Jump to content

Professor Hantzen

Bronze Member
  • Content Count

    529
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to Ezip1 in SEC Called me after I inquired about digital assets on an online forum.   
    So I don't remember exactly which online form I filled out, but I remember a tweet coming out from the SEC and it gave me the opportunity to ask a question. -
    10 Mins ago, I just got a call from a Washington DC Number, and the man said he was calling from the SEC following up on an online inquiry.
    We have a brief conversation about crypto and specifically, XRP.
    Ultimately, he said that the only two assets that have been addressed  per the chairman's statement are Bitcoin and Ether. No determination has been made about any other asset, including XRP. and to the best of his knowledge, there would be guidance coming out from their office in the future, but he didn't have a date to offer.
    Unfortunately, he didn't give me anything new that I already didn't know from my trips down the rabbit hole, but at least they're taking notice.
  2. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to tulo in Distributed exchanges and transactions privacy [frontrunning]   
    I was wondering what can be a solution or what already was developed for DLT to make transactions private.
    I explain better: in DLT many nodes (or all the nodes) will receive transactions before they are applied to ledger. This leads to the "problem" that the owner of the nodes will know the transactions before they will be applied in the network. This is a huge problem if we don't want frontrunning behaviors as it can be done in XRPL.
    So I was wondering if there is a mechanism to anonymize the transactions in DLT, something like the accounts anonymization in Monero but for transactions, such that the nodes will receive some information about the transaction but they are not able to understand the real transaction. And it should be applied also to XRPL.
  3. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to Routerz121 in SEC response to FOIA request regarding security status   
    Back in August I received this response from the SEC regarding my FOIA about XRP's security status. Doesn't tell us much but make of it what you will. 


  4. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to TokenBaby in The Great Market Capitalization Hoax   
    The whole "XRP passed ETH and is now #2" is getting annoying. It shows how immature and uninformed many in the "crypto news" space are.
    1. XRP has been ahead of ETH for a very long time! In terms of market capitalization, XRP has been #2 (behind BTC) for a while! All XRP already exists (~99,991,780,039 left). The problem is sites like CoinMarketCap and others don’t show the whole picture. They only show "circulating supply." The problem with "circulating supply" is that it doesn't make any sense. What's the difference between hodling and escrow? Nothing, besides a smart contract expiration date. Which means everyone who hodls XRP in a wallet, should also not be counted in the "circulating supply." Again, this makes no sense. As you can see from https://xrpcharts.ripple.com/ the true market capitalization of XRP is ~49B, not ~20B as CoinMarketCap would have the world believe.
    2. The way CoinMarketCap and others display digital assets is silly when you think about. What other asset class has a leader board? Where is the commodities leader board? Where is the stock leader board?
    3. Ripple (XRP II) has more XRP than any other person or company. Do you think they care about market capitalization or do they care more about volume!? Market cap in the context of XRP is not the metric of importance; volume is. But try telling that to the crypto community.

  5. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Xrpdude in XRP Ledger transaction volume surpasses total trading volume   
    Historically, payment volume often far exceeded transaction volume.  Its easy for even a single actor (with at least two accounts) to spam up millions and billions of payment volume at very little expense sending the same funds back and forth.  Transactions however usually will incur significant risk if one were to attempt the same as they have to deal with price/orderbook fluctuations and/or spread, and/or IOU fees.  As such, it's likely payment volume will peak out greater at times and with no impactful cause.  The balance between the two is therefore not a reliable indicator.  Maybe in a few years when the landscape has changed - but at the moment the ledger is mainly populated by people testing things out. Any single entity conducting a relatively cheap on-ledger payments stress-test could for example cause a peak in payments volume.  Or an actor with badly written code (something we've seen a few times in other areas).
  6. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Xrpdude in XRP Ledger transaction volume surpasses total trading volume   
    Historically, payment volume often far exceeded transaction volume.  Its easy for even a single actor (with at least two accounts) to spam up millions and billions of payment volume at very little expense sending the same funds back and forth.  Transactions however usually will incur significant risk if one were to attempt the same as they have to deal with price/orderbook fluctuations and/or spread, and/or IOU fees.  As such, it's likely payment volume will peak out greater at times and with no impactful cause.  The balance between the two is therefore not a reliable indicator.  Maybe in a few years when the landscape has changed - but at the moment the ledger is mainly populated by people testing things out. Any single entity conducting a relatively cheap on-ledger payments stress-test could for example cause a peak in payments volume.  Or an actor with badly written code (something we've seen a few times in other areas).
  7. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Xrpdude in XRP Ledger transaction volume surpasses total trading volume   
    Historically, payment volume often far exceeded transaction volume.  Its easy for even a single actor (with at least two accounts) to spam up millions and billions of payment volume at very little expense sending the same funds back and forth.  Transactions however usually will incur significant risk if one were to attempt the same as they have to deal with price/orderbook fluctuations and/or spread, and/or IOU fees.  As such, it's likely payment volume will peak out greater at times and with no impactful cause.  The balance between the two is therefore not a reliable indicator.  Maybe in a few years when the landscape has changed - but at the moment the ledger is mainly populated by people testing things out. Any single entity conducting a relatively cheap on-ledger payments stress-test could for example cause a peak in payments volume.  Or an actor with badly written code (something we've seen a few times in other areas).
  8. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Xrpdude in XRP Ledger transaction volume surpasses total trading volume   
    Historically, payment volume often far exceeded transaction volume.  Its easy for even a single actor (with at least two accounts) to spam up millions and billions of payment volume at very little expense sending the same funds back and forth.  Transactions however usually will incur significant risk if one were to attempt the same as they have to deal with price/orderbook fluctuations and/or spread, and/or IOU fees.  As such, it's likely payment volume will peak out greater at times and with no impactful cause.  The balance between the two is therefore not a reliable indicator.  Maybe in a few years when the landscape has changed - but at the moment the ledger is mainly populated by people testing things out. Any single entity conducting a relatively cheap on-ledger payments stress-test could for example cause a peak in payments volume.  Or an actor with badly written code (something we've seen a few times in other areas).
  9. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Xrpdude in XRP Ledger transaction volume surpasses total trading volume   
    Historically, payment volume often far exceeded transaction volume.  Its easy for even a single actor (with at least two accounts) to spam up millions and billions of payment volume at very little expense sending the same funds back and forth.  Transactions however usually will incur significant risk if one were to attempt the same as they have to deal with price/orderbook fluctuations and/or spread, and/or IOU fees.  As such, it's likely payment volume will peak out greater at times and with no impactful cause.  The balance between the two is therefore not a reliable indicator.  Maybe in a few years when the landscape has changed - but at the moment the ledger is mainly populated by people testing things out. Any single entity conducting a relatively cheap on-ledger payments stress-test could for example cause a peak in payments volume.  Or an actor with badly written code (something we've seen a few times in other areas).
  10. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to namini in Banned from /r/ripple on reddit   
    Hi,
    I was banned (permaban) from https://www.reddit.com/r/Ripple/ by "nvok" moderator. My account was some years old, 0 warning, just a permanent ban simply for talking about the subject of security. Did anyone else get banned on this subbreddit and feel like it was unjustified?
  11. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to Sukrim in secp256k1 endomorphisms   
    https://github.com/ripple/rippled/blob/develop/src/secp256k1/configure.ac#L117-L120 seems to indicate that this is not set by default and I haven't found a place where it would get set by cmake when building the library. You could probably set it here: https://github.com/ripple/rippled/blob/develop/CMakeLists.txt#L630-L636
  12. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to caroma in secp256k1 endomorphisms   
    By default, secp256k1's does not use the efficiently-computable endomorphism in performing point multiplication. I cannot seem to find if this is being used in rippled or not. Would anyone know if rippled uses endomorphisms?  
  13. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to caroma in secp256k1 endomorphisms   
    @Professor Hantzen will do. I'm currently working on a project to see if the energy consumption of the current protocol can be improved, since there really isn't any monetary incentive to running a ripple node/validator...might as well try to get the cost down as much as possible to encourage more people to participate. I'll be sure to post my findings as they are made. 
  14. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from caroma in secp256k1 endomorphisms   
    @caroma If you enable this and are able to improve rippled performance, maybe post a github issue with your findings (https://github.com/ripple/rippled/issues) and see if this can be made the default?
  15. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to Sukrim in Stock Node vs. Validator   
    It still needs to decide if the validators on its UNL have reached consensus, it just won't actively sign and communicate its own opinion about the current open ledger.
  16. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to nikb in Stock Node vs. Validator   
    Mostly because the code doesn’t support Ed25519 validator keys. There is an open PR (#2647) to allow validators to use Ed25519 to sign and it will get merged.
    To answer your question a little more broadly: a conscious decision was made to use the same algorithm as Bitcoin. But beyond just that, remember that the paper by Bernstein, Schwabe, Lang and Yang only got published around the end of 2011, so Ed25519 would have been way too new to seriously consider using at that point.
  17. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to caroma in Stock Node vs. Validator   
    @nikb @Sukrim @Professor Hantzen Thank you for your help and timely responses! Clears up a lot of my confusion. In terms of signing, referring to another question i have posted here and from my understanding of the source code, signing a message digest is done exclusively with secp256k1. Is there a reason why we do not have the option to sign with ed25519? Much appreciated!
  18. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from KarmaCoverage in What's the best way to store a secret to be used in a script?   
    That depends on the use-case and how it's set up.  In some situations there will be an advantage - possibly significant.  In others, there will be none.  In the case of a malicious actor executing a predefined set of transactions for a market maker for example, the net loss may be minimal - a bunch of sells or buys executed and resulting in a unintended configuration of funds and the payment of fees, but no actual loss.  However, the same malicious actor gaining access to a hot wallet could do whatever they wish with whatever funds that wallet controls.
  19. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from KarmaCoverage in What's the best way to store a secret to be used in a script?   
    If you need to sign transactions dynamically and frequently via a script, there is really nothing you can do to improve security beyond that of the machine running the script.  The secret will have to be stored in memory somewhere, so your script can use it.  You could use a secure element, but if the script can access the secure element, so can someone with control of the machine.  

    If you have enough similarity in your transaction dynamics, you could theoretically sign batches of valid, labelled transactions offline (by sequence number), and manually transfer them to the online machine at regular intervals.  Your script could then select the appropriate transactions throughout the time period.  The danger then is limited to a malicious actor choosing to execute only the full set of transactions for that period of time.  As this was going to happen anyway - and depending on what your script is doing - this may minimise any potential damage somewhat.
  20. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from pucksterpete in Bitstamp selects trading system from Cinnober   
    Assuming its Fair Fair Fair...
  21. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from LetHerRip in Does XRP Have a Name Problem?   
    @Stormchaser417 It's not called or pronounced "zerp". That's an unofficial nickname given by some community members (personally, I can't stand it - for similar reasons to you - but I believe people are free to call things whatever they want and from that angle I support it 100%).  

    Any official reference always pronounces each letter "X-R-P", for example, when spoken about by it's inventors.  "XRP", pronounced as an acronym, is the name.
  22. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from pucksterpete in Bitstamp selects trading system from Cinnober   
    Assuming its Fair Fair Fair...
  23. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from pucksterpete in Bitstamp selects trading system from Cinnober   
    Assuming its Fair Fair Fair...
  24. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to pucksterpete in Bitstamp selects trading system from Cinnober   
    Fast Fast Fast is always better
  25. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to Trickery in Does XRP Have a Name Problem?   
    Yeah I find zerp to be a little amateur as a name but I also find XRP to be a bit of a cop out from Ripple, XRP is X as in not a sovereign currency and RP as in Ripple so I always think of them as Ripples.
×