Re: Wallet.is a service striving to succeed where instawallet has failed
You just admitted that nothing is 100% safe. Besides, do some reading.. the chrome extension for Blockchain.info is quite secure. Not bulletproof of course, but a hundred orders of magnitudes better than your current setup with is "send me coins".
I don't think he "admitted" is the right word for describing a situation when someone says a truism that is well-known in all security-related fields.
Also, is your "hundred orders of magnitudes" assessment based on some formal estimation process, or are you just fond of throwing around brown-number claims that sound BIG ?
Here is what WILL happen (guaranteed):
1. Operator goes AWOL, with no renewals server goes down
2. Operator disappears along with the coins in the wallet. Possibly a "hack" explanation.
3. Site actually gets hacked by someone else, you lose some or all of your coins
1. Operator goes AWOL, with no renewals server goes down
2. Operator disappears along with the coins in the wallet. Possibly a "hack" explanation.
3. Site actually gets hacked by someone else, you lose some or all of your coins
Guaranteed ?
As in, you would be willing to bet money on that ? Interesting... We could do something... about that
Sorry if I'm a bit harsh, but this will end up with people losing their bitcoins to a hacker, to you, or to /dev/null.
Well well... user-side encrypted keys which are stored (encrypted) elsewhere can be rather vulnerable to /dev/null incident happening "on the server side" (of course, proper service should have backups - but that does not mean a given specific service does)
Especially considering how the operator was registered a couple of days ago, he most likely saw how instawallet could have stole 10 million USD and wanted to scam others.
Are you, by any chance, related to Glenn Beck ? (I'm just asking questions
)'cause I can like myself a strongly pseudonymous, online wallet that is sufficiently feature-rich...So come on, AMAZE ME.
I guess you didn't want a secure online wallet.
Now, now, it depends.
Personally, I don't think that "really fast one-time wallet" services are "done for", that's all.
Yes, they do have attack vectors and failure modes that are specific to them, but at a number of circumstances I have found such trade-offs acceptable (I have used Instawallet in the past, as an "intermediate" coin deposit of sorts, and was quite satisfied by the outcome).
Also, I don't think anything can be completely secure - my vanilla satoshi client, with password-protected wallet and regular automatic backups, can be argued to be safer than any "online-shmonline" service could ever be, but to claim it is "totally" secure would be just pure hubris.
The question is, what the tradeoffs are.
As it stands, Wallet.is doesn't do anything interesting enough to make me consider moving coins into it, though I probably will use it as a "lazy man's cheap-ass coin decorrelator" at some point in the future.
Hence, dear wallet.is, please amaze me. Or something.
I suggest we move the discussion from "Ye Greate Battle of Wallet Service Philosophies" to "what cool features one could add to a "classic" wallet service"
I can start a separate thread for great philosophical battles, if someone considers it necessary.
P.S.:
Dear TradeFortress, if Modify button was a bunch of rattlesnakes, your next-of-kin would have already received your possessions.