06:55:57 Why suddenly everybody and their dog starts to build Monero wallet apps? Today there was Reddit post (still in quarantine) by this user about a new one: https://old.reddit.com/user/Joeytheass 06:56:25 Website is probably this one: https://www.monero.one/ 06:57:22 The repo does not have a license, the X user is suspended, the Reddit posting history does not show a single post or comment to the Monero subreddit except the announcement today. 06:57:27 Claude go brrr 06:58:21 Don't know, at first sight that one did not have the typical marks of AI coded garbage, but maybe I did not look closely enough: https://github.com/bwgh0/MoneroOne-public 06:59:21 Anyway, even if all those wallets do work, I think they don't answer the most important question: Why should I use them instead of the already existing established and trusted wallet apps? 06:59:50 Yesterday we even had one with a 0.7% fee on transactions. How dumb must I be to use that one, I ask myself. 07:00:39 Hell, during an introduction phase, they should pay me to take the risk, and take the chance to try them ... 07:01:35 I am just too old to understand this splendid modern work, that must be it. Have to work now, I still have to write my code at my day job by hand, sniff. 07:06:06 Har, har, the new Monero all-time high even triggered the German "Telepolis" online magazine to report about Monero - can't remember them every doing something about Monero: https://www.telepolis.de/article/Monero-Warum-die-Darknet-Waehrung-jetzt-Rekordhoehen-erreicht-11148726.html 07:06:49 With the usual spiel "Dear criminals, we will catch you, not even Monero can protect you." Tough. 08:42:39 thanks for sharing rbrunner7, if the 0.7% fee was hardcoded in the app, that's terrible - there are even wallets who have no hard coded fee and obtain it arbitrarily from their servers at time of send like Coin Wallet https://github.com/monero-project/monero-site/pull/2143 08:58:21 Just to be sure we don't produce misunderstandings, the one with the 0.7% fee is this one: aerxus.com 08:59:24 I propose to do the new getmonero.org in the style of this website, isn't that look cool :) 09:03:39 lol floating pyramids .. gold... "Get it now 😠" direct link to an apk, wonderful 09:13:24 Check the APK URL for added fun. nioc will be full with joy - "catbox". 13:39:11 rbrunner7 the download link isn't working on tor browser :( 13:39:56 more than 10k DLs and coming to googoo play soon™ 14:25:44 Skylight Wallet 1.0.4 for Android and Linux is now available. Tor/LWS settings and auditable builds: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/1qjvqig/skylight_wallet_104_for_android_and_linux_torlws/ 14:40:13 With the recent growth in light wallets, maybe there should be a monerosecurity.org/light-wallet page. Idk who maintains that 14:51:25 Tobtoht 15:00:43 tobtoht I know you have better things to do, but if you ever have a moment to critique the way Skylight builds the releases, we're all ears: https://github.com/MAGICGrants/skylight-wallet/tree/main/.github/workflows 15:12:01 likewise for anyone else ofc! 19:30:54 <4rkal> https://cyphergoat.com/this-week-in-monero/issue-20 19:36:39 Reading all the view key and key image nonsense today on Reddit, I am sorely tempted to start an anti-Carrot Monero fork today, to give a home to all people who fear the sky is falling. That fork comes with a guarantee backed by my full karma that it will never ever implement Carrot. Of course I would program in a "pre-mine" [... too long, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/qYXThd8KNHJ5c1pN ] 19:37:34 This sounds fun lol 19:38:45 Dudes one scenario the end situation is the same. No one forces you to give up a view key. Dumb 19:51:26 @hooftly:matrix.org: The only way you can be sure not not be forced to give up a view key is if that view key doesn't exist 19:52:08 @rbrunner7: Is that the plot of your next novel? 19:55:42 No, clearly this needs to go the complete opposite direction of Carrot. Monero can be so private, not even the seed holder can see their transactions. Checkmate, feds. If I can't see my own balance, nobody can. I call it "Stick". 20:04:12 @hbs:matrix.org: And the only way you cant be forced to give up any key is the same consequence. If you are in a position you need to give up any key at all your private keys are at just as much risk 20:05:31 @hooftly:matrix.org: If you consider that lawful states are a thing of the past then yes, otherwise you need to have a legal reason for being forced to give out anything, and this is not unbounded in time. 20:06:52 This only strengthens my argument because if you are being legally compelled to give up a view key you can be compelled to give up key images there is literally no difference in this scenario dude 20:07:57 @hooftly:matrix.org: Give a viewkey now, that viewkey is valid forever, give a list of key images, any future ones are not automatically provided, huge difference, but again only if you believe in the legal system of your jurisdiction 20:08:18 So you migrate to a new wallet proble solved lol 20:08:40 @hooftly:matrix.org: But that migration will be viewable by whoever has your OVK 20:09:10 And? In this situation you are already a target 20:09:49 As tevador suggested when this discussion took place in the past, supporting the creation of legacy wallets even after the CARROT implementation seems a balanced solution. The importance is to give users a choice. 20:10:25 @hooftly:matrix.org: Your OVK will remain valid even after you may have been cleared of whatever you were suspected of 20:11:41 @hbs:matrix.org: No one is using the same wallet after you are cleared come on. This is a non issue. 20:11:41 How is 2 wallet types better for privacy wont these transactions be distinguishable creating more fingerprinting opprotunity? 20:12:35 @hooftly:matrix.org: Transactions will not be distinguishable, the only difference would be that the legacy wallets would not have an OVK or any of the other keys introduced by the CARROT upgrade. 20:13:35 Intersting how is that possible if address types are not compatible can you trabsact between them? 20:14:53 I suggest you read the CARROT proposal all over again, section 1.3 "However, an equally important design consideration of Carrot is backwards compatibility. One can participate in the Carrot addressing protocol using preexisting Cryptonote addresses, subaddresses, and integrated addresses. No wallet key migration is required." 20:16:50 Ok so what is the actual issue here then? if someone wants to maintain a legacy wallet they can it does not have to ve monero core if they are backwards compatible and the idea is to support both going forward this is all oxy moronic 20:20:44 @hooftly:matrix.org: That was the proposal tevador made yes, continue supporting both types of wallets 20:21:33 I get it but its seems technical debt for no good reason 20:21:48 There is a great reason, choice 20:22:16 Anyone can support a legacy wallet why does core have too that is ultimate choice 20:22:22 And that wallet creation code would probably not have to evolve anyways and is already present 20:23:31 Besides the actual argument isnt actually supporting both like he suggest the argument is not supporting OVK which is nonsensical in reason 20:23:38 @hooftly:matrix.org: Because it's important that legacy wallets are "officially" supported, and not just something off, otherwise it would become easy for powers that be to go after the few "misfit" wallets which dare to still support them 20:25:55 @hooftly:matrix.org: If it appears that the choice is to either have CARROT or stay with the current wallet then people will unevitably chose a side and some will oppose CARROT. If it is clear that both types of wallets will be supported after the CARROT upgrade then the choice will be postponed until the time when you cre [... too long, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/-7mHh98KcU9UNHR6 ] 20:28:06 I can see an argument here for supporting both but again the main issue is the claim that OVK somehow harms privacy. Your one scenario is easily defended against and this tool literlly increases saftety in regard to cold wallets 20:28:58 Ovks do harm privacy (?) Not sure how it could be argued that they dont 20:29:54 Knowing exact amounts that are spent in a tx is a reduction in privacy is passively observed. Of course ovks improve hardware wallet UX - those arent being shared publicly 20:30:09 How is it different than key images? If you are in a position you need to give up either you are fucked OVK 20:31:13 @hooftly:matrix.org: Please let people select their threat model, this will greatly vary from one jurisdiction to another, that's why supporting both types of wallets remains important 20:31:22 youre not giving up key images to binance 20:31:49 That would involve an import repeatedly. Ovks is a one time submission for constant monitoring 20:32:03 And allows passive monitoring 20:32:28 @hbs:matrix.org: Im not arguing against supporting both I do think its tech debt but understand the reasoning 20:32:40 @ofrnxmr: And there will be a market for those OVKs, I'm sure regulations adding those keys to the travel rule would be quick to be proposed... 20:33:37 Guys how is it hard to have 2 wallets like im sure everyone already does. These are already common behaviours no? 20:33:51 which would inevitably lead to people maintaining multiple wallets if they dont want to be surveilled, and being forced to provide SOF for funds that entered the OVK wallet 20:34:10 It removes or weakens plausible deniability 20:34:17 @hooftly:matrix.org: No 20:34:19 But you are talking about CEXs... 20:34:58 I have like 10 wallets, but i don't use a separate wallet to interact with party A just because party A was able to require me to share OVKs for their compliance program 20:35:29 @ofrnxmr: Why are you interacting with that platform anyway? 20:35:32 @hooftly:matrix.org: Funds which transit via an OVK enabled wallets are fully surveilled, so you may be constrained to explain each and every transaction 20:35:58 @hooftly:matrix.org: Same reason anyone does anything, convenience or necessity 20:36:56 @hbs:matrix.org: But again if you are forced to give this up you can be forced to give key images and you are already screwed 20:37:13 Its like how most zcash users need 2 (or more) wallets because T or exchange addresses reveal info about the wallet, so you need a 2nd private wallet 20:37:30 @hooftly:matrix.org: You keep ignoring the time bound difference of both approaches 20:37:45 no im not 20:37:45 Currently with monero, passive monitoring of spent key images isnt possible 20:38:25 @ofrnxmr: Yes and my argument is if you have to give up that key you screwed anyway 20:38:28 As I expressed earlier in 2025 when that subject was brought up (by me), I see OVKs enabled wallets as the exception in specific cases, not the norm, but for this to be true both wallet types need to be supported 20:38:53 @hbs:matrix.org: I can get on board with supporting both 20:41:10 I understand the reason behind ongoing surveillance but if you had to give up the OVK you are already in a situatuon where you could have been compelled to give up KIs too so the realistic situation where this happens is the same result if OVKs exist or not. 20:41:10 If you make it out of that situation I hope you use a new wallet 20:41:16 @hbs:matrix.org: what solutions to you have to the burning bug and JANUS attacks? Cause CARROT solves both of those 20:41:40 JANUS attacks are pretty edge case imo 20:42:03 @jbabb:cypherstack.com: I am not advocating against CARROT, quite the contrary, I am advocating for supporting both CARROT wallets and the current wallet type 20:42:07 It involves responding off chain to the attacker to confirm that you received funds on address B when they were semd to address C 20:45:50 I do that everytime 20:46:28 whenever i get paid in nero i dox someone and contact them irl to inform them i indeed received the fund on this specific address in full detail with timestamp 20:47:19 I used to do that until i learned of the janus attack /s 22:14:44 note legacy wallets won't be able to use the PQ Turnstile in case if ever gets used https://gist.github.com/jeffro256/146bfd5306ea3a8a2a0ea4d660cd2243 22:17:31 The turnstile would be 2 step in that case, no? Just spend to a private ovk/carrot wallet -> through turnstile 22:18:40 Nope, by the time that the turnstile would be activated (i.e. we no longer assume hardness of the discrete log problem), you can't spend old funds. 22:20:06 If we don't assume the hardness of the discrete log problem, there is no way to prove integrity of pre-Carrot RingCT amount commitments