6 ms·
> The secret key (“cryptographic toxic waste”) generated during this phase can be used to steal money - currently in the form of creating counterfeit coins, ste
by runeks 9y ago
> The secret key (“cryptographic toxic waste”) generated during this phase can be used to steal money - currently in the form of creating counterfeit coins, stealing from everyone collectively.
> As one of those participants, here’s my account of what I did to ensure that secret was destroyed.
Regardless of what he did or did not do to destroy this secret, doesn’t this make ZCash inherently non-trustless? If we trust that these people are honest, why not just have them sign messages with their keys to resolve double-spends, rather than build an elaborate system on top of this trust?
In other words, the ZCash crypto might be trustless itself, but if it’s employed on top of a base that requires trust, what’s the point in the first place? The weakest link is at the base.
“If you just trust me, I have some really cool trustless crypto to show you”
- petertodd 9y agoThe trust involved in the Zcash trusted setup is a significantly better type of trust than what you're suggesting, because you only have to trust the people involved once. Signing messages is an ongoing trust, which is far more vulnerable to attack.
- runeks 9y ago> The trust involved in the Zcash trusted setup is a significantly better type of trust than what you're suggesting, because you only have to trust the people involved once. I disagree. Since there’s no way for you to prove that you have actually destroyed the secret in question, there’s no way for me to know where that key is now and, hence, how long I need to trust you. “Only having to trust the people involved once” presupposes that I trust that they have destroyed the key properly, otherwise the key might still be out there, and the trust would be ongoing in this case as well.
- Doxin 9y agoWorst case the two scenarios equate to the same thing. Namely there's one or more people you need to trust indefinitely. Best case however is where they differ a lot. Best case for this method is trusting someone once. Best case for the other method is still trusting one or more people indefinitely.
- ringaroundthetx 9y ago> Nothing you will read below changes the fact that you’re trusting me and five other participants not to collude. Full stop. End of story. It is IMPOSSIBLE for myself and the other participants to prove to a third party that we did not collude to keep the secret key. If you do not believe you can trust me, you should stop reading now.