> FCMP++ is on the way
That's what I've been hearing for over a year so far. FCMP++ sounds like a great idea. It's effectively the same thing as encrypting the sender instead of hiding him in a group of 16. In that one respect, it makes monero *almost* as good as LN already is, since LN already encrypts the sender.
But the way LN does it has two advantages over FCMP: first, the encrypted blob we create doesn't go on a permanent, public blockchain where everyone can see that a payment happened, which is none of their business anyway. Second, the blob we create is smaller than the one FCMP++ creates. But keep trying! Your method of encrypting the sender, if it ever launches, will be pretty good. Not as good as the one we already use in lightning, but pretty good, and that's a win.
> the one-time pubkey would actually be one-time with FCMP++ then, yes?
Yes, or close enough to count, because you can't tell it was used since being in a zkp is similar to being encrypted
> Monero is constantly focused on improving its privacy to the maximum degree. It can upgrade to improve.
Let me know when you finally get FCMP
> Meanwhile covenants are dead in the water
LN already offers a better foundation for privacy than monero without the easier covenant options proposed by some people. Covenants are great but not needed to beat monero, we're already doing that without them.
> Amounts routed are not encrypted to channel partners in lightning that is false
All packets in lightning are encrypted so that people not on the route can't read them. As for people who *are* on the route, multipath routing ensures that none of them knows how much was sent either.
> Saying it's a privacy leak that someone knows how much they sent someone else is...mental gymnastic
The sender should know how much he *sent.* He should not know how much the recipient *received.* The latter is a privacy leak. It is none of his business if the money was autosplit between multiple people or not.
> lightning's glaringly obvious privacy issues don't rely on getting someone's private key, any ole 3rd party can just glean data off the network.
This is what-about-ism again. "It's okay that monero has an obvious privacy flaw related to key-rotation because lightning has obvious privacy flaws too in other areas." No, that's not fine. Obvious privacy flaws are terrible and ought to be fixed, not what-about-ed.
Super Testnet
npub1yx…c399s
2026-10-09 02:42:17 UTC
in reply to nevent1q…09mn
Author Public Key
npub1yxp7j36cfqws7yj0hkfu2mx25308u4zua6ud22zglxp98ayhh96s8c399sPublished at
2026-10-09 02:42:17 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "bad827f00c2ef9572f797e9f8d5e33d4a813c1326fc73fef9afcd6f73911e7a1",
"pubkey": "2183e94758481d0f124fbd93c56ccaa45e7e545ceeb8d52848f98253f497b975",
"created_at": 1791513737,
"kind": 1111,
"tags": [
[
"E",
"a1cb750f09593d57a9724612f2eecd4d0cd05d213f9583aa21efcf35a752807f",
"wss://relay.damus.io/",
"2183e94758481d0f124fbd93c56ccaa45e7e545ceeb8d52848f98253f497b975"
],
[
"P",
"2183e94758481d0f124fbd93c56ccaa45e7e545ceeb8d52848f98253f497b975"
],
[
"K",
"1"
],
[
"e",
"6d47926a2aaea41c9e73349ae879f0b01705086d794de714c942d2a26f6bf349",
"wss://relay.damus.io/",
"7286946a0e00a4861eb7547ee0a98d476ae2bdd359b32da6a24dc6efbedc1002"
],
[
"p",
"7286946a0e00a4861eb7547ee0a98d476ae2bdd359b32da6a24dc6efbedc1002"
],
[
"k",
"1111"
]
],
"content": "\u003e FCMP++ is on the way\n\nThat's what I've been hearing for over a year so far. FCMP++ sounds like a great idea. It's effectively the same thing as encrypting the sender instead of hiding him in a group of 16. In that one respect, it makes monero *almost* as good as LN already is, since LN already encrypts the sender.\n\nBut the way LN does it has two advantages over FCMP: first, the encrypted blob we create doesn't go on a permanent, public blockchain where everyone can see that a payment happened, which is none of their business anyway. Second, the blob we create is smaller than the one FCMP++ creates. But keep trying! Your method of encrypting the sender, if it ever launches, will be pretty good. Not as good as the one we already use in lightning, but pretty good, and that's a win.\n\n\u003e the one-time pubkey would actually be one-time with FCMP++ then, yes?\n\nYes, or close enough to count, because you can't tell it was used since being in a zkp is similar to being encrypted\n\n\u003e Monero is constantly focused on improving its privacy to the maximum degree. It can upgrade to improve.\n\nLet me know when you finally get FCMP\n\n\u003e Meanwhile covenants are dead in the water\n\nLN already offers a better foundation for privacy than monero without the easier covenant options proposed by some people. Covenants are great but not needed to beat monero, we're already doing that without them.\n\n\u003e Amounts routed are not encrypted to channel partners in lightning that is false\n\nAll packets in lightning are encrypted so that people not on the route can't read them. As for people who *are* on the route, multipath routing ensures that none of them knows how much was sent either.\n\n\u003e Saying it's a privacy leak that someone knows how much they sent someone else is...mental gymnastic\n\nThe sender should know how much he *sent.* He should not know how much the recipient *received.* The latter is a privacy leak. It is none of his business if the money was autosplit between multiple people or not.\n\n\u003e lightning's glaringly obvious privacy issues don't rely on getting someone's private key, any ole 3rd party can just glean data off the network.\n\nThis is what-about-ism again. \"It's okay that monero has an obvious privacy flaw related to key-rotation because lightning has obvious privacy flaws too in other areas.\" No, that's not fine. Obvious privacy flaws are terrible and ought to be fixed, not what-about-ed.",
"sig": "7e88f924607b479c5d28c89c3ddc08b1881b45d3cfc9a3c59d5e2814497ffd63c4ad4c396610a6b7bc927b6420293ebfa37381618d8d6f7bfc721a24bf909a28"
}