Quote from: nexern on January 03, 2014, 07:26:09 PM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on January 03, 2014, 07:03:44 PM

Quote from: jl777 on January 03, 2014, 06:52:33 PM

CfB + jean-luc + nexern,

There are millions of darkNXT and more being created all the time. darkNXT is NXT sent to an address that doesn't belong to anybody. I am assuming this is something we don't want the end user to be able to do easily. Anyone with direct API access could do whatever they wanted, but end users should NOT be allowed to create darkNXT, especially when all it takes is a typo or memory corruption.

The solution to this is so simple I am at a loss as to why it has not been implemented. NXT sent to an acct without key will create darkNXT, there is a call to detect if an acct has a key. Why has this simple guard not been implemented?

This is a very serious flaw and even ripple has a solution to this by not allowing money to an unfunded acct. We can't let horrible flawed useless ripple be better than NXT in this area can we?

James

P.S. For those not in the real world, EVERYTIME and end user creates darkNXT, it will create at least a support incident at worst lawsuits against a vendor supporting NXT. Need I remind people that we need widespread NXT adoption.

I hope nexern will fix this issue on client side.

already wrote about this two weeks ago.
the client wil handle it this way:

1. check if address is within own address book -> green
2. if account exist within blockchain -> yellow
3. don't exist within blockchain -> red

simple visual control.

what about double sending? Simple solution is to send 1 Nxt first, then users can check the trade on the blockchain - and then make a real trade to the same account