Haveno

My bank as many others charging high currency conversion fees of several % of the automatically converted amount.

What if trading partner refusing to send additional payment worth 3% of the previously sent amount to cover his mistake?

What can be a likely outcome for me of yours recommended action?

Thank you

Hello, for example other trade party sent me SEPA bank transfer in correct amount, maybe even mentioning their name in a transfer note (matching their name in RetoSwap trade details), but the sending account number is different from what they have in RetoSwap.

Please kindly tell me what to do, all the cases and how to handle these cases and ideally why?

For example I can copy paste the transfer detail to the chat and ask the trade party if this transfer is theirs. And if they confirm, I can mark the money as received assuming it causes no risk for me. But what if the party does not respond and the allowed trade time-frame expires?

ISSUE: I have been watching SELL XMR for fiat (SEPA) tab of the RetoSwap (Haveno fork) for a couple of weeks and there is rarely an offer below 3% fee. Most offers are around predatory 6% fee.

Since there is low amount of offers, some people put the 9% or similar dirty fee and this seems to be pushing up the average % rate of the future offers, making the Haveno not a good option for trading. When trading reversible pair, you do not want to create your offer, because you can not select with whom to trade by placing a limit on your trading partner (like account age and such).

SUGGESTION: Maybe if the maximum allowed spread from a market price is set to 2.5% or similar, there would be less predators and more people who really want to do the fair/market price trade. As a newbie when you open the app and see the SELL/BUY spread for fiat like 12%, it is pretty bad place to trade.

~~Ithink there's something funny going on with regard to this sudden drama regarding kewbit and his development of a network agnostic haveno client. I don't think it's a coincidence that this happens exactly when reto decides to clean all reference to haveno out of their network. Could be, but I don't think so.~~

So, Reto has basically no fees right now. They don't really benefit financially from being the only haveno network with liquidity. Yet, it does seem that they do want to have a monopoly position within our community. Why? They benefit in some way. If you don't pay with money...

I've always been a proponent using my little voice in our miscellaneous community spaces for reto, using the network with the liquidity, allowing competition to emerge organically, being OK with them being the big one as long as they serve the community honestly, and of being cautious with new haveno networks that pop up overnight. But this is entirely different than those things. Reto is actively trying to monopolize haveno and therefore the decentralized xmr <-> fiat gateway. This isn't some people saying "who is hardenedsteel? Do we trust them?" This is Reto removing reference to haveno ~~and a sudden controversy around the person that is developing a multi network Haveno client, going hard and trying to get them drummed out of the community.~~ And they're doing it for 0% fees, ~~which tells me they're after something else, and the only something else there that I can see is XMR users' data.~~

I ~~don't~~ know if kewbit is an asshole, annoying, acts like a child or any of the accusations against him lately. But I do know, we need competing haveno networks. We have literally forked away our entire currency network twice because we believe in what we are building so strongly we would not allow even network effects to stop us. Multiple haveno networks needs to be a top short term priority in this community, we are at a potentially dangerous point in development of a decentralized fiat exchange and preventing one group of arbitrators from controlling that is absolutely vital, regardless whether their intentions are benign or not.

Edit: looked into some details that I was not aware of, and have come to the same conclusion most of the community is coming to: this kewbit fellow is jerking us around. I still think it is important to have competing haveno networks, and a haveno client that supports multiple, and I'm still put off by the retoswap rebrand, but I am now convinced that this kewbit drama is exactly what it looks like at face value. It looks to me actually he is trying to hostile takeover the haveno brand.

Do You have any comment on these claims about Haveno?

1

they don't allow to use external wallets such as OpenMonero to post arbitration bonds from, thus making haveno-reto less secure then OM.

HuggingChat AI comment:

Arbitration bonds are a crucial component of Haveno dispute resolution mechanism, and requiring users to hold funds within Haveno own wallet might increase the risk of centralization. However, it is essential to consider the reasoning behind this design choice. Perhaps the developers aimed to simplify the user experience or reduce the attack surface by limiting wallet interactions.

2

In my opinion, Haveno-reto is not decentralized at all, bc order book is not shared between instances.

I see that my cryptocurrency to cryptocurrency trade period is 1 day. It can happen that my cryptocurrency payment (made to the wallet of other user) is not confirmed during that 1 day period. So what happens next?

The tooltip says that when the period is exceeded, both parties can open a dispute. But that does not give me any idea about how this is handled and what are the risks. I am unable to find the answer at https://docs.haveno.exchange/the-project/trade-protocol/?query=trade+period

My BTC wallet (Electrum) generates addresses which I can use for receiving new coins. So I have copied one unused address and set is as my Haveno account.

Now I want to sell BTC on Haveno (I have BTC on different address than the one I have set), so during trade I can send from any wallet or I must send from the one I have defined as my Haveno BTC wallet?

Maybe my question is nonsense, since I do not understand Bitcoin technicals. Thank you

When i select an offer marked as SEPA, Haveno-reto warns that I have multiple SEPA payment accounts set and notice me that i should select correct one.

What If I accidentally select my SEPA account on a offer, which is marked as SEPA instant? Both accounts has same IBAN. Can I face any issues in arbitration etc.? I mean for example the system would require action earlier than the transaction would be complete.

Placing an offer to sell my BTC and get XMR, it prefill 15% security deposit for both traders and this % is customizable. Why not to set it to 0% if both payment methods (BTC, XMR) are irreversible and why Haveno-reto does not set it like that automatically?

Existing offers of this currency pair usually has 15% or 40% deposit and the fee 1.8-20% which is also weird, I would expect people would be willing to trade like 0-1% just to cover the crypto. fees.

At https://docs.haveno.exchange/the-project/payment_methods/0-all-methods/#2-altcoin-payment-methods I can not find any explanation why the limit is placed, i assume that it limits the loss per trade, but then the scammer can do multiple trades and the loss is the same? So what is the point? If it is not like that, then please explain or link me to an explanation? Thank you

In this tutorial we're going to take a look at how you can contribute to an existing Haveno Network, by running a Seed Node, in order to make the Haveno Network of your choice more resillient to potential takedowns.

https://blog.nowhere.moe/opsec/haveno-seednode/index.html

Disclaimer: I am not running any seednodes for any Haveno Network, this is only to showcase how it works for whoever wants to run a seednode. Obviously you don't want to get the TornadoCash treatment by publicly announcing that you are helping with the infrastructure for an exchange with your public identity since this is potentially sensitive use. Therefore make sure you remain Anonymous (meaning you use a disposable identity) when saying that you are running a haveno seed node.

Hi, I launched Haveno. In the bottom right, it reads 'No seed nodes available'. How to fix that? Thanks

Hello everyone.

Last week, I used Haveno (reto) to buy XMR for the first time, and everything went really smoothly. Now, I'm considering selling small amounts of XMR, but I have a few concerns and questions before jumping in.

I've been trying to figure out how the account signing feature works, but I haven’t found any clear documentation.

How does the signing system operate on Haveno?

What’s the process for getting your account signed, and how important is it for someone who wants to start selling XMR? Are there specific benefits to having a signed account, aside from trust and higher limits?

Risks with SEPA Payments:

How likely is it that someone could pay me with a stolen/hijacked bank account when using instant SEPA? I’ve heard that chargebacks can happen if this is the case, but I’m not sure how common this risk is, especially for smaller transactions. Has anyone who's used Haveno or Bisq experienced this?

Using PayPal (Friends & Family):

I was thinking of using PayPal and enforcing "Friends & Family" payments to avoid chargebacks. However, is this even an option for selling XMR? Has anyone actually done this successfully, and if so, what should I be aware of?

I’d appreciate any advice or experiences from people who have been selling XMR in these ways. Thanks in advance!

I am making this post in the name of transparency, regarding a specific dispute case involving the arbitrator Tinted and user Grefin. In the following I try to be as neutral as possible.

Timeline of events:

19th of August:

A trade with Grefin as maker and XMR seller is taken, however the trade partner asks Grefin for extra identifying information, claiming it was requested by the bank.

A taker should only expect to receive whatever is stated in the offer. At this point Grefin has every right to have the trade canceled.

Grefin opens a dispute, stating the issue to the arbitrator Tinted and asks for the trade to be canceled due to the extra information asked for by their trade partner.

Tinted agrees but still needs to confirm with Grefins trade partner that the trade should be canceled and no funds were sent.

21st of August:

Tinted gives the non-responsive trade partner 24 hours to respond, otherwise they will assume no funds have been paid and cancel the trade.

The trade was a sell offer worth 4.2882 XMR with a 0.675 security deposit, which amounts to 4.9632 XMR. Since the maker fee of 0.5% still applies so the payout amount to Grefin should have been ~4.93838 XMR minus Monero network fees.

Tinted decided a small reimbursement from the taker towards Grefin is justified and tries to pay out 4.95 XMR to Grefin.

This payout fails due to a (now fixed) Haveno bug. Tinted instructs Grefin to apply a patch to their local Haveno-reto client to enable the option to re-open the closed dispute and re-attempt the payment before the next version of Haveno-reto is released.

Re-opened disputes can sometimes be displayed in a bugged state where they are open on the client side but still closed on the arbitrator side. At this point the client can send messages and the arbitrator can read them but is unable to reply.

Eventually the payment is properly broadcasted and Grefin receives a payout of 4.95 XMR. Due to the trade fee, Grefin has now 0.0132 XMR less than before the trade and 0.01162 XMR more than without the small reimbursement made from the trade partners security deposit.

At this point, Tinted is unaware the payout has cleared and is waiting on version 1.0.11 to release to re-attempt the payout.

5th of September:

Grefin asks Tinted in the Haveno reto SimpleX group why they have received less than they expected, claiming their trade partner tried to scam them and that they deserve the partners full security deposit of 0.675 XMR. Grefin also accused Tinted of potentially colluding with the trade partner but didn't provide any details nor evidence supporting this very serious accusation.

We have stated in the past that we make our decisions with the help of bisqs table of penalties. Since Haveno is still relatively new, we are more lenient in regards to traders going MiA since it might be related to a software issue. According to the table, asking for more info (specifically "shotgun KYC") carries a penalty of up to 10% of the security deposit. Since the request for more information was made before any funds were sent, Tinted chose to only apply a fraction of the penalty.

I offered Grefin to pay 0.25 XMR out of my own pocket but they have declined. Tinted offered to pay the full 10% penalty (0.067 XMR) to Grefin out of pocket but so far Grefin has not provided a Monero address.

In my personal opinion, Tinted did not make a major mistake, although Grefin should have had the entirety of the arbitration fee covered by the trade partners security deposit. In the future we will put extra importance on this when making payout decisions.

This situation has highlighted the maker-taker fee split. I would like to know peoples opinions on if we should keep the existing split (0.1% taker, 0.5% maker) or adjust it. For comparison, Localmonero used to have a 1% taker and no maker fee. I should also mention that we are reluctant to setting either side to 0% since we don't know for sure that it won't cause any software-related issues.

Thank you for reading, I hope this post clears up any misunderstandings regarding this specific arbitration case.

-m, haveno-reto

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/20730504

This one brings a ton of excellent updates. Take a look at the change log.

https://github.com/retoaccess1/haveno-reto/releases

cross-posted from: https://monero.town/post/3984696

Any help with the wiki would be majorly appreciated. it's as easy as opening pull requests against the repo: https://github.com/haveno-dex/haveno-docs

those changes are automatically published to the official docs: https://docs.haveno.exchange/

here are open issues with the wiki label: https://github.com/haveno-dex/haveno/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Awiki

Should we start a bounty? Current .deb requires the user to have sudo privileges and installs into root file directory. The first one is cumbersome for TailsOS users and the second one is cumbersome for QubesOS users.

An AppImage, in contrast, is a self-contained packaging for linux programs, that doesn't require sudo privs nor installation to root file dir. The user can simply double click on the AppImage and it will get Haveno working instantly.

Currently, Haveno/-Reto doesn't have an AppImage release. How do we get one? I am not a programmer, so I can't cook one for them. So, would opening a bounty on bounties.monero.social be helpful?

Putting aside the difficulty with setting up the application (not impossible, installing is not friendly to non-tech users), I have not had too much luck completing a haveno transaction just yet. Last time I used Haveno there were not many Zelle/CashApp vendors. When attempting to transact with some vendors I got an error message along the lines of "arbitrator not available" which quite honestly I don't understand what it means or how to get around it.

I am hoping these issues are temporary since the network is literal weeks old. I am just wondering if anyone has had a more smooth experience using Haveno to aquire monero?

• Documentation
• Installers
• Reto group-chat / Haveno (software) group-chat

Since Monero transactions are not 100% untraceable and these anonymous marketplaces may attract people with illegaly obtained money...

Cross posting to Haveno community

In this tutorial we're going to cover how to buy Monero, for cash by mail on the Haveno Decentralised Exchange. This was the most popular payment method back on LocalMonero, due to being an improvement over bank transfers (like SEPA in the EU) when it comes to trading larger volumes in the long run, as Cash cannot easily be traced by adversaries unlike bank transfers, making Cash by Mail one of the most private ways to exchange real world money for Monero.

https://blog.nihilism.network/servers/haveno-cashbymail/index.html

Let me know if there's anything i missed in that tutorial :)

In this tutorial we're going to cover an instant SEPA transfer (which is a bank transfer) transaction for monero, this is one of the most popular payment options in the EU region. Instant SEPA was a personal favorite of mine back on the now defunct Localmonero, mainly due to the speed of the transanction, the only requirement being that the other peer has a bank account that supports instant SEPA transfers.

https://blog.nihilism.network/servers/haveno-sepa/index.html

check it out ;)

Is there currently a way to get Haveno-Reto running on Tails? I have not tried running the standard Linux build yet, because it's likely to be a waste of time. Usually running an app on Tails requires a unique build because of the unique way Tails's Persistent function works, even though it's Debian-based.

If Haveno-Reto does not support Tails yet, it would be much appreciated and great for all-round privacy if someone could create a functioning build in the future. Doing so myself is sadly above my capabilities. Tails already supports Feather, so Haveno would be a great addition, especially now since localmonero is down.