Live data from Hacker News

Why I find IOTA alarming

medium.com

71–80 of 130 posts

Re: Why I find IOTA alarming

#71
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all rise together, so we should more encouraging of one another’s endeavors in crypto and blockchain There’s your tip-off for a scam: don’t ask questions, and be encouraging to each other, because it’s us against a skeptical world. Cults, penny stocks, Amway, and now crypto currency scams apparently: I’ve observed similar patterns in all. Not that we shouldn’t support each other in our mutual endeavors, but if tha…

> growing food crops for fuel is energy net positive, and otherwise a good idea. According to Wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_energy_balance ), growing sugarcane for ethanol is 8x net energy positive.

Said biodiesel nut never once mentioned sugar cane, soybeans was the frequently suggested crop, your article is talking about ethanol and not biodiesel, and that wasn’t the point anyway.

Re: Why I find IOTA alarming

#72
post #43
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the double spending problem is not really resolved. Just with the current theft, there are recipes posted[1] on how to recover the stolen IOTA by basically enforcing the double spending and trying to give your spending a higher priority than the fraudulent transactions had. That means fraudulent transaction could try this themselves and just need to exploit that race condition. That means a fraud needs to someho…

For the double spend to occur, you would need access to the seed ( private key) which the victims had and are trying to outrun the attacker in the case you were describing.

You know how hash collisions work and why it is important to have an hashing algorithm for which it is hard to enforce collisions.

It is so you do not need to know the private key. So that you can forge fraudulent transactions without knowing the private key.

Re: Why I find IOTA alarming

#73
post #52
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 8 times more efficient than binary They're claiming this, for what operation? And similar question for the 10% usage claim. I suspect storage will be the same when you get done packing into machine words and storing those, yes? Unless they're not using all the bits in a word... Any independent references for ternary efficiencies for any operation?

I am not sure about 8 times efficiency and 10% argument. The founder said that in his interview yesterday. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GwhJQ67zxbg I just found this article about ternary and as you said storage needs to be in ternary too. The main reason seems to be it is close to the value of “e” https://www.techopedia.com/why-not-ternary-computers/2/32427

Unless you have access to physical trits, you're going to be emulating them with two bits each...

Re: Why I find IOTA alarming

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OT: who are the crypto people you follow? And on which channels? Twitter seems sadly popular among this crowd. Sadly because it lends itself to flamewars.

Here are two resources that I think are helpful: 1. Token Economy is a weekly crypto newsletter run by two crypto VCs ( https://tokeneconomy.co/ ). I think it is extremely good at separating the signal from the noise. Highly recommend. 2. Twitter is unfortunately indeed the easiest place to follow what's going on. Naval Ravikant, the founder of AngelList, recently published a list of the people he follows in the spac…

Oh, you meant cryptocurrencies, not the cryptography people. "Crypto" is an established abbreviation for "cryptography". Probably, to avoid confusion we should spell out both terms.

Re: Why I find IOTA alarming

#75
post #2

I feel like I'm missing one side of the story. I don't know much about IOTA but from what I learned reading articles linked on HN today IOTA: - Uses custom "ternary" crypto which has been shown to have vulnerabilities in the past. - Has software that doesn't include the basic function of generating wallet addresses, instead having some users rely on shady 3rd party websites and getting their coins stolen. - Does away…

1) No, the whole implementation of the ledger is written in ternary. Its current hasing function is called Kerl. The vulnerability that DCI claimed existed is impossible to be used in the wild because an attacker would have to have seed level access to the wallet at which point, any attack vector becomes moot. 2) The IOTA Foundation and the community expressly warned not to trust unaffiliated sites. Saying they relie…

Why would ternary be at all a good basis for this sort of software? I could imagine some use cases at the hardware level, but in software it’s just nonsense.

Re: Why I find IOTA alarming

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BitConnect, a literal Ponzi scheme that was repeatedly flagged to newbies as a Ponzi scheme they should avoid, had a $2.5 billion market cap last month before collapsing. While IOTA boosters probably have a story they believe that justifies the hype in their mind, just because it’s worth $6 billion in this market doesn’t mean they necessarily have a good one. For what it’s worth, of all the crypto people I follow tha…

> For what it’s worth, of all the crypto people I follow that I consider smart or savvy, none of them are IOTA bulls. Would it be possible to stop using crypto as a shorthand for cryptocurrency? It's already a term of art for the much older field of cryptography and things get confusing, especially as all the crypto(graphy) people I follow consider altcoins in general to be hype. Not to mention it makes no sense, kry…

No. Give up. It's over. Use context clues. Not a statement on the merit of cryptocurrency or your reasoning, just a descriptivist observation.

Re: Why I find IOTA alarming

#77
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 8 times more efficient than binary They're claiming this, for what operation? And similar question for the 10% usage claim. I suspect storage will be the same when you get done packing into machine words and storing those, yes? Unless they're not using all the bits in a word... Any independent references for ternary efficiencies for any operation?

IOTA is built for the internet of things and more specifically for sensors operating in the field. Perhaps with limited acces, perhaps with long intervals between service periods. Generally, you would't care about an 8 fold efficiency increase when you're hooked up onto a powerline but remote sensing equipment does.

Great, someone else quoting 8x efficiency. Maybe you know about the claim? We understand the motivation, which keeps getting mentioned, but what I think we all want to know is:

  8x efficiency _of_what_compared_to_what_?

Re: Why I find IOTA alarming

#78
Oh man, this article reminded me I should sell what little IOTA I have, so I tried to. Here's what happened:

I launched my wallet and saw a zero balance and zero transactions. I looked around and heard from some friends that I need to convert my funds or something, because there was a "snapshot" yesterday.

I clicked the "re-attach" button and waited for a few minutes. It failed, so I did it again and again and again. After half an hour and five times or so, it succeeded and I could see my balance.

I tried to send funds, the wallet said "sending" for around ten minutes, and then it finally said "success". I waited for the funds to confirm (there were three transactions, two of which were zero for some reasons), but 70 minutes later it still hadn't.

A friend told me I should "re-attach" the transaction and "promote" it. Apparently, "promoting" sends five transactions that reference yours, to confirm it. I imagine the transactions are zero-fund transactions that just spam the network to self-confirm your own one. Who confirms the confirmers?

This is absolutely insane and I can't believe this thing ever got traction. It feels like hacks upon hacks upon hacks. It doesn't even work right! Did any of the people who bought these coins try to ever use them for anything?

Re: Why I find IOTA alarming

#79
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Custom crypto primitives (ciphers, hashes, etc.) is a big red flag to me unless the designers are cryptographers. I know a fair bit about crypto. I would implement (and have implemented) higher order constructions like encrypted and authenticated protocols according to design patterns and principles put forward by competent cryptographers. I would never ever even attempt to design a cipher or a cryptographically stro…

> Actual deep cryptography such as cipher design is an area where truly extreme and very esoteric expertise is required to even get started I hear this every time cryptography is brought up. I think I get that it's hard, but people make it sound like it's the hardest thing ever . Where does this extreme complexity stem from? And what's the field of knowledge required? (Mathematics I imagine)

> I hear this every time cryptography is brought up. I think I get that it's hard, but people make it sound like it's the hardest thing ever.

It’s not literally the hardest thing ever, but it’s probably in that category of difficulty with a few other domains. There are several reasons why this is the case.

First, to understand cryptography well enough to safely design a novel cryptosystem requires significant knowledge of information theory, complexity theory and approximately all of undergraduate mathematics. If you’re only developing symmetric encryption cryptosystems or primitives like hash functions, you can probably stop there. If you’re developing a novel public-key cryptosystem, you will be adding on graduate-level study in number theory and algebra; in particular for advanced topics in elliptic curves, coding theory and vector spaces (lattices). Throw in game thory while you’re at it to model cryptosystems and their security proofs. You don’t need everything from every course, and it doesn’t have to happen in a strictly academic setting, but you still need to acquire that knowledge if you want to design novel systems.

Second, while a lot of “hard” fields require knowledge of very advanced topics in math, cryptography is somewhat unique in that the incentive to identify a mistake in your design is extraordinary. Designing an imperfect alternative to bcrypt or scrypt results in absolute catastrophe for real-world user privacy and monetary assets if a serious vulnerability is found after it’s widely adopted. Simply put: this is an arms race, and most software does not need to be designed to be fault-tolerant in an actively hostile environment. This elevates the design difficulty to what you could call the “military setting.”

Finally, and corollary my second point, cryptography is very difficult to implement. It’s fairly easy to choose the wrong parameter when you’re implementing a cryptographic primitive from a specification, or to accidentally destroy the security of the cryptosystem in an attempt to make it a bit faster (e.g. lattice reduction). And other than that you need to defend against a battery of side channel attacks, which introduces another level of complexity.

I personally understand a lot of academic cryptography (but the more you learn the less you actually know...), and I’d say that, categorically speaking, cryptography is comparable to rocket science. I’m not claiming it’s absolutely as hard, but it shares many of the broad strokes. It’s not brain meltingly difficult in any single dimension (I find cryptography papers far easier to read than some blog posts by Terence Tao, for example), but the conceptual addition of a “safety” requirement makes everything more complex. It elevates the requisite mathematical knowledge and engineering rigor needed to design and implement a good cryptosystem.

Re: Why I find IOTA alarming

#80

Oh man, this article reminded me I should sell what little IOTA I have, so I tried to. Here's what happened: I launched my wallet and saw a zero balance and zero transactions. I looked around and heard from some friends that I need to convert my funds or something, because there was a "snapshot" yesterday. I clicked the "re-attach" button and waited for a few minutes. It failed, so I did it again and again and again.…

No offense but your comment is unintentionally humorous because you're asking all these sane questions blaming the mindless people who bought into IOTA, but you happen to be one of them as you describe yourself.

> This is absolutely insane and I can't believe this thing ever got traction.

It got traction because people--including yourself--bought into it without thinking much.

> It feels like hacks upon hacks upon hacks. It doesn't even work right! Did any of the people who bought these coins try to ever use them for anything?

Yeah, like yourself. You never actually tried to use the coins for anything until this point when you are now finally trying to "cash out".

Post reply on HN