41–50 of 223 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's even room for marginally technically skilled to rake it in. I think Karpeles is still out on bail. And there's a few that did well with just marketing skill and vaporware mining gear.
Don't "mine" gold, sell shovles.
https://github.com/zcoinofficial/zcoin/blob/81a667867b5d8489...
and the line of code:
zccoinSpend.denomination == libzerocoin::ZQ_LOVELACE;
Error: == has no effect in expression
It's really past time for languages to not accept such code any more. Legacy code needs to get fixed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think if you explained this in layman's terms to "a bloke down the pub", he'd consider it theft. The law generally feels the same way. (IANAL.) Not the same, but it reminded me of years ago, I had £50 deposited in to my account, by mistake, a couple of months running. I asked my girlfriend's dad - who actually was AL (WAL?) - if I could keep it. He said it would be like someone parking their car on my driveway and…
Depends on a country. In Poland, if a company sends you money, once you spend it, they have no right to get it back. The reasoning being that you have a right to assume companies know what they are doing. If a private person sends you money, you have to give it back.
So if a bank in Poland sends you a million dollars by mistake, is it yours?
What would happen if someone stole it and transferred it to your account, does that make you a criminal?
And even more interestingly, if a malicious bank programmer (who's in league with you) introduced a bug on purpose (let's suppose we cannot prove the intent here, it's very difficult) and the bank mistakenly deposits you the money, do you have a duty to return it?
The error is here: https://github.com/zcoinofficial/zcoin/blob/81a667867b5d8489... and the line of code: zccoinSpend.denomination == libzerocoin::ZQ_LOVELACE; In other words, a statement with no effect. In D, such a line gives an error, not a warning: Error: == has no effect in expression You can force the statement to be accepted by casting it to void. It's really past time for languages to not accept such code any…
The error is here: https://github.com/zcoinofficial/zcoin/blob/81a667867b5d8489... and the line of code: zccoinSpend.denomination == libzerocoin::ZQ_LOVELACE; In other words, a statement with no effect. In D, such a line gives an error, not a warning: Error: == has no effect in expression You can force the statement to be accepted by casting it to void. It's really past time for languages to not accept such code any…
Any C++ static analyzer worth its salt would catch this. I don't think this is so much of a C++ language issue, but more of an issue with C++ environments/compilers not doing static analyzing by default, and/or the authors of this software not being aware of the fact that they need to use static analyzers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any C++ static analyzer worth its salt would catch this. I don't think this is so much of a C++ language issue, but more of an issue with C++ environments/compilers not doing static analyzing by default, and/or the authors of this software not being aware of the fact that they need to use static analyzers.
You're right. My contention is that the language itself should no longer accept such code, it shouldn't be relegated to an ignorable warning or a 3rd party tool that isn't run.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People complained a lot for 10% of Zcash going to the founders (in the form of a 20% draw on the first half of mining). But that value and expertise are used to ensure bugs like this Zcoin attack do not occur.
There is no proof that currencies that have pre-allocations for certain people are more bug-free than ones that don't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think this is immoral? I am genuinely curious as to what the arguments would be one way or another. People are taking a risk with these things and they know they're risky. So it's not really stealing.
I believe it is a crime, both in spirit and on paper. In spirit, you took something that was not yours and not meant for you, and by selling the coins you decreased the value of everyone else's. On paper, let's say that the developers behind whatever coin you hack decide that they are going to take no action. You still run afoul of countless computer security laws designed, however poorly, to protect people from hack…
Only if you're citizen of/doing it in a country with such laws.