the different cryptonight versions were monero specific so you won't find them on cryptonote.org

you'll have to go through GitHub to find the exact changes

in december i bought some monero from changenow.io with creditcard, didnt have to upload passport, now i tried buying a bigger sum, but was asked for passport.. is there a limit when i have to upload passport?

eoc, changenow.io/faq/kyc-aml-procedure

secret sauce and you got lucky

:|

they dont seem to have charge my card, dunno if i can just ignore it then, the text seems a bit unclear ...

3 days to validate and get back money after 24h ...

Sorry, I've never used the service.

Wish I could be more of a help to you.

If they didn't charge your card though, you can likely ignore it.

ill just send them an email in case ... but damn i was nervous about this stuff from before ...

> Usually, we answer within half an hour.

wow..

what do you use to buy monero?

Kraken is nice but they also have KYC

hm yeah, you basically have to upload passport to buy?

try localmonero.co

i actually looked a bit there, hmm ..

they said they neede some time to look into it .. come to think of it i didnt get to the part where i had to authorize it throught the bank, so i guess they wouldnt get access to the money ...

jaja ...

ok, seems to be ok to just abondon it, they were fast indeed, a bit back and forth ...

do you need KYC to do crypto-crypto on Kraken?

i think so

used to be not, but unless i'm mistaken it was changed a couple years back

maybe depends on your country, too. i dunno

inge: yes you do

how did this happen? old.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/ry…t_393_xmr_in_a_transaction_fee_only

could the high tier actually cause a fee of ~4 xmr?

Fee multipliers are 1, 5, 25, 1000.

is that the official GUI wallet?

feels like there should be a warning if the proposed fee is >100% of the sending amount

GUI v0.17.3.1 binaries are now online, thank you to all contributors

I wonder why it was so high.

Tx size: 1.9219 kB

nothing extraordinary

moneromooo this tx's fee is way more than 1000x of the lowest fee

fee per KB: 2.048 looks suspicious

this is how it looks in the GUI with max fee usercontent.irccloud-cdn.com/file/6…ot%202022-01-07%20at%2018.31.09.png

hmmm... no kidding

i wonder if that dude would share logs or something

aight, they are interested in sharing stuff. whats the best way to send stuff, and what would be useful?

having a hard time seeing how a malicious public node would benefit from the high fee, unless they think they'll be the ones to mine the next block?

Griefing?

same reason why people DoS nodes

just to be annoying

so far it's still only one person who had this issue

Bonus deanonymization points if the victim ends up containing on a public forum, so you have a username to associate with their ip address

CIA going after random Monero users...

Doesn't seem likely.

is there any reason excessively high fees shouldn't be rejected by the network?

Why would you want network rejection of excessively high fees though ndorf ?

such transactions will stand out like a sore thumb

"excessive" in this context meaning higher than the 1000x mult

What does it matter if it 'stands out like a sore thumb' though?

i didn't think the desirability of indistinguishable transactions was still an open question

This whole thing confuses me, but it seems like an opportunity to learn something. First, I was under the impression that the fee is part of the transaction which would be signed by the private key, so a node shouldn't be able to tamper with it without breaking that signature. Second, the CLI only shows four fee levels (unimportant, normal, elevated, priority)- I didn't realize it was even possible to set a manual fee outside of these op

tions.

that is correct, but it's all based on a fee estimated from current network conditions and provided by the node

ah, all clear now

the excessive fee is shown to the user before they sign it, but if they're not paying close enough attention...

that's why I want to add a warning to the GUI if the fee appears abnormally high

+1

yep. only question is how does the GUI determine what too high means?

>X% of the sending amount would be a good start, but wouldn't catch the ones where the sending amount is high

hence why i'm asking about a consensus rule (in addition to a GUI warning)

e.g. GUI warns if fee > 10% sent, network rejects if fee > 1000 * base

Wouldn't the person putting those txs on the chain already be able to identify their own txs anyways ndorf? I don't see how restricting maximum network fees would be of any value.

everyone can see the fee amount, not just the sender

yes

well, that is not consistent with the long-standing goal that transactions should be as close to indistinguishable as possible

Wouldn't 500 * base still stick out like crazy?

or 250?

When I send a tx that includes pre-bulletproof outputs it sticks out

i'm not sure i understand your point. is it that if we can't get to 100% perfection, we shouldn't bother with any improvements at all?

would you also oppose the fee quantization mask, dummy change output, and other measures that have already been deployed?

no

but I do oppose the removal of integrated addresses

sure, at least there is a use case for those.

not sure i see any valid use case for a fee >1000x base?

if you want to donate to miners you can do so directly, and privately :)

why make things more complicated for something that might come up once in 7 years?

it's not complicated at all. if (fee > 1000 * base) { reject(); }

every legit node that has the latest block agrees on the base fee already

Could likely be exploited against someone to verify their identity.

how so?

Well, of course by that point they'd already have been compromised anyways.

Altered wallet that sets a really high fee... if it's connected to your node and your node rejects it.

how is that worse than the same node allowing it?

So now you're agreeing with me that it doesn't matter?

;)

no

if it's rejected then only one node will see it. if not, it will be recorded in the blockchain for everyone to see forever

Wouldn't multiple nodes be rejecting it?

Pretty sure my tx can't be rejected from the entire network with just one node rejecting it.

only if the node being used for RPC doesn't reject it first

and even so, a few nodes is still better than every node + permanent public record

Alright, I'll agree to the blocking of crazy high tx fees if you'll agree not to remove the integrated addresses support.

deal lol

although i think i saw a proposal to remove tx_extra altogether

yeah

it's been in discussion on and off for years now

The discussion was recently re-opened

i'm partial to keeping integrated addresses, but i also am open to the idea that the downsides might outweigh the upsides

Me too, I don't like the forced housekeeping that's required with sub-addresses.

another possible benefit to integrated addresses (maybe not, just thinking out loud here) is that the sender can be sure they're sending to the same recipient

IOW: i buy something from your store. a year later, i buy a second thing. i can be sure i am sending funds to the same primary address as before

Yes