Author: Limo

Competitors and Amy Castor: a tale on reputation usage and a campaign to discredit IOTA

Competitors and Amy Castor: a tale on reputation usage and a campaign to discredit IOTA

Disclaimer. I’m invested in IOTA, Ethereum, and Bitcoin. I’m not connected to the IOTA foundation and the following post is my own work and opinion. This is not meant to deter the collaboration of legitimate scientists. The IOTA Foundation is always grateful if thinkers help IOTAs adoption and vision.

Bells and Whistles

This is my response to the “responsible disclosure” of would-be neutral scientists that are destroying the reputation of IOTA, but also of the MIT (media lab), the Boston University (one associated developer), and Forbes.

In these times, fake-news and tinfoil stories can be found everywhere. The following post could be just a big coincidence, but if we allow ourselves in connecting some dots, maybe we get a better picture of “cryptoland”.

I’ll say it upfront: Competing projects try to harm IOTA as much as possible.

Let me start with this tweet of “fnord” because this pretty much sums up my motivation to write this summary.

On this blog, I usually try to stick to straight facts and relevant, legit news about IOTA. No Bells and whistles, Just information. 

We also expect straight facts and objective information when we visit pages like Forbes or when we read peer-reviews from MIT and BU scientists, but apparently, this is not the case.

Therefore, I decided to leave the path of tech news around IOTA for a moment, in order to draw a picture of how competition in this sphere works.

Recently we witnessed a misinformation campaign of highest magnitude in order to harm IOTA’s reputation. And I’m going to explain why.

It is vital to understand that some innovators in this innovative field of cryptocurrencies act in their own best interest. As rational deciding homo oeconomicus in this game of blockchains.


You may have seen the big headlines about IOTA: “MIT And BU Researchers Uncover Critical Security Flaw In $2B Cryptocurrency IOTA” following the “vulnerability report

The report was done by:

Ethan Heilman (Boston University, DAGlabs, Paragon Foundation – joint collaboration with Spectre, another DAG project, Commonwealth Crypto, Dev of a Bitcoin anonymity transaction Hub),
Neha Narula (MIT Media Lab),
Thaddeus Dryja (MIT Media Lab, Lightning Network Dev),
Madars Virza (MIT Media Lab, co-founded Zerocoin Protocol that Zcash is using, advising Zcash.)

The Forbes Article was written by:
Amy Castor (Independent writer at Bitcoin Magazine and Forbes)

Sergey Ivancheglo, main developer of the Tangle and creator of proof of stake, known as Come-from-Beyond, responded on several channels and closed the case.

The IOTA foundation also published an answer.

Unwinding all the details becomes unnecessary, but I’ll highlight the important ones:

  • IOTA has never been hacked.
  • CURL was tested under ludicrous conditions. The victim’s system would be running malicious code. In those conditions, stealing the key is trivial and much easier and effective. (custom wallet)
  • The discussed signing algorithm CURL was in an old version of IOTA, that was patched weeks ago. IOTA is using SHA-3/Keccak right now, there was no vulnerability to start with, but even less of a chance after that change.
  • the apparent flaw was, as revealed instead, an intended copy protection mechanism
  • No funds were or are at risk.
  • The Forbes headline, as well as the vulnerability report, suggested that the alleged flaw is still in play.
  • Yesterday there was an attack on the network, effectively defended by the presence of the Coordinator function. The IOTA team will be posting all the details in a blog entry.
  • IOTA’s valuation and price were directly and significantly affected by those actions, adding to the general value loss that has been affecting the whole crypto world this last week.

 

The headline takes effect

After IOTA supporters reminded the cryptographers that this is unethical and hardly a “responsible disclosure”, they reacted as if they were neutral and rather victims of an unjustified shitstorm:

I just give you the blank tweets.

In the meantime, Ethan Heilmann retweets an incredible total of 49 defamatory and blatant tweets. These were clearly, important and necessary actions by any reputable, objective scientist, both in content and form.

A few examples:

 

 

 

Madars Virza follows the crowd and tweets funny stuff about the legitimacy of the whole idea of IOTA:

David Sønstebø offers an open debate because the claims are wrong, but he gets no response:

 

Matthew Green, Co-worker of Madars Virza, ZCash, starts to attack IOTA and Sergey Ivancheglo. People from Zcash stepping in? Coincidence:

Another ZCash Co-Founder and developer tweets against IOTA, coincidence:

Bitcoin Core Developer Peter Todd reacts:

One of many Twitter-reactions by Amy Castor, that already blocked me, and many other accounts that expressed criticism:

 

Amy Castor is already convinced that IOTA is a scam. She is working for Bitcoin Magazine and she’s a member of the Bitcoin Core Slack. Again, just another coincidence. Her agenda “don’t roll your own crypto” seems like a general campaign against former or recent initial coin offerings ( ICO’s)

Numerous tweets show her biased stance against IOTA. Some of which are pointing to sources on Bitcointalk and weird websites, that obviously try to discredit IOTA. Some others are just asking to know what are David Sønstebø’s benefits, what his incentive is for creating IOTA. – this is something that he explained more than once in a very clear way.

On top of that, Bitcoin Evangelist Andreas M. Antonopoulos tweets misinformation to justify the smear campaign:

Meltem Demirors – Director at DCG (Investor of ZCash) coincidence:

Responsible disclosure

Now, apart from this little list of tweets against IOTA, I’m going to look at the definition of “responsible disclosure“.
it says:


Responsible disclosure is a computer security term describing a vulnerability disclosure model. It is like full disclosure, with the addition that all stakeholders agree to allow a period of time for the vulnerability to be patched before publishing the details. Developers of hardware and software often require time and resources to repair their mistakes. Hackers and computer security scientists have the opinion that it is their social responsibility to make the public aware of vulnerabilities with a high impact. Hiding these problems could cause a feeling of false security. To avoid this, the involved parties join forces and agree on a period of time for repairing the vulnerability and preventing any future damage.


As we already know, the report of the Zcash, DAGlabs and Lighting Network devs was written as if there was a problem in effect, although the issue was already corrected.

Also, the Forbes article, that is written in present tense followed by the meetup title.

I conclude that in this case there is no “social responsibility to make the public aware of vulnerabilities with a high impact” because there is neither a vulnerability nor high impact.

Apparently, however, they seem to have the need to showcase IOTA’s alleged vulnerability, because the cryptographer decided to set up a live stream meetup to break CURL, the signing algorithm of IOTA.

They write:

“Now that all parties are out of stealth mode, I can formally announce that Ethan Heilman will be demonstrating how he, along with three researchers from MIT Digital Currency Initiative (DCI), broke IOTA’s nonstandard “Curl” hash function.

By doing so, they revealed in a $2B cryptocurrency a serious security flaw that could have allowed a hacker to steal user funds. (IOTA has since lost about 25 percent of its value, according to Coin Market Cap.)”

And they seem to also assume that when all cryptos are taking a plunge, IOTA shouldn’t have been affected. Even more interesting.


Now, to draw a conclusion

In theory, IOTA is a technology that is able to outperform almost every other cryptocurrency.

Especially the Lightning Network, that is trying to address Bitcoins scaling problems, and Zcash, that is possibly threatened by Masked Authenticated Messaging are in a direct competition with IOTA, let alone DAGlabs.

If independent scientists of a renowned faculty like the MIT or Boston University claim to be able to break IOTA, people listen, the market reacts immediately.

In order to make the public aware of vulnerabilities with a high impact, and to save people from losing money, they did disclose information in an unethical and wrong way, which added significantly to the loss of valuation. If that is not irony, I don’t know what is.

But these guys are not just rational, independent scientists. These people are investors and developers of competing projects, so no wonder that the tweets were written accordingly. Coincidental of course.

Direct conflicts of interest:

To support my thesis that this is a coordinated effort I point out the blatant and obvious conflicts of interest.

  • Ethan Heilmann and developer of DAGlabs.com, a direct competitor to IOTA (also Bitcoin Core developers involved). Due to almost 50 anti-IOTA tweets, I assume that he wants to change the sentiment or just coincidence
  • His project DAGlabs is in a fundraising right now. A direct competitor developing their own DAG solution and currently trying to acquire Series A funding partners. Coincidence.
  • Madars Virza is Zcash Co-founder, a direct competitor to IOTA (is heavily supported by Matthew Green and Ian Miers, both ZCash). Coincidence
  • Amy Castor is working for Bitcoin Magazin and is postulating questionable insults against the IOTA Founder while she is a member of the Bitcoin Core Slack and following an anti-ICO agenda. Bitcoin Magazine. Coincidence
  • To Cite Satoshiwatch: “Amy Castor – who propagated MIT’s malicious report/attack in the Forbes, is a writer for CoinDesk, Barry Silbert’s Digital Currency Group (DCG)
    -“DCG ownership and crypto-investments include Zcash, Ripple, Rootstock, and etc.” Coincidence
  • Tadge Dryja is working for the Bitcoin Lightning Network, a direct competitor of IOTA. Coincidence

All in all 4 people of ZCash involved. Madars Virza, Matthew Green, Ian Miers, Meltem Demirors Coincidence.

Centralization of the Coordinator:

Concerning the coordinator(Coo), it seems like no one is missing an opportunity to point out that the Coo centralizes IOTA. The Coo is a special node in the hands of the IOTA Foundation that sets milestones in order to prevent Sybil attacks.

If people want to attack the network, they try to become an omnipresence in order to conduct doublespends.

This protection is necessary as long as the network is in its infancy. The transparency compendium pointed this out and it’s common knowledge, that it’s solely for the purpose of protection. The developers cannot alter transaction or access seeds.

Just the day before yesterday, an attacker tried to take over the Tangle.

To make it clear what’s happening, he added a tag to the transaction: “BZWFL99FUCK9CORE99LETS9FORK

The coordinator prevented a takeover from happening, everything is safe and sound.

But its purpose to protect the users of IOTA is of low significance, as it seems. People rather point out that due to the Coordinator, the whole system, idea, network is worthless. What a hypocrisy considering their biased stance.

At this point, I’m asking myself, why are these people insisting that the coordinator is a bad component? Obviously, the term centralization is undefined, because looking at this definition I could just claim that IOTA is still decentralized, especially because there are no blocks, no miners, the validation of transaction is not decoupled but in the hand of the users, unlike Consensus at Bitcoin. The comparison between blockchains and the Tangle looks therefore wrong, because of the “centralized part”, the coordinator has no participation in the consensus model.

 

When I look at Bitcoin, the true centralization happens due to the power of miners, where five of the biggest mining farms set 51% of the global Bitcoin hashpower.

Furthermore the centralization of developers, one can easily recognize when you look how many Bitcoin Core developers are connected with side projects or react in unison when a shitstorm is formed.

An incestuous innovation ivory tower, if you ask me.

If this was only about following science ethics, why would they fabricate a lurid headline, that clearly suggests that IOTA is still vulnerable?
Why would objective scientists talk about a crashing price and retweet dozens of tweets with an anti-IOTA sentiment?
Why would they decide to make a live-stream to showcase how to break CURL, although it’s not used anymore?

As a side note: The IOTA devs have not been invited to defend themselves or to talk about their point of view.

Since none of the mentioned persons kept a neutral stance, I can only conclude that this is a coordinated effort to destroy IOTAs reputation as ultima ratio because IOTA threatens their own projects.

Neha Narula, as the director of the MIT Media Labs, missed the chance to provide an independent peer-review of IOTAs -not in use- signing algorithm CURL.
Instead, she allowed that her team used its personal bias for their own purposes.

Amy Castor abandoned the ethics of journalism: “The duty of the journalist is to further those ends (justice and the foundation of democracy) by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues.” when she started ranting her personal agenda like a bulldozer and furthermore acted highly unprofessional against IOTA Founder David Sønstebø.

Her lacking ethics may be motivated by the fact that she has written about Zcash, at this point I can only assume that she owns Zcash, or it’s just another coincidence:

This “responsible disclosure” is not the work of objective, competent scientists of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology or the Boston University as proclaimed. This is the epitome of a conflict of interest, where people use the names of big institutes.

In the game-theory, there are only rational agents. It seems these scientists are rational in that sense.

To cite Prof. Dr. Harald Lesch: “The economization of science is a problem: performance instead of position.”
-Especially in the field of crypto currencies.

Interesting to see that Zcash, DAGlabs and Bitcoin enthusiasts develop the same habits when they talk about IOTA, the same kind of habits that banks used to, when they talked about Bitcoin back in the days.

So if this is the business conduct of the MIT Media Lab, the Boston University or Forbes, I wonder where we can still find unbiased science and information.

What a great coincidence.

Casus ubique valet! Semper tibi pendeat hamus! Quo minime credis gurgite, piscis erit!

20 Security Rules for Cryptoland, IOTA, and Trading you should know

20 Security Rules for Cryptoland, IOTA, and Trading you should know

Cryptoland is growing on all ends and new people from all over the world start to look for new opportunities.

This digital era enables many ways to make money, to find new jobs, or to create new business models for your company.

As the majority of newcomers are targeted by organized groups, in order to scam their money, I decided to make a short list of important rules you should keep in mind, when entering this shark-pond.

 

1. Most important rule: stay up to date.

The majority of software you will find in this cutting-edge area of the Internet is not in the release-candidate stage.

Most of the projects are in alpha or beta stage, so in order to get all the important information, you should check the software and currencies you are using for updates. The more often, the better.

Vital updates, bugs, and security vulnerabilities are part of the daily madness in cryptoland.

Therefore, you should check the official channels of all currencies and projects you’re invested because you have no guarantee at all that everything is working like it did yesterday.

Twitter is one of the best sources for that!

 

2. Don’t rush into important decisions

Some decisions are expensive. If you have important news, and it happens to be the case that you think you can read the markets, think about it twice before you set a buy- or sell order.

That also applies to software you are using. Before deleting wallet-software, or backups, ensure that there are no important files like “wallet.dat”, or password lists.

Too many people lost their money because they acted too fast. Don’t be that person.

 

3. Invest after due diligence, not after recommendation

An investment in cryptoland can be many things.

In most cases, you lose your money, especially if you blindly follow recommendations of tweets, strangers of the Internet, or persons you barely know.

In almost every social channel, you will find a flashy advertisement for every currency out there, for every upcoming ICO or IPO.

The flashier these advertisements are, the more due diligence you should do.

Take your time, read into it and decide where to invest if you have a solid overall understanding.

Look for the developers, for criticism, for the technical perks, unique features, for warnings, PSA’s and for the long-term vision of a project.

 

4. Don’t do margin trading without experience

If you’re new to cryptocurrencies, never do margin trading. People underestimate these markets and its unique behavior.

Most Exchanges are not regulated. Influential parties can manipulate the course with a trading bot to their advantage. That happens all the time.

If you think you can read the markets and you leverage your funds with factor 10 or factor 100, the chance of losing everything is extremely high.

The volatility in cryptoland is as high as it gets, even stock markets are nothing compared to the flash-pumps and crashes, that happens many times a day.

If you decide to invest, start with exchanging your money to cryptocurrency and watch the charts for a while before training margin trading with very little amounts.

 

5. Don’t trade OTC without an escrow

Lots and lots of people are looking for an easy way to purchase cryptocurrency without signing in at an exchange, which can be time consuming and annoying.

These Over-the-counter (OTC) trades are extremely dangerous as the majority of these offers are a scam.

So, in order to trade securely, you have to look for an Escrow service, a trusted person that acts as a middleman.

There are some trusted escrows in every cryptocurrency community, so ask around and find a person that has been vouched for multiple times.

The biggest Cryptocurrency forum Bitcointalk has a reputation system, that should never be trusted, though.

Many accounts with high reputation are bought, hacked, or backed up with false votes.

Instead, go into a high frequented thread and ask many different trusted members, you eventually find a trusted escrow.

 

6. Trust no one

Everyone should be treated as a total stranger that wants your money.

That’s not a very nice way to deal with humans, in cryptoland, however, it’s an important rule to keep your funds in your hands.

Big parts of cryptoland are unregulated, fabricated, set up, just to scam people.

 

7. Niceness isn’t for free – be suspicious

As a general rule: be suspicious if someone is too nice. Nothing is for free, especially where people can send and receive thousands of Dollars with just a click.

 

8. Read the real link, not the alias link in the browser

To ensure that you are lead to a legit page, hover over the link and read the real link on the status bar of your browser.
Additionally, compare the given link with the help of google with the place that it’s supposed to link you to.

There are many successful phishing attempts with copies of exchanges, online wallets, etc.

 

9. If you get an unexpected Email, ensure that the sender is legit

Never trust the sender of an email.

If you use one email for everything, there is a high probability that someday, you get phishing emails with a wrong name. Read the header and real email closely, to ensure that the sender is legit.

 

10. Don’t log in over links or login-windows in emails, only on the page you know

One of the most important security advice in cryptoland: never log into an account over a link or a log-in-page in an email.

Instead, go the usual way, or over Google, login and look for announcements, if you are invited to check your account.

A big piece of the scam-pie is working over email, so be careful with dealing with “official PSA’s” via email.

 

11.  Don’t click a link if you don’t need to

You have no business with a new, unknown service, some guy sent you via direct message somewhere? Don’t click it and gather information about it on Google instead.

 

12. Check sources of programs and wallets

If you are looking for a wallet-link or software connected to a cryptocurrency, compare given links and ensure that you use the original source, mostly via Github. Google can help you to find the right source.

 

13. If you generate a seed, don’t trust online-generators

Online password or seed-generators are a comfortable way –for scammers.

You should never use such a service if you are unsure whether it’s legit and secure or not.

For generating a secure password or seed, I recommend you use KeePass instead. An open source solution that has a long history of happy users.

 

14. Protect your accounts, not only with 2Fa

Just recently, a new way to hack almost every account or service has been revealed: Malicious groups and hackers get control over your smartphone and use the authentication service and the 2-factor authentification to circumvent every security-measure that is protected via 2FA.

To prevent anyone from login into your account and stealing your funds and information: activate all available options, such as email, additional question etc.

Additionally, you can buy a second sim and a second, cheap smartphone, that you use solely for 2FA such as Google Authenticator.

 

15. Chose the right passwords

The longer the passwords, the better.

There are many recommendations to generate a secure password with a high entropy. KeePass enables an incredibly high entropy.

A good source of information regarding passwords is on the CERN-page

Please keep in mind, that the IOTA seed comes with its own recommendations, that can be read here.

 

16. Use different Computers for surfing and handling your funds

Although this sounds like an overkill, it’s a splendid way to prevent you from getting scammed: Use two different system for browsing and managing your funds.

You never know if your system is infected. Good security software is just one side of the story, a different system is way better.

 

17. Never tell people how much you own

Would you go onto the street and tell anyone your bank account value? Of course not.

As in point 6 explained, don’t trust anyone. For scammers, this is a valuable information. Never share your net-worth.

 

18. Don’t leave the majority of your investment on an exchange

In the past, nearly every exchange had security issues, or they were hacked.

In order to prevent that from happening to you and your funds, you should never leave the majority of your investments on an exchange.

Exchanges are never safe.

In the real world, except a few exceptions, almost every Bank has been robbed too. Cryptoland is no difference, in fact, it’s almost inevitable.

19. Secure your funds offline, multiple times

If you have the option to store your private keys/seeds/funds offline or in a hardware wallet -do it.

Hardware wallets like Trezor or Ledger Nano S have been reliable in the past.

 

20. Use a different bank account for cryptoland and your real-life

For the security enthusiasts, it’s a good way to monitor all your doings, expenses, and tax related questions.

Use an additional bank account for cryptoland.

That way, you have always a good overview over your costs, wins and losses and it’s incredibly easy to deal with the IRS or your tax-institute.

 


 

I hope this list provided you with some interesting information regarding the security in cryptoland.

Feel free to leave me a comment if you have questions, additional points or concerns.

Thank you,

Limo

 

 

 

Explaining Series: Fog Computing in the Internet of Things

Explaining Series: Fog Computing in the Internet of Things

Fog Computing -one of many new trendy terms that we see and read almost everywhere in this field.

What is it? -and how can IOTA enable the perfect fog-computing landscape, the IoT needs?

I give you a short explanation and good sources for a smooth heads-up.


Roundup:

This roundup is an experiment that aims for a better understanding of the greater picture. Some keywords before the actual article are meant as an information-index.

  • Internet of Things (IoT)= Term from the MIT, Kevin Ashton, 1999
  • Fog-Computing = Term from Cisco
  • Fog = Decentralized/Distributed
  • Cloud = Centralized
  • Realm = IoT + IIOT, B2B, M2M, IoE, Smart grids, Smarthome, Smart cities, interconnected world
  • Problem = Unused Sensor-Data, Need for a solution of a distributed network, Costs of cloud-computing, time
  • Application = Evolving Markets, Quality-as-a-service, Machine Communication, Scada
  • IoT Systems = Basically two groups: 1) Identification Group (sensors, data gathering) 2) Computational group (processing, data storage)
  • Limitations until now: Cloud computing (centralized, far away from consumers and devices)  doesn’t fit the requirements of the IoT (distributed, in need of close storage, computational resources, instant processing), Bandwidth
  • Connection Types: WiFi, Bluetooth, ZigBee, 2G/3G/4G/5G, Radio, Z-Wave, 6LowPan, Thread, Wifi, Cellular, NFC, Sigfox, Neul, LoraWan

The IoT

The vision of the Internet of Things is still in the making.

With the latest development in this interconnected world, new markets are emerging and a variety of requirements are born.

Wearables, smartphones, domestic devices like smart-home solutions for an intelligent household demand an interconnectivity solution that has yet to come.

It’s no secret that almost every company is also working on solutions to make it happen: a world, where data is a more valuable resource than oil. If not today, then in the near future.

This leads to a point, where technical barriers of today hinder progress for tomorrow.

The IoT, a distributed network around the world is more than the Internet.

A mesh-net that is connected with every possible connection type. Where devices work in local clusters, it’s obvious that centralized components, sometimes on a different continent, don’t fit in the greater picture.

Sensors, cameras, smart devices often use ad-hoc solutions to function in their specific field, such as monitoring systems like Scada, that send valuable data to a nearby control center in order to optimize industrial processes.

What if these monitoring systems are working time-sensitive, but the current solutions are slow and on top of that centralized and unsecured. The productivity could be better, employees may work in a more dangerous environment and as a result: the company could face problems.

Connected facilities incentivize industry-espionage and hacks.

Distributed denial of service attacks is a phenomenon of the last few years, where certain malicious parties are attacking infrastructural points in the web, to cripple communication of some systems and special services.

Sometimes as a decoy for a hack, sometimes for political or activist-reasons.

Not rarely, mentionable down times create financial losses or the blockage of regional infrastructure’s hits, next to the target, also other companies that are located in the surrounding area.

A problem of the Internet, not necessarily of the IoT.

Due to the distributed mesh-net characteristics, the IoT is envisioned as a network, that is self-sufficient, in which case it can connect devices of the identification group via many ways, not only one.

An attack on central points is per definition impossible because there is no center in the IoT.

That leads to a natural resistance against DDoS and other downtimes.

Legacy systems vs. new systems

An additional issue of cloud-computing in the IoT would be the costs. Legacy system use to ignore huge amounts of data because there is neither storage no need for them.

New systems in the IoT, with smart solutions, rely on this data, but sending them into the cloud would go beyond the scope of the IoT. Too much information is generated, and real-time analysis, as well as centralized cloud-computing solutions, are conflictive with each other as uploading these huge amounts takes time and money -especially if the cloud-storage is thousands of miles away.

Fog computing, however, creates a bridge-solution for the identification group and computation group: It is about forwarding the computational power to the edge of the network, where data is generated and the results are needed.

The benefits of using Fog computing instead of legacy cloud systems are tremendous.

Varghese, Wang, et. al [2017]. come to the conclusion that. “For an online game use-case, we found that the average response time for a user is improved by 20% when using the edge of the network in comparison to using a cloud-only model. It was also observed that the volume of traffic between the edge and the cloud server is reduced by over 90% for the use-case.

This is just one use case that can be mirrored on many other settings.

In consumer markets, Quality of Service and Quality of Experience are important factors.

Another example would be the transparent customer. When a transparent customer enters a big supermarket, his views and interests could be analyzed within seconds.

Cameras can detect his interest in certain devices or components, and advertisements on monitors along his path can be adjusted to his specific needs. With old legacy systems impossible due to the long processing times between these cameras, a cloud, and computational resources, with fog computing, however, the data can be processed way faster and deliver the necessary information back to the customer, along his way in the mall.

To draw a simplified picture of the fog-landscape:

The distributed mesh-net is growing in height z, if you will, whereas decentralized and centralized networks are growing on the x and y axis. Shorter ways from the data collectors to the computational resources are the result of fog-computing.

Concerns can be addressed with IOTA

Whether it’s the data-integrity, optimization or protection of the in-house Research & Development data, companies look for a lasting solution.

When data is stored centralized, hackers usually use social engineering, or phishing attacks to get access to the data.

As centrally stored data would be collected all in once with this method, Fog computing would make it possible to store sensitive information in small packets, distributed, with different passwords/keys/seeds to access them.

IOTA  can deliver a unique solution here. A data-stream, bound to countless seeds, in a distributed network, secured with sophisticated algorithms. Not even quantum computing would be a threat to the hashes.

As you may already know, IOTA is a distributed ledger technology, that enables fee free transactions.

For data-transfer with fog-computing, you wouldn’t even need tokens, the only condition would be to confirm two other transactions before sending one of your own.

A rule that enables true scalability for a billion device network on a global scale.

With Masked Authenticated Messaging, IOTA has an additional option to send and process sensitive data.

Now, a really big hurdle in the IoT is the availability of dozens of connections and different norms.

When devices could be connected in a similar way, the usability would increase. A plethora of standards that are built for the IoT can lead to a fragmentation of the network, as companies want to stick to their standards, to support their product-line or roadmap.

If IOTA would be the standard settlement and data layer, which is free to use, the Internet of Things could be a barrier-less environment with true scalability and data-integrity.

Due to the value of collected data, new markets would come up, that aim for selling this information in real-time.

People would possibly be able to sell their consumer data, each time they enter a shop, with true nano payments.

If data would be collected in the fog, BigChain DB a scalable distributed database for all kinds of data could deliver the necessary infrastructure for customers, institutes, and companies.

A seamless solution for the IoT.

Fog computing is, therefore, the next necessary milestone in the field of the Internet of Everything and a vital part of the vision of IOTA.

 

Video of Dominik Schieners Presentation at the Tech Open Air 2017

 

 

 


Sources:

https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en_us/solutions/trends/iot/docs/computing-overview.pdf

http://www.springer.com/de/book/9783319576381

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1701.05451.pdf

 

Images:

<https://www.iot-now.com/2016/01/11/40800-connectivity-on-the-edge/>

 

THE T▲NGLER Restructuring

THE T▲NGLER Restructuring

Hello Folks,

Summer break is over!

As my blog was growing insanely over the last months (already over a quarter million visitors), I decided to change a few things in order to keep up with the demand of information.

IOTA is a great invention, and also extremely difficult to explain and understand.

In fact, If I try to explain the technological advances of IOTA to new people in this sphere, I lose them at “distributed ledger technology”.

IOTA is not a separate program or an autarkic system, on the contrary, it’s an open eco-system that will presumably be a part of everyone’s life in a few years, if the current development keeps its current momentum.

Several companies are lined up to work with IOTA, hundreds of people all over the world are running a full-node and countless developers are applying for the ecosystem fund. It’s only getting bigger from here on!

To understand an eco-system I must deliver information as such.

I, therefore, will broaden my spectrum to keep up with everything.

  • Explaining Series

    1. I will illuminate basic terms and topics of the Internet of Things, to set a basic level of understanding
    2. I will enable a voting system for terms that you’d like to understand.
    3. The Explaining Series will appear two times a week

 

  • Cryptogossip
    1. I’ll cover relevant information of alt-coins if they are in a competition of IOTA
    2. I’ll cover rumors about IOTA, its technology, misinformation and leaked information.
    3. Cryptogossip will appear whenever I find worthy topics.

 

  • Industry-news
    1. Internet of Things connected companies announce interesting news? I’ll cover it and rate the announcement.
    2. I will connect the field of application with a possible IOTA collaboration
    3. Industry news will appear whenever I find interesting news.

All other topics will stay the same.

I’m always happy for suggestions!

Thank you for visiting The T▲ngler!

Kind regards, Limo

Advertisment ad adsense adlogger