kayabanerve update on ccs.getmonero.org/proposals/fcmp++-development.html ?

<s​bt:nope.chat> plowsof: I have mentioned the stagenet faucets. you can try those

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> plowsof: I consider the libraries done in effect, although there is some final polishing occurring, audits ongoing, etc. jeffro256 is happy with the performance, integration hasn't been an issue, the the upcoming testnet will use the FCMP++ libraries directly from their current home.

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> The libraries are being merged into monero-oxide incrementally, as it's too much to merge in one PR. boog900 is currently reviewing our audited generalized bulletproofs library.

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> We're about to have helioselene audited by Veridise, after the contest for a performant version, MRL having approved the new review and audit. With that, I'll probably open a PR for the helioselene library to be merged in (again reviewed by boog900 along the way).

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> I have yet to request payout for legal/financial reasons (due to the size of it). I'm actively working with an accountant to try and get everything sorted.

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> Once merged into oxide, they'll also immediately be in scope of our BBP on Immunefi offering up to 100,000 USD in XMR (paid by Power Up Privacy) which is dope.

<n​onlogs:matrix.org> hi

<n​onlogs:matrix.org> Suppose there are 1 million subaddresses how do exchanges consolidate them? Do they use sweep_all and works fine out of the box?

<o​frnxmr:xmr.mx> No

<o​frnxmr:xmr.mx> firstly, xyproblem.info ( youre not asking the question properly )

<o​frnxmr:xmr.mx> You dont typically need to sweep at all. Sincr i have some context, i believe the question is "what should exchanges do to regularly consolidate dust"

<n​onlogs:matrix.org> yep thats the question.

<n​onlogs:matrix.org> yep that's the question.

<o​frnxmr:xmr.mx> Answer to that is, method "sweep_all" and params "subaddr_indices_all": true + "amount_below": 12345678910

<n​onlogs:matrix.org> What would happen if there were 100k such subaddresses?

<n​onlogs:matrix.org> would it crash ?

<o​frnxmr:xmr.mx> No?

<n​onlogs:matrix.org> I think we’d need to use batching of around 50–100 subaddresses so the funds can be moved more easily ?

<o​frnxmr:xmr.mx> No

<o​frnxmr:xmr.mx> First, you dont have 100k subaddresses, second, no

<n​onlogs:matrix.org> sorry what do you mean ?

<o​frnxmr:xmr.mx> I mean, your exchange does not have 100k subaddresses

<n​onlogs:matrix.org> Yes, but i need to write a logic that can handle 100k+ subaddresses or make a batch consolidate system.

<o​frnxmr:xmr.mx> No you dont

<o​frnxmr:xmr.mx> Just run the sweep_all subaddr_indices_all below_amount everyday (or something)

<s​gp_:monero.social> It'll make multiple transactions automatically afaik. One command to consolidate however many to one address

<s​gp_:monero.social> docs.getmonero.org/rpc-library/wallet-rpc/?h=sweep_all#sweep_all

<o​frnxmr:xmr.mx> Yes

Hi. Question, How can it be so hard to program a script to derive subaddresses from a private view key and a main address in java/kotlin?

I mean, an offline script

<r​brunner7:monero.social> It's quite some "crypto" involved, if self-contained (not referencing several third-party libraries) that "script" would become quite big. And well, in the end you could say that so far nobody felt like doing it, so it did not happen.

<r​brunner7:monero.social> I could harvest some library copied from the late Turtlecoin project, add some code of my own and do it in C# for a website of mine. It's not magic, just work. Maybe put up a bounty, wink wink :)

<r​brunner7:monero.social> I may soon face the job to adjust that to the new FCMP++ key hierarchy in wallets ...