Quote from: Luckybit on November 15, 2013, 02:51:15 AM

Quote from: Peter R on November 15, 2013, 02:42:51 AM

Quote from: Luckybit on November 15, 2013, 01:31:39 AM

So you're telling me that if each Bitcoin is worth $1 million dollars ransomware or other sophisticated malware and spyware wont be developed to target Bitcoin users? This isn't paranoia it's common sense. Governments may or may not have hit any of us already with advanced persistent threats. Do you think they'll tell us?

This seems disingenuous. Gold and cash are worth lots too. If you advertise the fact that you have a big hoard under your bed, and then leave your doors unlocked, then, yeah, you'll be a target.

Just like gold or $, if you don't want to secure your money, pay a service that will.

The beauty of bitcoin is that everyone is free to make the choice that is right for them.

The fact is that it already is advertised who has a big stash. Anyone could be analyzing the blockchain as we speak and connecting those wallet accounts to email addresses. An unregulated exchange could collect email addresses and wallet addresses to put into their database. That exchange could then be hacked or perhaps the government sponsored hackers put the malware on that exchange. Perhaps the exchange itself is merely a front, a honeypot to attract high net worth Bitcoin holders to capture intelligence (which can then allow the database owner to sell the database for Bitcoins to hackers).

Once intelligence has been captured then you know how many coins are in certain addresses and you have their email addresses. So what stops you from sending them attachments with malware? What stops you from targeting them for scams or phishing for more information for even better targeted advanced persistent threats, malware or ransomware?

When you're talking about someone with a million dollars in their wallet and their email address is public information because its associated with an exchange, why wouldn't hackers target that email address? Why wouldn't hackers be looking for personally identifiable information? The same way KYC can be used by regulated exchanges nothing stops unregulated exchanges from collecting information about users and then hacking them.

Thank you for the civilized response, Luckybit.

I would argue that your last points are only likely if you're "not locking your doors," if I may extend my previous analogy. Since bitcoin is so new, we don't fully know what it takes to "securely lock your doors," but we are slowly learning.

It is my opinion that trying to "regulate-away" this learning curve would just create a more catastrophic problem down the road.

I view this learning curve as an opportunity to create more secure ways to store and transact with bitcoin!