Quote from: coins101 on April 28, 2014, 01:12:30 AM

Quote from: ErrorId on April 28, 2014, 01:03:22 AM

Quote from: eduffield on April 27, 2014, 09:38:22 PM

Quote from: LimLims on April 27, 2014, 08:43:47 PM

Quote from: humanitee on April 27, 2014, 08:36:49 PM

Quote from: LimLims on April 27, 2014, 08:32:50 PM

Quote from: humanitee on April 27, 2014, 08:17:49 PM

Quote from: LimLims on April 27, 2014, 08:15:52 PM

I don't get how the 2 machine masternode setup is more secure. If someone can break into either, your setup is toast. And the wallet's security is independent of the machines hosting it -- it relies on the strength of your password & the encryption algorithm. I can't see how the 2 machine configuration helps at all.

Because your master node IP is static, broadcast to the network, and an attacker knows 1000 DRK is on it. Your local machine IP is not listed on the master node list with the 2 machine setup and there are no coins on the server that's running the master node. Double win.

If we could get a port of Armory for Darkcoin you could theoretically do all this with the coins in cold storage. Triple win.

Masternode has to communicate with the node holding the coins, to verify the 1000 DRK are there. So if the masternode can do that, so can an attacker who has compromised the masternode. From there, they just need to break into the secondary node holding the wallet, which will presumably have no better security than the one they already broke into.

I very much doubt the remote master node knows the private keys, because as you have pointed out, it would be of no advantage.

The way I'm thinking about this is that an attacker follows this path:

Get static IP of masternode --> compromise masternode --> figure out IP of secondary node by [magic] --> compromise secondary node

The [magic] part I'm assuming must be possible because the masternode must at some point communicate with the secondary node. But maybe there's some reason why this is infeasible?

Nope, they don't need to communicate. The masternode with the money just needs to sign a message with it. That node broadcasts it to the whole network. After than the secondary masternode is good to go.

So if I read this correctly what Evan is saying is that once the machine that doesn't hold the 1k drk get's approved by the one with the 1k drk it's a master node and the machine that holds the dark is no longer required allowing you to backup your wallet and put it away for safe keeping. Am I right?

But in that case I'm confused about how the collateral will work. Where will the .1 drk fee for bad actors come from? Or are we way past that point?

Quote from: eduffield on April 27, 2014, 10:52:06 PM

Quote from: kaene on April 27, 2014, 10:18:36 PM

Quote from: Donho on April 27, 2014, 09:44:04 PM

Quote from: kaene on April 27, 2014, 09:43:25 PM

Quote from: eduffield on April 27, 2014, 09:38:22 PM

Nope, they don't need to communicate. The masternode with the money just needs to sign a message with it. That node broadcasts it to the whole network. After than the secondary masternode is good to go.

Could you disconnect the masternode with the money from the network and even send it to cold storage once the secondary masternode is in the network?

that's the whole point of it Cheesy

Yeah, I basically wanted an official confirmation Tongue

Nope, both need to be online. At least for now.

So it's in the works. Thanks.