods historic monero drama can be found here

thank you

the Monero heavy trailer nitter.sethforprivacy.com/markofdistinctn/status/1662592776087953408

the trailer is awesome, my favorite comment is this: "Saying more, if @Monero support this kind of marketing, I boycott #Monero."

I am excited for the film, but I don't understand the use of Monero in this.

It is just given to someone and said "this is like Bitcoin but untraceable". Where else is it used?

Css marketing fund

I this is the point why did css fund it

<recanman[m]> "I am excited for the film, but I..." <- 25k

Sorry, I meant the promotion

Not how much was funded

Milestone 1 "pay me to share my movie with film festivals" 12k

milestone 2 "pay me if i win at any of them"

recanman[m]: Monero is mentioned in a song or something

I see that it is introduced in the trailer, but it does not really use Monero throughout the trailer

* the trailer. Just saying it is untraceable.

* of them" 12k

Really, there is no crypto in the movie

And yall declined my proposal for something actually useful smh

Lukeprofits, that ccs was a fkn scam

The business wallet one?

Yep

It was majority rejected, and had sockpuppet accounts pushing it to funding

Then it was merged behind the scenes

It's coming along well, I'm just working for free while random movies get funded

It's fine

I'm getting a feeling that you're angry

But I'm not sure

lukeprofits: im referring to the movie btw

lukeprofits[m]: Trust me, even though i voted against your proposal, i was much much more against that bullshit movie

I don't remember, did it get funded?

Yes

It went to funding on a tuesday

Without consensus

And was funded by large actors who were caught messing with the voting.

I don't remember hearing any of this

Messing with the voting?

The bulletproof+ peer review ccs cost less than the movie (and the movie isnt available to us)

recanman[m]: Using sockpuppets to vote multiple times

Where?

On gitlab

I've only ever donated to audits and peer reviews, I find those worthy

Look at the thumbs up

yeah, the movie was funded by people with money

i guess geonic wanted to go through ccs instead of gettingthe money directly

M0x1zxq7896lp2ze: 2 more weeks

what about bulletproofs++ are they coming with seraphis + jamatis and FCMP

Bp++ paper was recently updated

recanman[m]: cool

The peer review is funded, were just awaiting a final version of the paper before beginning the review

(iirc)

<ofrnxmr[m]> "Trust me, even though i voted..." <- It's just frustrating because it seems like the CCS doesn't really work well. Proposing BS gets pushed through, and actually useful stuff gets knocked off. Had a lot more faith in the CCS system prior to submitting one. Lol

Luke

It works, but some slimeballs slip through the cracks

Look at msvb's latet ccs attempt

Latest*

how did geonic's movie get pushed through? Money talks, i guess

ofrnxmr[m]: are you cheery in real life as well, or just on IRC?

I bring this up all the time.

honest folks are given a hard time. Scrutinized and made to fit standards.

dishonest scammers, manipulate or bully their way into getting funding.

its ridiculous

midipoet: In real life, of course

oh that's good to hear, cause for a while i thought it was just for us on IRC

Do you know that you can earn $5,000 or more weekly from crypto Trading? With Just $500… 100% Inbox Admin on Telegram for more details 👇👇👇👇👇👇 t.me/PROFITSWITHSTEVE

was just reading this

Exploring the Monero Peer-to-Peer Network

6 Conclusion... (full message at <libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/v3/do…257399832cfadbf76eba709974d340c49c4>)

midipoet: are you referring to my comments about msvb's ccs (20k for badges)? Or about geonics(25k for a movie that doesnt feature monero)? Or that sarang (20k bp++) and kaya (50k fcmp) are scrutinized, while geonic get yolo merged + monerokon and @monero twittrr product placement + kon expenses, and msvb makes away with 15k + expenses of monerokon money

daley_: plowsof plowsof:

how did the network layer privacy improved compare to before will we get any new stuff in the next upgrade

telescam

was it noise protocol

or white noise

<Abo Gemaal el-Folani 👑> Telegram sucks but that's where all the porn is at

<Abo Gemaal el-Folani 👑> Not that i watch any

<Abo Gemaal el-Folani 👑> Of course

Nothing major. The p2p connections of nodes are sent in the clear

yea that will be a big think to figure out

<Abo Gemaal el-Folani 👑> Hi ofrn

<Abo Gemaal el-Folani 👑> I'm that one guy

* figure out solution of more network layer privacy

Are you sure youre not two?

Girls?

M0x1zxq7896lp2ze: Monero.fail/map (use firefox based browser.. seems to crash chromium based stuff here)

<Abo Gemaal el-Folani 👑> I'm the one from the group chat

<Abo Gemaal el-Folani 👑> Where we speak about things

Ikik Monero Offtopic tho lol

ofc

🫠

ofrnxmr[m]: any and all of the affformentioned, in any and all orders. moral relativism is difficult, more so in decentralisation. i think it's good to remain open minded about the CCS and especially decisions that surround it. It's never going to be perfect.

embrace the fact that many different people often want many different things.

I know for a fact i'd be bored out of my mind if i had to read cryptography proposals all the time.

embrace the scam artist

ofrn

Difficult for who? 🚮 is 🚮 and scammers gonna scam

im happy to fund non-cryptography proposals. Not but bullshit merch at 100-300% markups, and pay for a private endeavor that does absolutely nothing for monero

And im really only referring to recent events

We could talk about the haveno frontend ccs

How the hell does that hot trash heap of a ccs go to funding? Vaporware to this day

Ccs said would have a frontend in 6 months. Over a year later, theres still no backend for this fake frontend scam

Erc isnt a dev. But we threw money at him because were suckers

Kaya does high level work, and has been paid 0$ from us. And is delivering the code.

This has nothing to do with being a hardass against non-technical ccs', and everything to do with giving scumbags the unreasonable benefit of the doubt.

37 xmr for travel (6k), $50*400pieces(20k) for badges that cost 10k to produce (10k profit), which he retails to community members at $160.

then the movie. _you_ got to see it. Its not available to the public. And even if it did win an oscar, the movie has less monero in it than an episode on netflix. Its about exploiting the death of a 16 year old kid. And we paid, not for the movie, but 1. To submit it to film festivals. Thst is all. If geonic wins at any of them, we pay out the second half of the 25k

"Community members".. more like vultures

i reckon purgatory ccs project funds should be re purposed for dev funding or seraphis

people donated money for a project and the person has bolted at least re purpose it