CUTcoin (CUT) Coin Review : It Is Good Or Bad Review 2021

About CUTcoin

CUTcoin are professionals with a deep understanding and a strong belief in cryptography and blockchain. The believe that open-source development is a true key towards decentralization and building an inclusive economy and, given that, the CUT project belongs to all the people from the crypto community. That’s one of the reasons why the core team remains anonymous. Names don’t matter — smooth and breach-free code does. The believe in delivering great results as opposed to giving long term promises and wild ass guess predictions.

CUTcoin In 2008 Satoshi Nakamoto published the manifesto ”Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System” [1] that supposed to be a kick off to the modern cryptography-based financial system. The paper gave a short but exhaustive recipe of how several relatively simple technologies can be combined together to obtain a qualitatively new phenomena that was called ’Bitcoin’, or cryptocurrency. They include digital signatures, distributed p2p database, or ’blockchain’, the concept of ’consensus’, or agreement between nodes in the p2p network and a set of the rules of governance. Further on we will walk through the privacy aspects of different coins, the consensus algorithms pros and cons, and finally elaborate on the motivation for the new coin development.

CUTcoin Comparing to fiat currencies, Bitcoin has obvious advantages: there’s no trusted party it depends on; fast and transparent transaction processing and, among others, privacy. Privacy may be a requirement due to personal reasons, but it’s also important as in the modern world the vast majority of payments made both by individuals and companies are processed in an electronic form. The corresponding information about transactions and the involved parties is confidential, however, it can be stored and accumulated by banks, authorities and other financial institutions. This data attracts attackers around the globe, sometimes they get unauthorized access and use it for fraud, fishing, etc, that evolves into financial and reputational losses [2, 3]. Traditionally, financial institutions protect clients’ data by restricting access to their informational systems. There’s also an alternative that lies behind cryptocurrency.

CUTcoin (CUT) Storage Key Points

Consensus Algorithms

The absence of a single trusted party is definitely the strong side of cryptocurrencies. Instead of trusting to somebody participants achieve consensus on the history of the operations in the system. We don’t discuss these mechanisms in details and generally follow this analysis [11]. First cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin rely on Proof of Work (PoW) algorithm. If a node (miner) wants to add a new block into the blockchain they need to solve a difficult (resource consuming) task. One of them does it first, creates the block, publish it and receives the reward. Other network participants receive a block and before accept it can easily check that a certain amount of work has been done. There may be a situation when different blocks come to different nodes at the same blockchain height, then alternative versions of the blockchain appear. There is a rule that allows one to solve this problem: any node accepts the longest alternative of the blockchain as the true version. In the most cases after several rounds of adding of new blocks nodes select one of the alternatives in the network.

Motivation There are lots of cryptocurrencies that claim to be ’private’, but it is just a few of them to have privacy that is proved by the cryptographic apparatus used to conduct transactions. Monero coin looks most solid amongst them so we chose it as the base for Cutcoin. However, Monero miners have to mine new blocks using expensive equipment, following the mining algorithm updates and spending electricity. The idea of using PoS as the consensus algorithm for transactions looks promising. So all that being said, Cutcoin is the first private cryptocurrency with Proof of Stake consensus algorithm. The most challenging problem of a stake verification and preserving of privacy at the same time was successfully solved, further on we provide technical details.

Average Block Creation Time

From (7) we can see that the average block creation time can be easily changed by just tuning of t0 value, see Figure 5. PoW consensus algorithms need to keep this value big enough as it let miners to do much work and make it expensive for potential attacker to reorganize a blockchain. In opposite, PoS blockchain sustainability doesn’t suffer in case of relatively small t0 as it is protected by the random choice of unspent outputs to sign blocks. It looks like a big advantage as lets process much more transactions per time unit and decrease blatancies

Conclusion

In this paper we have presented a new private coin based on Proof of Stake consensus algorithm. PoS coins are sustainable for various types of attacks 16and provide larger functionality than traditional PoW ones. We proposed the randomization mechanism for the choice of the next block miner. The achieved randomness is regularized so that the probability is proportional to the account’s balance, that means block rewards have fair distribution between users. Another advantage is possibility of ’fast forging’, that means the block generation time is about tens of seconds instead of minutes or tens of minutes, which is typical for PoW algorithms. The proposed PoS algorithm and the elements of randomness used to choose the next block forger protect the blockchain from the several types of attacks, including 51% attack typical for PoW consensus algorithms. The system is successfully implemented and available for users as Cutcoin. We expect that in future Cutcoin network will enable various applications and services to run across a common layer of privacy.

References [1] Satoshi Nakamoto. (2008) Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System.

[2] Nikki Fiorentino, Kelly Dwyer, Alex Hamilton, Karen Barney, Megan Dwoskin, Eugenia Buggs, Laurel Laluk, (2018) The Impact of Cybersecurity Incidents on Financial Institutions, https://www.idtheftcenter.org

[3] Threat Analysis, www.mwrinfosecurity.com/assets/swiftwhitepaper/mwr-swift-payment-systems-v2.pdf [4] Mina Deng, Kim Wuyts, Riccardo Scandariato, Bart Preneel, Wouter Joosen (2011), A privacy threat analysis framework: supporting the elicitation and fulfillment of privacy requirements, Requirements Engineering, 6(1), pp. 3-32.

[5] Kurt M. Alonso, (2018) Zero to Monero. [6] Wai Wuv, Brett Falk, (2018) Limitations of Privacy Guarantees in Cryptocurrency. [7] Nicolas van Saberhagen, (2013) CryptoNote v 2.0.

[8] Daniel Genkin, Dimitris Papadopoulos, Charalampos Papamanthou, (2018) Privacy in Decentralized Cryptocurrencies, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 61 No. 6, Pages 78-88.