Also running a Masternode will become useless for information gathering purposes thanks to blinding anyway. So what's the big fuss with the NSA? ...
Again - I think JL was posing a genuine point. I don't think he's a "thick skull".
There are loads of possibilities when you've got hypothetical attack vectors at your disposal. How they play out in practice I don't know.
The fiat banking system leaks like a seive and is probably the poorest security model you could imagine in your wildest dreams. Yet the whole world runs on it. Every time I use a cash machine I reflect to myself on how totally stone age it feels compared to any crypto - yet I still use it without a worry.
It's a legitimate question - that business of the "NSA" commandeering masternodes, but what most people miss is that the challenge isn't taking control of the machine, it's taking control of the coin supply which is a prerequisite. That's a question of budget and market liquidity and it brings us into a domain of consideration that goes beyond any one coin.
I look at that scenario as "the NSA vs all of crypto" because that's how they would look at it. Each cryptocurrency has different strengths and weaknesses and different types of market appeal. The only defence any of them have against being "bought up" is the very market diversity that we fight over in these stupid troll debates.
I commented on this for Strix yesterday in a slightly different context, the thing with Masternodes and the way Masternode Blinding is implemented is either you own them all or you don't have anything. Here is my comment to Strix I hope you guys find it useful in this context.
Mangled B, please don't ignore me, though I admit I may be stupid, I am really trying to understand and am NOT trolling. I admit that I have been persuaded by the single crusty bread crumb. It just sounds logical to me, but I also respect you and your opinion. What is it that I am not getting. The only argument that I have heard in opposition to 51% concerns, is that self interest will keep miners from taking advantage of their power. Is there more to it than this. PLEASE help me out here; I will certainly sleep better if you can.
Strix,I think you got confused, people were trying to say there was an issue with someone controlling lets say 51% of Masternodes, is a misplaced extrapolation from the 51% mining issue or how much we are used to simple majority meaning something.
In the case of Masternodes, a set of 20 Masternodes is randomly selected for each transaction, so even if you control a large percentage of the network lets say 90% your chances of following transaction are non existent.
Here are the probabilities of someone actually following through the Darksend process as it stands today.
Each round uses 20 random masternodes of 2300, so you must control 20 of 2300 four times in a row. It's super secure .
Here's the new probablities for each successive round:
- 1 rounds with 10 masternodes is ((10/2300.0)^20)^1 == 5.826976675086318e-48
- 2 rounds with 10 masternodes is ((10/2300.0)^20)^2 == 3.3953657171999996e-95
- 3 rounds with 10 masternodes is ((10/2300.0)^20)^3 == 1.9784716837512123e-142
- 4 rounds with 1000 masternodes is ((1000/2300.0)^20)^4 == 1.1528508353537028e-29
* attacker controlled
With regards to the 51% mining thing, I think you can read online about that a lot as it relates to all Proof of Work coins.
