Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

153k Ether Stolen in Parity Multi-Sig Attack

etherscan.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 754 posts

Re: 153k Ether Stolen in Parity Multi-Sig Attack

#141

Post by urda »

codewiz wrote: post #106
matt_wulfeck wrote: post #100

I'm sure they'll just hard fork again. And nobody cares because ethereum isn't actually being used for anything real, just a bunch of enthusiasts trying to get rich.

How is rolling back transactions that are clearly part of a robbery a bad thing?

... because it breaks the basic fundamentals of a block chain. A block chain is supposed to fight against roll backs not support them.

Sure, the core team / devs are using the rollback for good. But will that always be the same in the future? It's an avenue for abuse and one of the primary reasons ether isn't going to take off.

Re: 153k Ether Stolen in Parity Multi-Sig Attack

#142

Post by davidy123 »

Kenji wrote: post #29
finnh wrote: post #11

I've posted this before [0], but it's still apropos regarding the foolishness that is Ethereum. [Ethereum] only makes sense if all of the following obtain: (a) the code is 100% bug-free (b/c accidents cannot be rewound) (b) all code-writers are 100% honest (their code does what they say) (c) all contract participants are 100% perfect code readers (so as to not enter into fraudulent contracts) (Strictly speaking, only…

Let perfect not be the enemy of good. If you demanded that our currencies like dollars live up to your criteria, we would still be trading goods without currency.

"We" possibly never did trade goods instead of using currency. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/02/barter-...

Re: 153k Ether Stolen in Parity Multi-Sig Attack

#143

Post by draw_down »

dna_polymerase wrote: post #46
earlz wrote: post #25

Here's the root error I believe: https://github.com/paritytech/parity/blob/master/js/src/cont... The initWallet function should have been marked internal, but was instead not marked. Unmarked functions default to public in Solidity, so anyone can call that function and reinitialize the wallet to be under their control

I can literally feel how Ethereum changes the law. I mean, seriously, no need for lawyers anymore. On ethereum it's is simple: You got fucked, live with it. "Bad faith? It's the code, didn't you read it?"

Yeah! Well, uh... except that one time.... mumblemumble

Re: 153k Ether Stolen in Parity Multi-Sig Attack

#144

Post by eco »

Deimorz wrote: post #54
sna1l wrote: post #27

https://etherscan.io/address/0x1dba1131000664b884a1ba2384641... -- white hat group exploited the vuln and are holding people's crypto for them.

I don't follow Ethereum closely at all, but I don't really understand a few things about this: - Who's the "white hat group"? Why do people have confidence in it? - Why does everyone believe they'll give back $75M+? If they decided to just keep it, what could anyone do? - How will people even be able to claim ownership of the ETH in a way that's verifiable so they know they're giving it back to the right person?

It's the same group that rescued funds during The DAO attack so they have a good history of benevolent hacking.

They are just going to deploy new multi-sig contracts with a fix and make the original owners the owners of the new contracts. Pretty easy to do. They are actually paying for the gas to do the fix using donations they received for their work on The DAO attack so the original wallet owners aren't even out the gas the fix would charge (which isn't all that much but it's nice that they are being made completely whole).

Re: 153k Ether Stolen in Parity Multi-Sig Attack

#145

Post by urda »

lettergram wrote: post #13
niahmiah wrote: post #2

Let me guess... another hard fork to undo this.

Hard fork can't even undo this, from my understanding.

> Hard fork can't even undo this, from my understanding.

This is completely incorrect.

A hard fork can undo anything, it's just backing up before this happened and continuing down another path as if it didn't.

Re: 153k Ether Stolen in Parity Multi-Sig Attack

#146

Post by draw_down »

codewiz wrote: post #106
matt_wulfeck wrote: post #100

I'm sure they'll just hard fork again. And nobody cares because ethereum isn't actually being used for anything real, just a bunch of enthusiasts trying to get rich.

How is rolling back transactions that are clearly part of a robbery a bad thing?

Define robbery.

Re: 153k Ether Stolen in Parity Multi-Sig Attack

#147

Post by Animats »

Analemma_ wrote: post #43
earlz wrote: post #25

Here's the root error I believe: https://github.com/paritytech/parity/blob/master/js/src/cont... The initWallet function should have been marked internal, but was instead not marked. Unmarked functions default to public in Solidity, so anyone can call that function and reinitialize the wallet to be under their control

> Unmarked functions default to public in Solidity What kind of brain-dead apes designed this language? This would be a stupid decision in any language, never mind one specifically intended for high-value transactions.

This is why I keep saying that "smart contracts" should be expressed in some declarative notation like decision tables. Byte-coded programs as contracts were a really bad idea. Contracts need to be readable, not just executable.

Re: 153k Ether Stolen in Parity Multi-Sig Attack

#148

Post by rocqua »

vkou wrote: post #80
joshschreuder wrote: post #52

Let's play hypotheticals. If you were the attacker and you now have the ETH in your wallet, how do you cash out without anyone identifying you and maximising your profits? Also has the attacker broken a law by exploiting a bug in the contract?

> If you were the attacker and you now have the ETH in your wallet, how do you cash out without anyone identifying you and maximising your profits? Exchange to BTC, mix it, exchange to USD. > Also has the attacker broken a law by exploiting a bug in the contract? There are no laws. Only contracts.

There are presumably still actual nation-state like laws that apply. Heck, laws still apply to contracts.

Re: 153k Ether Stolen in Parity Multi-Sig Attack

#150

Post by oh_sigh »

dna_polymerase wrote: post #46
earlz wrote: post #25

Here's the root error I believe: https://github.com/paritytech/parity/blob/master/js/src/cont... The initWallet function should have been marked internal, but was instead not marked. Unmarked functions default to public in Solidity, so anyone can call that function and reinitialize the wallet to be under their control

I can literally feel how Ethereum changes the law. I mean, seriously, no need for lawyers anymore. On ethereum it's is simple: You got fucked, live with it. "Bad faith? It's the code, didn't you read it?"

Odds etherium does another hard fork to fix this bug?
Post reply on HN