Quote from: dooglus on June 20, 2012, 06:54:20 AM

Quote from: Phinnaeus Gage on June 18, 2012, 06:37:10 AM

Quote

Received Time (2012-05-11 12:18:15)
1CMKwkqWVD6BiuHWtrBFTiiCSuSxyyN677 (4,749 BTC - Output) (2012-05-09 22:59:22)
1KsssDbhj8sW5rvcQ6NHiNoxU2wmSVUrQT (3,750 BTC - Output) (2012-05-09 22:59:22)
1Fs1ixzNdPDqLcvsNieUtxd6nX5mZ67SR3 (3,199.9375078 BTC - Output) (2012-05-09 22:59:22)
1PqfGjpgZpdd4gbbGUsUWPJkVaVqoSLizY (3,519 BTC - Output) (2012-05-09 22:59:22)

These look like change outputs after 4 separate withdrawals of 250 BTC from the hot wallet. It could be they split large amounts up into smaller amounts to save on fees, or perhaps they transferred coins to the cold wallet in pieces of 250 BTC. Maybe they deposited to MtGox in 250 BTC pieces. Either way, each of those 4 amounts is the change from sending 250 BTC elsewhere, not a deposit to the hot wallet.

All four 250 BTC went here: http://blockchain.info/tx-index/5866198/8b0a8ed0b2d3b22926615759d882364c7702cca7877782822563ead0b5f62515

So, for two days no other transfers (huge or small) were needed to send to clients from either of those amounts?

Quote

We have over 80% of our Bitcoins in offline wallets at the moment before the attack. We had to keep a large balance because the withdrawals are huge!

And who is "we", for genjix claims he had no idea such a large balance was kept (or in this case, recently placed) in the "Hot Wallet"?

~Bruno~