CryptoFly.us | CRYPTOCURRENCY BITCOIN SHIRTS CLOTHING APPAREL HATS

CRYPTO NEWS

Australia’s Pension Fund Giant with $69 Billion AUM Is Open to Investing in Crypto

Queensland Investment Corporation (QIC), one of Australia’s largest pension funds, said it might make small investments in the cryptocurrency sector. The fund told the Financial Times that it is open to investing in cryptocurrencies in the future.

QIC manages A$92.4bn ($69 billion) of assets and is Australia’s fifth biggest pension fund.

According to the fund’s head of currencies, Stuart Simmons, early inflows into crypto are likely to be “more a trickle than a flood” due to uncertainty surrounding regulation.

“I don’t think there’s an inevitability about super funds and the institutional market investing in crypto, but as the segment matures . . . there’s a likelihood that super funds seek out exposure.”

Unlike family offices and private investor funds in the country, Australia’s “supers,” which pool together and manage people’s retirement savings, hasn’t entered the crypto market until now.

Not Interested in Crypto Assets

This is yet another sign that retirement funds are now taking an interest in the crypto asset space despite increasing regulatory scrutiny. Recently, Canada’s second-largest pension fund, Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (CDPQ), with $300 billion in assets, led crypto lender Celsius Network’s $400 million equity funding round.

CDPQ CTO and executive vice-president Alexandre Synnett said in an interview that their inaugural investment in the crypto sector shows their “conviction” in blockchain technology, which will “change the way the financial services are interacting.”

Synnett, however, said the fund is only focused on making “opportunistic” investments in “diamond in the rough” early-stage companies and that this is just a “small diversification play,” with “absolutely” no plan to allocate funds directly into Bitcoin or other cryptos.

Similarly, Andrew Fisher, the head of the asset allocation at Sunsuper, a Queensland-based pension fund manager with $63 bln in AUM, said it is only interested in blockchain technology, and that bitcoin and other cryptos are “not an area of interest or focus.”

Regulatory Requirements Need Clarity

According to Simmons of QIC, there are still a number of uncertainties around cryptocurrencies, and the “operational infrastructure for institutional investing remains immature,” as well.

The largest investors will want more certainty on the regulatory front and more protections around “unquantifiable risks” such as fraud and market manipulation, he added.

But once regulatory requirements become clear, conservative investors will feel more comfortable making investments into the sector.

The entry of large banks and other financial institutions “highlights the perceived opportunity from the enablement of crypto investing,” said Simmons.

“As the framework continues to develop, super funds may eventually simply be responding to user demand by facilitating investment in crypto.”

The post Australia’s Pension Fund Giant with Billion AUM Is Open to Investing in Crypto first appeared on BitcoinExchangeGuide.

Simple mixer in ethereum

I have found this mixer proposal https://hackmd.io/@HWeNw8hNRimMm2m2GH56Cw/rJj9hEJTN?type=view I’m is interested in this topic, but from my point of view with a current ethereum state it won’t work. Let me share my view Below i described my understanding mixer implementation in Ethereum and possible weaknesses. General mixer description: Address A make a deposit to a mixer::Listen

I have found this mixer proposal https://hackmd.io/@HWeNw8hNRimMm2m2GH56Cw/rJj9hEJTN?type=view

I’m is interested in this topic, but from my point of view with a current ethereum state it won’t work. Let me share my view

Below i described my understanding mixer implementation in Ethereum and possible weaknesses.

General mixer description: Address A make a deposit to a mixer contract M. Address B sends to contract M prof that he made a deposit, but the proof doesn’t reveal that he was A when he did it, and asks to withdraw his deposit to address C. As soon as there is no connection between A and C mixer successfully does what we expected. We investigated two possible implementation of such mixer: zk-SNARKs mixer Ring signature mixer zk-SNARKs – when A deposits money he also add a proof (a leaf) to a merkle tree inside the contact. When B wants to withdraw he send a proof that his leaf exists in the tree and a proof that he has never sent such request before( double spending protection) Issues with this approach – merkle tree will constantly grow, BarryWhiteHat who investigated this mixer said that he faced problem with amount of computations, for 1.5M (number of leaves) tree it takes 7 minutes to create a proof. We didn’t check how much gas it takes to check the proof, but the problem is the merkle tree will grow and grow, and proof generation will became very hard. As I know for now we don’t have solution to this problem.

Ring signature mixer – when B wants to withdraw he sends to the mixer a list of public keys (PKs) and proof that he has a private key of one of them, it is impossible to say which public key belongs to B. As soon as the mixer knows public keys which were used for deposit it can confirm that this person can withdraw money, also it makes double spend check.
The main issues with this approach is – the check is quite expensive, to check 5 PKs the contract spends ~1M GAS, so if you want to withdraw money with let say 1% probability that A and B is the same person, you have to withdraw with 10 PKs ring 1-10 times, if you have a public key in a ring which withdraw money from the mixer before it should be replaced with the ring it took money from, so if you are lucky you can get much better probability then a ring size and you will pay 2M – 20M GAS + (some gas to deposit money). This method doesn’t have problem with accumulation of deposits, computation depends only on size of ring not number of people who made deposits. But flat ring computation is expensive.

Also we have general Ethereum mixer issue – when B send a withdraw request he must pay for this transaction, and for this he has to have money. It mean that it is impossible to just create a random account and send withdraw request from it. Even if a link between A and C doesn’t exist there is a clear link between B and C, if an adversary is able to find a link between A and B he will define that A and C is the same person. As we said before B needs money to use the mixer so A needs some safe way to send this money to B, if A has this way he doesn’t need the mixer he can send money to C without mixer. We can create some off chain services to send money to B or play role of B, but it will create a centralization/failure point. There is a improvement suggestion for ETH2.0 which will let contracts pay for transactions, in this case C can send a transaction to the mixer and the mixer will pay for it. If this suggestion become real the problem with gas trace will be solved.

Combination of problems described above makes mixer implementation in the current version of Ethereum very questionable. By my opinion the fundamental issue is gas traceability. It converts our task from hide from/to to implement hidden/safe gas supply for random accounts. To solve “create hidden transactions” task, we have to have hidden transactions. A snake bites its own tail.

Does anybody knows a good approach which will let us solve these problems and help to convert a mixer to a real application?

Australia’s Pension Fund Giant with $69 Billion AUM Is Open to Investing in Crypto

Shopping cart
There are no products in the cart!
Continue shopping
0