James, with all due respect what you've just said is baseless and untrue.

We're completely open to any type of attack being possible, and I can assure you that we are cryptographically competent. To that end, we have and will continue to push out research like the Monero Research Lab bulletins that cover theoretical attacks and corner cases that may be impossible to practically pull off. We are not naïve enough to believe the CN reference code we inherited lacks flaws, nor are we stupid enough to believe in our infallibility. The code does have bugs, and may contain as-yet unknown issues, but we are quite confident in the maths and cryptography (as are gmaxwell et. al.), and have yet to see any evidence to the contrary.

Thus far we have seen AnonyMint / TheFascistMind merely redo our MRL-0001 research. We are waiting to see if he can add an additional amplification to it or not. Even so, it is unlikely that the MRL-0001 chain reaction has anything to do with this, as a "time warp" attack doesn't relate to it.

And, too, thus far we have seen no evidence that BCX actually has an exploit. All we have are disjointed breadcrumbs that don't fit an overall picture of how the proposed attack would play out. Given the lack of evidence we are certainly not discounting the remote possibility that there actually is an exploit, but just as with each of Bitcoin's 26 very serious exploits we will analyse an attack if there is one, patch it, and move on.

Between now and 60 hours time we are not going to "rapidly evolve" just because BCX claims he has an exploit but won't give us the technical details. We are, instead, going to continue our work on incrementally documenting and refactoring the codebase, as well as our independent research into edge-case cryptographic weaknesses, and deal with an attack if there is one.