Quote from: figmentofmyass on July 08, 2019, 08:37:18 PM

Quote from: nutildah on July 08, 2019, 11:42:59 AM

What do you mean "did nothing"? They were the first to figure out what was going on and shut down deposits and withdrawals immediately thereafter. They immediately reached out to the Monacoin developers and told them about the issue.

you mean livecoin was the first to figure out they just got double spend attacked and lost funds? i imagine they were.

what would you expect the coin developers to do about it?

At the very least (in both instances) provide Livecoin with some kind of bug bounty reward.

Quote from: figmentofmyass on July 08, 2019, 08:37:18 PM

Quote from: nutildah on July 08, 2019, 11:42:59 AM

Quote from: squatter on July 07, 2019, 09:46:46 PM

Imagine if exchanges accepted zero-confirmation transactions in Bitcoin and then began blaming Core developers because customers managed to double spend attack them. This is the same thing.

This is a disingenuous comparison by the very nature of how cryptocurrency works. Its of course not nearly the same thing.

hmmm, could you explain how they are so different? these are both proof of work protocols. relying on insufficient proof of work = services could suffer double spends.

The difference between zero and 1 confirmations is almost infinite. Anybody can create a doublespend with zero confirmations yet very, very few people can pull it off with 1 confirmation. A transaction is not at all secure without at least a single confirmation.

Quote from: figmentofmyass on July 08, 2019, 08:37:18 PM

isn't this why exchanges require a minimum number of confirmations? seems like livecoin didn't require enough confirmations and then allowed the attackers to withdraw before the deposits were double spent. right?

You should read about what actually happened:

https://www.reddit.com/r/monacoin/comments/8k7640/51_attack_on_monacoin/

What they _could_ have done is had some sort of warning system to notify them that 5-6 blocks were created in 1 minute instead of the usual 1.5 minute block time, then either frozen withdrawals at that time or else upped the confirmations required for a deposit. It wasn't until a week later that the Monacoin developer came up with the suggestion of requiring 100 confirmations for a deposit. Both Livecoin and Bittrex had ceased deposits and withdrawals well before then.

Quote from: squatter on July 10, 2019, 09:32:56 AM

Quote from: btc2017btc2017 on July 10, 2019, 09:08:18 AM

exchange dead, exit scam? why no announcement?

They announced on Twitter about 24 hours ago that they would go down for scheduled maintenance today. It's supposed to last for 4-5 hours. How long has it been down?

Its been back up for at least a couple of hours.

Quote from: izooomrud on July 09, 2019, 08:34:56 AM

Stock exchange officer does not stop lying, please read my new response to his slander here and if you find that I am right, please support my flag it is very important!

Your flag has an overwhelming amount of support. You don't have to keep advertising it when everybody sees it at the top of every page in this thread. Even if they did unlock your account, you'd just go back to bitching at them about not being to withdraw your MONA.