71–80 of 321 posts
Thank goodness it's decentralized and there are no single points of failure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing this is sarcasm? crypto.com is very very far from a single point of failure.
They might be alluding to the removal of centralized authorities that would have otherwise been able to get that money back.
How did they check if a withdrawal was unauthorized (real) or not? What if I did a withdrawal, say it was unauthorized, and claim the money (and also have the crypto in a different wallet)?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't call it a startup, it paid 700mil$ to rename an arena!
Technically, they agreed to pay $700M over 20 years for arena naming rights -- no idea what the deal actually looks like but if you flat-line it, they're "only" paying $35M/year. Which is still a ton of money but much more reasonable in terms of cash out the door for a startup.
> 2FA tokens for all users worldwide were subsequently revoked to ensure the new infrastructure was in effect. We have mandatory 2FA policies on both the frontend and backend to protect users during this revocation phase, as outflows such as withdrawals have a requirement to setup and use 2FA in order to withdraw. How is this supposed to work? They revoked all of their 2FA for all accounts? Doesn't this just open the…
Time to play the classic crypto exchange game: hack or exit scam? Disabling 2FA in this scenario is dumb enough to raise the question of malfeasance of the part of this theft.
> No customers experienced a loss of funds. In the majority of cases we prevented the unauthorized withdrawal, and in all other cases customers were fully reimbursed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yes, they literally logged everyone out, removed 2FA, and on the new login, users had to re-add 2FA
Wouldn't this also allow an attacker to add his own 2FA?
I am a cyber security consultant for startups. The first thing that I communicate is that just by not being in crypto you have drastically lowered your risk profile. Attackers care a lot about what they can get to if they are able to breach your security.
Just like finance companies have a different risk profile than companies generating bingo cards, crypto companies have different risk profiles than other non-financial ones. Are people arguing that this is not true or something?
MATT DAMON HOW COULD YOU DO THIS TO ME
It's funny how many comments are about Matt Damon. That must be a pretty sticky ad campaign. It's also bizarre that I never heard of them before this marketing blitz although they seemingly have enough cash to hire Matt Damon and buy naming rights to an NFL stadium. I guess all their budget went to marketing instead of hardening their platform.
That's par for the course in the cryptocurrency space. Why develop good technology with well-defined valuable use cases when you can hype your rocketship to the moon?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe, but I think you can make a case for the opposite too. Without exchanges, there'd be no crypto. Exchanges are the only reason 99% of people who have crypto can figure out how.
Especially with mobile devices taking over. An increasing number of people don't even have a laptop or desktop to hold a whole blockchain on. Even an iPhone 13 Pro with 1TB of storage would lose 10-20% of its space to that. That isn't going to improve. The more popular it gets, the faster it grows, and it would compete with all the other storage needs that also grow. Get someone to load up and maintain a whole blockc…