<nioc> "when sending txs you don't..." <- Okay, thanks nioc

hi monero community: is there any downside to using a new wallet's primary account for mining, and then that same wallet non-primary accounts for storing/sending/receiving? I saw that p2pool recommends using a separate wallet for mining because the primary address is visible for mining payout . . . but if only using primary address for mining and never anything else, why not keep it all in one place in same wallet for convenience?

does primary account address be used for anything else other than mining? hope this is right place to ask thank you

just to clarify terminology, for mining you use the primary address and then you have subaddresses connected to that address. This constitutes an account.

you can have multiple accounts in a wallet which behave as separate wallets, each with a primary address and their associated subaddresses

this is my understanding but I have never used multiple accounts within one wallet

yes this clarification sounds correct to me. as I understand it, primary address (which is the top-level address of primary account) is only option for mining solo or p2pool.

whether you are using the term non-primary accounts for subaddresses or a different account I do not have an answer to you :)

well a different account is ok

oooohh sorry :)

I do mean different accounts

or subaddresses withing different accounts, but the only thing that primary account would be used for is mining

my main concern is to maintain privacy with not having any addresses I use for transactions be visible through mining, but would love convenience of not having to juggle multiple wallets at this time (hence interest in mining on primary account, and then separate accounts in same wallet for transactions that can't be tied to mining)

I think it would be OK, but in case is obvious bad problem I wanted to verify with others in community :)

I appreciate you responding with me nioc, thank you

temp_monero_womb: np, not many people around at this time

seems like it should be ok but yeah would be nice if someone confirms

<toralien[m]> "because my fs doesn't look..." <- It's the layout on a remote server, running `mainnet`, `testnet` and `stagenet` daemons, including `monero-lws-daemon` and some `monero-wallet-rpc`.

Prague Travel Guide For Monerokon3 - monerokon.medium.com/prague-travel-guide-for-monerokon3-2fbbd5734a3a

Didnt add screenshot yesterday for cakepay's partner shotgun KYC so here:

Just a note to myself to not use anything cake related coming forward and just keep using bitrefill and allark instead

hello

do anyone knows oneline  converter as rate.sx(off now)

fiat > monero and the opposite

just price info?

yes

coingecko, kraken and cake wallet have apis

 echo "0.44" | xargs -I {} echo "{} * $(curl --no-progress-meter "api.coingecko.com/api/v3/simple/price?ids=monero&vs_currencies=usd" | jq '.monero.eur')" | bc

dont work

why not

(standard_in) 2: syntax error

so you need to use a command that works

yes

<temp_monero_womb> "hi monero community: is there..." <- Depending on your jurisdiction it may be beneficial to have different seeds for different purposes. Because if you are forced to reveal view keys for eg. mining operations, you can still keep the other transactions private.

look at the heuristics on p2pool.observer

it shows a bit of what can be correllated (recent consolidation/sweeps, spends with non coinbase, likelihood)

the last time i asked chatgpt for someone it gave me this curl -s "min-api.cryptocompare.com/data/pric…UAH,XMR&tsyms=USD&api_key=asddsacdc" | jq -r '.UAH.USD / .XMR.USD'

curl -s "min-api.cryptocompare.com/data/pric…UAH,XMR&tsyms=USD&api_key=asddsacdc" | jq -r '.UAH.EUR / .XMR.EUR'

jq: error (at <stdin>:0): null (null) and null (null) cannot be divided

If you feel uncomfortable with the request or if you are not familiar with the commands being asked of you, it's perfectly reasonable to suggest that the person try talking to ChatGPT themselves.

it works here, you must have... some networking issue / cant access that url

i run from other pc and output is the same

try it on my wifi

pc in on other network

ceetee🇧🇪: oooohh that is good point would give plausible deniability. I will look if this part of my threat model. does view key expose only single account, or does view key expose all accounts inside a wallet made with seed? thank you !

do anyone knows any open source version of chatgpt because i dont want to give my info to google

ofrnxmr: thank you for link, I look now at what someone can know about p2pool miners

About any pool miners, realky

Just that p2pool is shows you what info pools can collect on users

this makes sense thank you !

<Guest77> "do anyone knows any open..." <- I use an old microsoft account with bing's version

There are some open source alternatives. but a lot of front ends as well which still require you to have gpt api keys.

i havent tested the fully open alternatives

<temp_monero_womb> "ceetee🇧🇪: oooohh that is good..." <- each seed has one view key and one spend key. Accounts are like buckets to manage the individual received outputs to prevent accidental mixing of them when spending

thank you this is helpful to know 🙏

The Janus attack is the #1 reason you want to use separate seeds

If you arent a target, subaccounts are often sufficient.

avoid mixing funds between (subaddresses, subaccounts, or separate seeds) depenind on your threat level

If withdrawing to different sub accounts, you only want to spend from one account at a time. Iirc its technicnally possible to spend an entire wallet balance, but by default in most front end wallets is when spening from an subaccount that only the the accounts funds are used

Separate seeds/accounts etc should be treated as separate identities

<Guest77> "do anyone knows any open..." <- This belongs in OT but FYI you can selfhost open source LLMs, just not specifically the brand-name closed-source "ChatGPT"

Here is a nice list, new ones are being released almost daily

ofrnxmr: thank you for explain so much too, I like separate accounts/seeds as separate identities. I will read on Janus attack to see if matters in threat model your words are big help 🙏

I have 1 more question I think of - is any major risk of mining p2pool on personal computer? I see many use dedicated mining rig but I do not want to buy second computer. I assume is different for threat model, but curious what risk be when not opening ports

IMO mining is minimal risk, much lower than running a node. No peers need to connect to your miner; your miner just occasionally needs to download a new block.

this I think too, thank you for opinion. to clarify, I run local pruned node to keep blockchain local, but not open ports. with this setup, no peers should be connect? I am trying hard to make sure I use right words as monero documents can be confusing to new people :)

P2pool does do p2p connections

And increases the amount of info going out over the network

Monerod sync + p2pool sync

temp_monero_wombat_5274: you should take a look at CSMiner as a reference

temp_monero_womb: You make outgoing connections with your clear ip

You can run the node behind tor if you want to hide your ip

it's simpler to understand than xmrig, in my opinion, since it only supports randomx and is made in a simpler language (unless you are a C++ dev)

What is your goal?

goal is to to mine very small here and there to acquire some monero in account - not trying large profit operation

Convenience <<<<< exchange for >>>>> privacy

I connect GUI wallet over vpn or tor, no open ports

That doesnt change the node config afaik

Thats only for the wallet

yes, this convenience is what I am try to balance with my threat model :)

max privacy = node behind tor, solo mining

Max convenience = no node at all, using a clearnet centrslized pool

Quite a good spectrum of options inbetween

thank you for telling extremes of that balance, I appreciate

I do not have big hash power, so I think to get little monero here and there I choose pool. I like decentralized pool because better for network.

I cannot confirm whether or not p2pool works behind torsocks

Some pools have onion addresses, which can be highky convenient but also have good privacy

I have not problem with local node and prefer local node for trust, but is on my personal machine so I prefer not to seed with node so no open ports

and yes okay I will research maybe do vpn instead for p2pool if no onion

temp_monero_womb: Your node shares with peers. You create the tunnel (outgoing) but the tunnel is bidirectional

<xfedex[m]> "temp_monero_wombat_5274: you..." <- I not ignore you, thank you for recommendation :) I think I look for p2pool miner though and it already in GUI wallet

So you do in fact seed to peers, but peers cant initiate the connection

P2pool runs a sidechain

ooooohh okay I think I need more research then :)

I am know that p2pool runs separate blockchain

Ok. Im just saying that youd need to tor that too, if possible

yes thank you

I also mention vpn as maybe, but you keep say tor only. is vpn bad idea your opinion?

Tor over vpn is good, but vpns arent really private

Theyre more for subverting georestrictions or "being in another location"

Ivpn for example, uses forked networking for some of their backend

Forked is a monero sponsor

Forked also has a customer who had 750+ sybil monero peers

Using ivpn for monero privacy, may lead directly back to sharing your ip with sybil nodes

ofrnxmr[m]: Wow that entity must really like Monero

Theyre cheap

Super cheap

I think 1500/year for 255.. i could just check instead of guessing, i guess

These arent just monero sybils eithrr

Its known as LurkingLion and its an attack on btc and xmr

(good thing we have more full nodes :D) lol

<ofrnxmr[m]> "Tor over vpn is good, but vpns..." <- yes okay I use other vpn (not ivpn) to shifting trust from isp to vpn, but I still has to trust vpn. tor is more private. but for node and p2pool, concern would be exposing ip, and both would accomplish hiding ip from connections to node or p2pool I think, yes?

Ivpn uses a few different backends

Most others do as well

<ofrnxmr[m]> "So you do in fact seed to peers,..." <- was this note about seed to peers about p2pool monero local node or both?

Good chance no matter who you choose, youre just paying for the same pig with different lipstick

temp_monero_womb: Both

Vpn over tor works, and just tor works as well

But just vpn isnt really private, its, as you said, shifting trust from isp to vpn provider

I hear you thank you for all help and ideas

Who might be using the same isp as the the exit

Vpn for punching through blocks. Anonymity networks for privacy

yes, is chaos game to play!

Combine tthe two to access anonymity networks where blocked

yo

yoyo

how ut go??

sideways, usually to the right, stablecoinin

based

and you?

doing good

good to hear 💪

The monero.fail onion node list is empty! Looks like a bug

(My own .onion node is still up, and used to be indexed there libertytmtitynvmnto2k42liys5fenb3wa…ksyrc7jvgmjiqd.onion:18089/get_info )

Who runs monero.fail ?

monero.fail/?chain=monero&network=mainnet&onion=on --> empty list

monero.fail has been really slow recently

slow isn't a problem. But I often make a polemical point about XMR's resilency by noting the ~100 Monero .onion nodes and linking to the above

yeah I know, just annoying for me

that would be lza_menace @lza_menace:libera.chat:

very slow indeed, perhaps being ddosed

I’ve noticed it as well. Can’t replicate it. It is likely due to the intensive node scanning I implemented. Seemed to start after that

Seems like I broke something tbh

I’ll fix it tonight

I have a question related to the hash_to_point function in Monero. I do not want to bother the devs because the question is just to satisfy my own curiosity. I am not a mathematician and am just learning as much as I can. I have replicated the hash_to_point function in Python and can calculate a correct key image by stealth_address_private_key * 8 * hash_to_point(stealth_address_public_key). But to calculate 8 (

hash_to_point(stealth_address_public_key) I have to add it to itself 8 times because the Python function nacl.bindin.crypto_scalarmult_ed25519_noclamp throws an error when I try to multiply by 8 (int(8).to_bytes(32, byteorder="little")). And nacl.bindings.crypto_core_ed25519_is_valid_point says the original hash_to_point value (before adding it to itself 8 times) is not a valid EC point. I do not understand enough to figure out why on

my own and was hoping someone could help explain why that behavior occurs?

I have a very vague intuition that the hash_to_point() function is generating a point that is not in the prime order subgroup, and adding to itself 8 times produces a point in the prime order sub group. But that is very very vague intuition, not enough to truly understand.

for 2 yrs i have gui wallet on my laptop, syncing with ocal node but now it is syncing forever. is it ok to use remote nodes, i would like to be able to transact and not to wait so long. what most of you do when you use monero for payments? local or remote.please advise, im not a computer person. tnx

alandamjanic: ssd or spinning disk? i use local

I use local, it's weird that it's so slow with syncing

I don't use the GUI, does it do syncing by itself?

remote is okey for most payments

and yeah it's ok for payments

but i kind of prefer monerod + cli wallet

alandamjanic: check that your network is properly set up, that you are not using a spinning disk drive, that your internet speed is good

Unless using a 2400 baud modem, internet speed is never the bottleneck.... (full message at <libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/v3/do…cf7ed8de371fc54b9574e295cc1908c1326>)

After many hours of searching it appears that hash_to_point() implements Elligator2 or something similar. It appears to be available in libsodium but not in the Python nacl.bindings wrapper. I believe the function crypto_core_ed25519_from_uniform might provide the same functionality as hash_to_point(). doc.libsodium.org/advanced/point-arithmetic#elligator-2-map