281–290 of 312 posts
The 0x protocol will allow for decentralized exchanges, so hacks like this would be a thing of the past if it gains adoption. https://0xproject.com/
It's still impossible to have a decentralized exchange convert between USD and a coin. XEM (the coin that was stolen) doesn't have plans to implement 0x, but there are other plans for decentralized exchange.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>There is no such thing as a hardware wallet Their absolutely is. A hardware wallet can take unsigned transactions and sign them internally, and output a signed transaction. Your private key never leaves the hardware wallet. Compare this to signing a transaction with a private key on a computer. Your computer can have spyware that can snoop on the key and steal your coins. The hardware wallet has a burned ROM with a…
> Your computer can have spyware that can snoop on the key and steal your coins. So could a hardware wallet. [0] [0] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Hardware_wallet - see under "Security Risks", both the "compromised production process" and "compromised shipping process" items are places where this could occur.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's still impossible to have a decentralized exchange convert between USD and a coin. XEM (the coin that was stolen) doesn't have plans to implement 0x, but there are other plans for decentralized exchange.
OmiseGo is building a decentralized exchange that converts between USD and a coin (any coin any currency). http://www.tristone-llc.com/omisego-the-global-standard-for-...
Someone needs to be the operator of exchange between fiat and crypto, at which point they and you will be subject to tax and regulation.
Anyone who operates an exchange is subject to money transmitter laws and KYC laws.
Anytime you convert from cryptocoins to fiat, you're subject to capital gains tax if you're a US citizen.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/01/27/bitcoin-deale...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
'Money ain't got no owners, only spenders' -Omar Little This quote applies to unregulated markets: drugs or cryptocurrencies.
I just finished watching all The Wire seasons for the first time and freaked a little when I saw your comment. I often see something on Hacker News that I just recently had contact with and is not that popular.
[0]: https://www.damninteresting.com/the-baader-meinhof-phenomeno...
They are tainting the stolen coins to avoid them to be sold. What’s the point of having a decentralized currency if a centralized entity make the decisions anyway at the end of day?
They are tainting the stolen coins to avoid them to be sold. What’s the point of having a decentralized currency if a centralized entity make the decisions anyway at the end of day?
Perhaps I am misunderstanding how tracking coins typically happens, but if "tainting" the coins effectively prohibits the actors from withdrawing at their perceived value, how would this work if the actor decided to send the vast majority coins to many random, arbitrary accounts? (e.g. arbitrarily sending coins to everyone who has committed a trade on some exchange in the last X days.) Would enough information be kno…
The 0x protocol will allow for decentralized exchanges, so hacks like this would be a thing of the past if it gains adoption. https://0xproject.com/
Surprises me that Komodo keeps going under the radar. Nearly 30,000 atomic swaps between btc/zcash protocol coins and a working decentralized exchange (BarterDex) with assetchains.
Just demonstrated one of the first implementations of a btc/erc20 swap as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If funds move out from your wallet without your intervention then somebody else has to have your key.
Yes, but from the exchange's perspective: How do they know? I'm presuming that in this case (given the amount) that this was not a typical user. But is there some framework of dispute for lesser amounts?
Since the funds have moved (visible on the overall distributed blockchain system, where everything is public), either of the two scenarios must have happened. It really is that simple, there are no other "moving parts" or "possible human error" in other parts of the system here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> how would this work if the actor decided to send the vast majority coins to many random, arbitrary accounts? (e.g. arbitrarily sending coins to everyone who has Then they'd have to take those coins off the blacklist, or else prepare to deal with an increasingly intractable tracking problem. Ethically, that would be the less bad option, since the thief would be deprived off the income, even if it's not returned to t…
What if a portion of those sent coins are sent to attacker-owned wallets?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Based on some surveys I did within the general US population, a significant number of people (around 30%) haven't even heard of Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies and most (60%+) have heard of it but haven't put money in it. Keep in mind that statistically speaking, you and I live in an echo chamber. Hacker News is a bubble of engineers with a penchant for business and finance (startups, the main thing here, are where geeks…
And on the flip side a movie lime "wolf of walstreet"