Stake-To-Farm (STF) protecting the network

If it is clear a big attack on the SAFE network has taken place, it is probably good publicity. Also how difficult is it to do an attack with a lot of vaults and staying unknown?

2 Likes

If I’m a new SAFE user with no safecoin how do I create a vault to GET safecoin to create a vault to farm safecoin? Assume I’m a user that knows nothing about exchanges and is new to cryptocurrency and is not inclined to spend REAL money on this SAFE network thingy.

Why do millenials eat tide pods? If people CAN do something then someone will for some god awful reason. Humanity needs therapy.

I was saying IF. I gave the issues IF you did weaken account security

IF you weaken account security so that a section can read the account info then a baddie can read everyones (in the section) account info.

But in actually SAFE is secure so that a section NODE’s cannot read the account info and thus CANNOT read how many coins you have so PoS is impossible without changing the core security concept.

Yea if you combine the “IF you change things” with “what it is actually” then they will contradict won’t they

Vaults DO NOT KEEP Balances. Where did you get that one from. There is no mechanism and also it removes security to attempt to do so.

When a vault is given a coin all that happens is that a coin is created and the owner is set to the ID stored with the vault and a message is sent to the ID. The vault isn’t even being told it earned. But this may change with the response from the coin create attempt. (true/false)

No no no no The core code is given the information from the user who CAN access their account. The addresses are supplied through the API. The only list is kept by the user, usually in a wallet record and that is encrypted. The network cannot decrypt that even if it knew where to look.

The network (NODES) cannot see this information. If they could then a bad NODES could read everyones info that uses that section.

I think you missed the basic security issue here

  • Account information is Encrypted on the network. Only decrypted on the users device using the account secrets.
  • No NODE can read anyones account record or any list of coins they may have stored somewhere
  • The network has no way to know where to look for any coin list the user has. And the coin list is encrypted.
  • To provide a mechanism to see the list or account info by the section then breaks SAFE security and allows all NODES in a section to see account info of everyone. If the section can read the account info then everyone can, the NODEs are run by people remember and they can patch the code to disclose any unencrypted information.

Oh and the point about PARSEC was missed entirely.

One of the MAJOR selling points of PARSEC is that it is permission-less.

  • Permission-less means you do not need permission to be a part of it.
  • PARSEC permission-less is compared to PoS permission consensus and considered better than PoS
  • So you will make PARSEC permission consensus and broken one of its major selling points. Actually it is changing PARSEC to a PoS system.

Domain squatting would seem a higher priority/ real world issue that absolutely needs resolving.

3 Likes

Based on one of your own proposals like [this one] for example (Proposal for SAFEcoin division - read datastructure topic first - please discuss). Vaults have different personas, so client_manager etc. If you want to spend a divided Safecoin somehow that address needs to be frozen. And you also need an index somewhere to register who has what balance. There’s also a PUT-balance for example. That is on a per-token-base so you can indeed not know someone’s whole balance. But there is an index per coin if it’s divided. Not in the code currently that’s correct.

We can go on in circles here but I don’t think that’s the case. Staking in this case could mean that you make a public transaction recorded in a datachain. SAFE does allow for public transactions. So you could drop some Safecoin on an address… Nobody knows where it did came from…

Next thing you become part of a group and that group says: Do you have Safecoin? Give us that address (could be made public) and remove your ownership. Now it’s just an address and you burned maybe 3 or 4 Safecoin on which the group reached consensus you did. Now you’ve spent 4 Safecoin just to be able to farm and nothing is changed to PARSEC. It was just used to reach consensus on the fact you did burn some tokens.

Once you get to the level of Elder and get your coins back you could be allowed to Farm until you succeeded in getting these Safecoin (different ones probably) back. You move these to a non-public address again and you’re good.

You just download the binary for that and start Farming. That’s how it is now. If my idea got implemented you started the software (Vault) and it would ask you for some balance. That’s indeed a problem if you don’t have any money or can use an exchange to buy/sell. But it’s until the network is at several million Vaults. From that point on I think it’s close to impossible to take over a group.

And if you read it it is the section’s own wallet data structure so obviously the sections can read it. It is their own data

AGAIN NODES cannot read the data that is not theirs. Account and wallet data is not theirs. A vault is not an account. Its only holds a single value, the ID, that the vault has and the ID is sent the coin, not the vault.

Well it is.

Its plain english. PoS is a permisson based consensus.

PARSEC is a permission-less consensus

They are DIFFERENT things and including PoS into SAFE is to remove permission-less.

HOW does it know the balance??? The vault only has an ID to send coins to.

To know the balance you need to read the user’s account and sections cannot do that since its is encoded.

PoS is permission less, like bitcoin mining or node aging it means you need to spend some resources to participate in consensus, as opposed to getting someones permission.

Permissioned consensus is basically that someone adds your private key to a list of who can participate in consensus.

1 Like

PARSEC is a consensus mechanism that’s used in SAFE. Where in this topic did I ever propose to change the consensus algo in SAFE? It’s actually quite weird to claim I did or that the idea of Staking does. Also: my idea is not called Proof-Of-Stake. That’s really apples and pears. POS is used in blockchains and SAFE doesn’t has one. It is used in blockchain systems to allow someone to make a block. Again; where in this topic did I talked about using any form of Stake to create any block?? Nowhere, because that has nothing to do with this whole idea. The idea is just used for Staking coins the moment you want to Farm Safecoin. It has again nothing to do with any form of consensus.

And that needs to be done here because the PoS suggested HAS to know the coins. So the user has to give the section the keys to their coin ID and wallet list in order to allow that section to know they have coins in order to give them permission to be a NODE

So it does make it a permissioned consensus

It is a consequence of PoS - see just above

The request to give up some Safecoin before you can Farm changes the consensus system in SAFE??? My god… I don’t know where you got this idea Rob but it’s quite far off from what I proposed here. And please stop calling it Proof-Of-Stake. That’s something completely different used in blockchain systems.

You asked for consequences and I just explained why

Otherwise the section has no way to know cryptography that the person has the coins. The only way is to reveal to the section the keys so the section can verify the wallet and the list has the coins. And the section needs to keep checking so that you don’t move the coins to another wallet and startup a new node. Thus you need to register the keys with the section and that fits @ intrz’s definition of a permissioned system. And I won’t mention the security breach by giving your keys to other people who run the nodes since they can mod the node’s code to reveal them.

And the consequence of that is you now have PoS which is a permissioned system

Proving the stake is what its all about. You have to prove to the section your stake and allow the section to prove you keep them while being a node. So is that not proof of stake at its basis

Like I said, in SAFE the idea is to allow for public addresses/transactions as well.

Here it is :fu:.

So you can become part of a group, you can show that group a “used once” public address and you can also say to that group: “This is my public address with 4 Safecoin in it”. And then that group could verify that and request you give up ownership. If you do within the next few seconds they reach consensus on the fact that you indeed burned some tokens. No need to change any consensus algo.

Lets do this one step at a time

Where is this list of coins?

No, sorry. This will keep going around in circles. All fine though, people should shoot etc. But claiming I proposed POS and changing the consensus system is so far off of what I proposed that this is not gonna work. You don’t like the idea of any Stake and that’s fine. I think we need need something like that at least until we reach several million Vaults. Let’s keep it that way :+1:.

I think we should be careful with adding additional layers of complexity (the arch-nemesis of security), and so far the arguments that this increases the security of the network seem quite speculative. It’s good to discuss ideas such as this, but until there’s a strong argument (or better, a showcase in a testnet) that the network needs staking of coins to be secure I’m not in favour.

5 Likes

That is why I wanted to do it one step at a time, because we at times are answering posts out of order. So that we don’t go in circles and we can sort out each step along the way and maybe find something that works. But fine, I’ll stop. Pretty said all that I am going to other than we MAX Nodes for protection.

Maybe stupid idea :sweat_smile:, but in the startup phase of the network you can also put each new potential node in ‘quarantine’ for a week or so. The node has to be available for 24/7, the network will check this. If it passes this ‘proof-of-dedication’ then it will become part of the network as real node.
Botnets and hijacked PC’s will probably not pass this test.
Of course you can/must only do this in the startup phase.

2 Likes