Monero Research Lab Meeting - Wed 31 July 2024, 17:00 UTC

Logs

< rucknium:monero.social > Meeting time!

< rucknium:monero.social > 1) Greetings

< vtnerd:monero.social > Hi

< jeffro256:monero.social > howdy

< rbrunner > Hello

< one-horse-wagon:monero.social > Hello.

< 0xfffc:monero.social > Hi everyone

< jberman:monero.social > waves

< rucknium:monero.social > Meeting issue: https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/1048

< kayabanerve:matrix.org > 👋

< rucknium:monero.social > 2) Updates. What is everyone working on?

< rucknium:monero.social > me: Comments on some tx broadcast PRs. Reading papers on gossip protocols and their privacy, bandwidth, and speed.

< vtnerd:monero.social > I'm working (right now) on jeffro256 pr for blockchain syncing - hopefully we can get this shipped today. Also doing LWS frontend stuff atm

< 0xfffc:monero.social > Reading and familiarizing myself with my broadcast mechanisms. I have started implementing this: https://github.com/monero-project/monero/issues/9334#issue-2306257939

< 0xfffc:monero.social > Reading and familiarizing myself with broadcast mechanisms. I have started implementing this: https://github.com/monero-project/monero/issues/9334#issue-2306257939

< jeffro256:monero.social > Me: writing the carrot doc. Draft is here https://github.com/jeffro256/carrot/blob/master/release/carrot_0.1.md

< 0xfffc:monero.social > Reading the erlay paper and familiarizing myself with broadcast mechanisms. I have started implementing this: https://github.com/monero-project/monero/issues/9334#issue-2306257939

< kayabanerve:monero.social > I've been preparing crates for auditing, once our current reviews wraps up.

< rucknium:monero.social > 0xfffc: Looks like we are looking at a similar area

< jberman:monero.social > me: working on adding fcmp++'s to the cryptonote::transaction class

< rucknium:monero.social > 3) Stress testing monerod https://github.com/monero-project/monero/issues/9348

_< sgp:monero.social >__ Hello

< rucknium:monero.social > spackle created a new release version for stressnet. It pulled in everything that is in the new monero master plus the invalid blocks fix and jeffro256 's PR to reduce tx writes from 2 to 1.

< rucknium:monero.social > Things seem to be running smoothly with the new release so far

< rucknium:monero.social > Any more comments on stressnet?

< one-horse-wagon:monero.social > Rucknium: Is there any projected date as to when stressnet will end?

< rucknium:monero.social > That's still being discussed.

< one-horse-wagon:monero.social > My feelings are to keep it going until every stress idea has been exhausted.

< 0xfffc:monero.social > Around August 8,9 spackle will leave stressnet, and me Rucknium will maintain the repo. We expect to continue stress-net but with much less nodes.

< 0xfffc:monero.social > ( spackle did a great job so far. So hats off to his work )

< rucknium:monero.social > Yes that's the loose plan now

< rucknium:monero.social > 4) Potential measures against a black marble attack. https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/119

< rucknium:monero.social > A group claimed responsibility for the suspected spam transactions earlier this year: https://antidark.net/board/viewtopic.php?t=10

< rucknium:monero.social > They said that their objective was not to launch an anti-privacy black marble attack, but to congest the txpool to try to exploit some mechanisms in some services' withdrawal logic.

< rucknium:monero.social > Anyone want to share opinions about this?

< kayabanerve:matrix.org > When I first read it, there was no evidence of their claims, and it didn't completely make sense. I wouldn't care too much about it. I'm unsure if they've added more detail though to justify their story.

< jeffro256:monero.social > Agreed: As of yet it is unverified. Might be a mistake to assume that a black marble attack did not occur because some rando on a forum said so

< rucknium:monero.social > I basically concur. But they did say something that a person who prepared spam txs would know: wallet2 does not perform well when 200,000 accounts are created.

< jeffro256:monero.social > This looks to be a followup (maybe): https://antidark.net/board/viewtopic.php?t=15

< basses:matrix.org > There are some discussion from antidark members https://monero.town/post/3785880

< basses:matrix.org > yes

< rucknium:monero.social > In the followup they answer a comment about why won't they release the spam wallet(s) view keys. They said that they would not release it.

< rucknium:monero.social > It would be bad for user privacy if the suspected spammer actually released the spam wallet(s) view key(s).

< rucknium:monero.social > Releasing the view keys would prove that they actually were responsible for the spam (or at least that the entity that was responsible gave them the view keys.

< rbrunner > I guess it doesn't change much for us overall whether it really was this group or not.

< kayabanerve:matrix.org > I'd rather such a theoretical view key not float around.

< rucknium:monero.social > 5) Research Pre-Seraphis Full-Chain Membership Proofs. https://www.getmonero.org/2024/04/27/fcmps.html

< kayabanerve:matrix.org > I don't have much more to say than my initial comment. Veridise is moving forward with the R1CS gadget for evaluating this week, and there's preliminary opinions on the GBP proof review.

< rucknium:monero.social > I saw this paper: https://distributedlab.com/whitepaper/Bulletproofs-Construction-and-Examples.pdf "This document introduces some clarification and corrections to Bulletproofs++ [Eag+23] paper."

< rucknium:monero.social > The paper probably isn't very relevant for Monero right now since BP++ is not going forward in the Monero protocol AFAIK.

< kayabanerve:matrix.org > I saw the note it existed. I wouldn't change the perception of BP++, as Aaron reviewed it, at this time.

< kayabanerve:matrix.org > If this leads to a new revision of BP++, then that may be eligible for rereview, but...

< rucknium:monero.social > Any more topics anyone wants to discuss?

< jeffro256:monero.social > Who would be some good auditors for the new addressing protocol ?

< jeffro256:monero.social > Whether that be Jamtis or Carrot or something else

< aaron:cypherstack.com > FYI the Cypher Stack review of the Veridise report should be released to kayabanerve today as an initial draft for comment

< aaron:cypherstack.com > Very curious on the GBP opinion :D

< kayabanerve:monero.social > :D

< rucknium:monero.social > That reminds me that Cypher Stack reviewed a protocol that seemed to add return addresses to Monero-like txs, which has been on getmonero.org's roadmap for a while: https://github.com/cypherstack/salvium-review/releases/download/final/final.pdf

< aaron:cypherstack.com > We did that review, yes

< kayabanerve:monero.social > jeffro256: You'd need to define the desired properties.

< kayabanerve:monero.social > Presumably, a variety of indistinguishability properties.

< jeffro256:monero.social > I have a list of informal security and indistinguishability properties that I plan to add later. Also working on writing a condensed abstraction of FCMP++ requirements for Carrot (i.e. O = x G = y T, C = z G + a H, 0 <= a < 2**64, L = x Hp(O), sender needs knowledge of x, y, z, a, outgoing view wallet needs knowledge of x, etc)

< jeffro256:monero.social > Is this the right path?

< jeffro256:monero.social > *O = x G + y T

< rucknium:monero.social > kayabanerve: What do you think ^ ?

< rbrunner > Seems to me if Cypher Stack reviews something like this Salvium, they are in a good spot to review our "stuff" as well. Looks pretty ambitious, by the way, that Salvium project.

< aaron:cypherstack.com > I can't speak for Cypher Stack, but I would certainly advocate that the company put in a bid for such a review (for the addressing, I mean)

< kayabanerve:matrix.org > I'd have to see the document to properly comment, sorry.

< jeffro256:monero.social > Aaron Feickert: thanks !

< jeffro256:monero.social > kayabanerve: fair enough, will try to do later today

< rucknium:monero.social > I think we can end the meeting here. Thanks all.

< jeffro256:monero.social > Thanks everyone !

monero-project / meta

Monero Research Lab Meeting - Wed 31 July 2024, 17:00 UTC #1048

1044