Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 21 results by Neuerung
I also had an unauthorized transaction yesterday, I've been using blockchain for about 2 years now and have never had this problem before. I talked to support and they said i either had malware or used a phishing site. I'm using Ubuntu so I don't think malware is the problem, I was in a hurry when i logged in but i tried to look for phishing sites by doing a search and couldn't really find any( i also just made this wallet). The only other thing i did was use tor while creating this wallet(for anonymity) not sure if thats what did it, but I've done this multiple times before with no problem. Guess this is just the nature of the btc game, i should have set a secondary pass maybe? any insight would help for future transaction. this is the wallet for reference 1CDAeLd55L4o9ivYGHsH2JecB3HfRgVKYt
Thera was phishing site yesterday on top of the google ads (so in front of the normal search results) for a few hours, when looking for blockchain.info on google. Google removed it eventually.The site looked exactly like the normal blockchain wallet login, but the url was something different like "blockchain.info.xxxx.xxx". I have two factor autentification and the field for two factor authentification did not show up. I did not enter anything on this mask.
Maybe you went on this phishing site and you did not have two factor authentification on. Then the phishing site stole your password and they emptied your wallet.
My real account on blockchain.info is just fine, nothing missing...
5. Make a test transaction to the public address of my paper wallet of one satoshi to verify the functionality of my paper wallet....
I think you can´t transfer only 1 Sathosi. It will be considered spam and no be confirmed. Try sending something like 0.01 Bitcoin. Don´t forget to put fees (0.0001) Bitcon in this case. Blockchain.info does this automaticalle in the "simple mode"
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1ztjmg/andreas_im_fundraising_for_dorian_nakamoto/
Hi everyone, Andreas M. Antonopoulos here.
I'm fundraising for Dorian Nakamoto, the person named in the newsweak article.
I have no idea if this person is Satoshi, though it seems increasingly unlikely. However, it doesn't matter either way. If this person is Satoshi, then the funds are a small "thanks" and won't make much of a difference.
....
Hi everyone, Andreas M. Antonopoulos here.
I'm fundraising for Dorian Nakamoto, the person named in the newsweak article.
I have no idea if this person is Satoshi, though it seems increasingly unlikely. However, it doesn't matter either way. If this person is Satoshi, then the funds are a small "thanks" and won't make much of a difference.
....
If Dorian is indeed Satoshi (which I believe), the funds (now collecting) could still make much of a difference. If Dorian worked for the government and created bitcoin for them (or he worked in a Government-group that created bitcoin), then the results from early mining would belong to the government (his employer) and he had never access to the resulting money of early mining...
Hallo,
ich wollte meine neuerworbenen Bitcoins auch einmal testweise ausgeben, bei lieferservice.de
Die bieten Bitcoinpayment an (wohl über Bitpay). Ich besitze ein blockhchain.info wallet sowie paperwallets und möchte mir kein zusätzliches wallet auf meinem Rechner installieren (mögliche malwaregefahr).
Auf dem "Zahlscreen" von Lieferservice.de steht dann die Bitcoinadresse, der Betrag und ein sechstellige Buchstabenkombination und ein Knopf ("mit Bictcoin zahlen") mit einem link der auf eine Website, die statt mit "http" mit "bitcoin" anfängt. Darauf würden dann wahrscheinlich installierte wallets wie multibit oder armory reagieren (Stehen auch auf der Website von Bitpay als kompatible Clients). Wass passiert aber, wenn ich einfach von meinem Blockchain.info wallet den Betrag an die angegebene Bitcoinadresse überweise? Was mache ich mit dem zusätzlich angegebenen sechsstelligen Code? Als öffentliche Nachricht mitgeben? Erkennt dann Bitpay meine Zahlung und gibt dann bitpay diese weiter an Lieferservie.de?
Fragen über Fragen in Hoffnung auf eine Antwort.
Vielen Dank im Voraus.
ich wollte meine neuerworbenen Bitcoins auch einmal testweise ausgeben, bei lieferservice.de
Die bieten Bitcoinpayment an (wohl über Bitpay). Ich besitze ein blockhchain.info wallet sowie paperwallets und möchte mir kein zusätzliches wallet auf meinem Rechner installieren (mögliche malwaregefahr).
Auf dem "Zahlscreen" von Lieferservice.de steht dann die Bitcoinadresse, der Betrag und ein sechstellige Buchstabenkombination und ein Knopf ("mit Bictcoin zahlen") mit einem link der auf eine Website, die statt mit "http" mit "bitcoin" anfängt. Darauf würden dann wahrscheinlich installierte wallets wie multibit oder armory reagieren (Stehen auch auf der Website von Bitpay als kompatible Clients). Wass passiert aber, wenn ich einfach von meinem Blockchain.info wallet den Betrag an die angegebene Bitcoinadresse überweise? Was mache ich mit dem zusätzlich angegebenen sechsstelligen Code? Als öffentliche Nachricht mitgeben? Erkennt dann Bitpay meine Zahlung und gibt dann bitpay diese weiter an Lieferservie.de?
Fragen über Fragen in Hoffnung auf eine Antwort.
Vielen Dank im Voraus.
Einfach den angegebenen Betrag an die Adresse schicken. Bitpay ordnet Zahlungen über die Adressen zu, diesen ominösen sechsstelligen code brauchst du also nicht
Vielen Dank,aber wozu ist der denn der sechstellige Code da? Damit Lieferservice.de weis dass ich gezahlt habe und mich auf der Webseite weiterleitet um meinen Bestellvorgang abzuschliesen?
Habe Angst, dass ich das Geld schicke, aber der Bestellvorgang noch nicht richtig abgeschlossen ist. Wenn der "bitcoin-link" zum Wallet ausgeführt würde, würde er mich ja dann evtl au liferservice.de mit einer Bestätigung des Zahlvorgangs zurückleiten und dann wäre die Bestellung "richtig" abgeschlossen...
Hallo,
ich wollte meine neuerworbenen Bitcoins auch einmal testweise ausgeben, bei lieferservice.de
Die bieten Bitcoinpayment an (wohl über Bitpay). Ich besitze ein blockhchain.info wallet sowie paperwallets und möchte mir kein zusätzliches wallet auf meinem Rechner installieren (mögliche malwaregefahr).
Auf dem "Zahlscreen" von Lieferservice.de steht dann die Bitcoinadresse, der Betrag und ein sechstellige Buchstabenkombination und ein Knopf ("mit Bictcoin zahlen") mit einem link der auf eine Website, die statt mit "http" mit "bitcoin" anfängt. Darauf würden dann wahrscheinlich installierte wallets wie multibit oder armory reagieren (Stehen auch auf der Website von Bitpay als kompatible Clients). Wass passiert aber, wenn ich einfach von meinem Blockchain.info wallet den Betrag an die angegebene Bitcoinadresse überweise? Was mache ich mit dem zusätzlich angegebenen sechsstelligen Code? Als öffentliche Nachricht mitgeben? Erkennt dann Bitpay meine Zahlung und gibt dann bitpay diese weiter an Lieferservie.de?
Fragen über Fragen in Hoffnung auf eine Antwort.
Vielen Dank im Voraus.
ich wollte meine neuerworbenen Bitcoins auch einmal testweise ausgeben, bei lieferservice.de
Die bieten Bitcoinpayment an (wohl über Bitpay). Ich besitze ein blockhchain.info wallet sowie paperwallets und möchte mir kein zusätzliches wallet auf meinem Rechner installieren (mögliche malwaregefahr).
Auf dem "Zahlscreen" von Lieferservice.de steht dann die Bitcoinadresse, der Betrag und ein sechstellige Buchstabenkombination und ein Knopf ("mit Bictcoin zahlen") mit einem link der auf eine Website, die statt mit "http" mit "bitcoin" anfängt. Darauf würden dann wahrscheinlich installierte wallets wie multibit oder armory reagieren (Stehen auch auf der Website von Bitpay als kompatible Clients). Wass passiert aber, wenn ich einfach von meinem Blockchain.info wallet den Betrag an die angegebene Bitcoinadresse überweise? Was mache ich mit dem zusätzlich angegebenen sechsstelligen Code? Als öffentliche Nachricht mitgeben? Erkennt dann Bitpay meine Zahlung und gibt dann bitpay diese weiter an Lieferservie.de?
Fragen über Fragen in Hoffnung auf eine Antwort.
Vielen Dank im Voraus.
I have sent a xxxxEUR amount via SEPA yesterday at 16:00. It arrived at my account on Bitstamp today at 12:00, already converted into USD. So its took 20 hours.
One hour after arrival I traded them into Bitcoins and withdrew them again immediately into a privat wallet. Withdrawal was done in 15 minutes.
So still no problem for me. Everything is fast and smooth at least for me.
One hour after arrival I traded them into Bitcoins and withdrew them again immediately into a privat wallet. Withdrawal was done in 15 minutes.
So still no problem for me. Everything is fast and smooth at least for me.
Anyone from bitstamp to comment on this? It has been 6 days
What kind of SEPA transfer? Withdrawal, deposit? How much? Are you verified? do you have 2FA?It a SEPA withdraw, nothing serious 200 USD, I have been verified for months now, answered KYC 2 months ago, and I do have 2FA. I just wanted to test the withdrawal time, but seems there is a problem with them. A month ago everything was going smoothly, transactions never got "in process" for this long, it was max 2 bussines days. And it's 5 now, and no one from support is answering. For me, it is kind of an alarm, since we all know how it was with gox
If bitstamp is running on fractional reserve (which I don't believe, i think they are honest), each aditional day they keep the money could help cover their "fraction".
Lets assume their fiat transfer volume is 10Mio$ a day. Then each day delay in fiat processing (deposit and withdrawal) could cover a hole of 10Mio$. Lets compare this to mtgox. If they had 42 day delay in withdrawal (6 weeks, which was about the time i think) it would have covered a hole of 420 Mio US$ at mtgox. Thats about the dimension of the financial hole they really had... (coincidence?)
But again: I don't think bitstamp is running on fractional reserve.
Anyone from bitstamp to comment on this? It has been 6 days
What kind of SEPA transfer? Withdrawal, deposit? How much? Are you verified? do you have 2FA?Re: BITSTAMP SEPA account "no transfer" countries/banks' list (upd 2014-02-28)
they have problems. Bitstamp will be the next Mt. Gox.
Why do they have problems?
I just deposited an xxxxEUR amount on bitstamp (SEPA). It took 1.5 businees days. I then traded these to bitcoins and withdrew these bitcoins to a private wallet immediately. BTC withdrawal was done in a few minutes. So no problem for me at all.
Still a happy customer.
According to this post http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1yzbhg/bitstamps_bank_refused_to_open_me_a_bank_account
Unicredit in Slovenia (the bank Bitstamp uses) and Sillcon Valley Bank (the bank Coinbase uses) are both declining bank accounts to new bitcoin-related firms.
So for new companies in the bitcoin business it will be probably nearly impossible to get banking accounts, if even these banks which already have bitcoin related accounts (coinbase and bitstamp) refuse to open new accounts.
The probability (with the MtGox and the Silkroad scandals in mind) that these Banks are also shutting down the accounts of bitstamp and Coinbase is not low.
Then we would loose even more important exchanges, people with FIAT on these exchanges will not be able to withdraw any more.
People who are exchanging btc locally are also in danger to get imprisoned for money laundering already.
All this would be a very hard hit to bitcoin.
What do you think? I this a realistic scenario? Should we really worry?
Unicredit in Slovenia (the bank Bitstamp uses) and Sillcon Valley Bank (the bank Coinbase uses) are both declining bank accounts to new bitcoin-related firms.
So for new companies in the bitcoin business it will be probably nearly impossible to get banking accounts, if even these banks which already have bitcoin related accounts (coinbase and bitstamp) refuse to open new accounts.
The probability (with the MtGox and the Silkroad scandals in mind) that these Banks are also shutting down the accounts of bitstamp and Coinbase is not low.
Then we would loose even more important exchanges, people with FIAT on these exchanges will not be able to withdraw any more.
People who are exchanging btc locally are also in danger to get imprisoned for money laundering already.
All this would be a very hard hit to bitcoin.
What do you think? I this a realistic scenario? Should we really worry?
Ever heard of localbitcoins.com?
Yes, the guys which got arrested where from localbitcoins.com
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-02-09/miami-bitcoin-arrests-may-be-first-state-case-prosecutor-says
Didn't we have this South African bank that is testing bitcoin? This is the new deal, time for Africa to rule!
This bank already burried their plans concerning bitcoins unfortunately (sorry I can't find the link anymore).According to this post http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1yzbhg/bitstamps_bank_refused_to_open_me_a_bank_account
Unicredit in Slovenia (the bank Bitstamp uses) and Sillcon Valley Bank (the bank Coinbase uses) are both declining bank accounts to new bitcoin-related firms.
So for new companies in the bitcoin business it will be probably nearly impossible to get banking accounts, if even these banks which already have bitcoin related accounts (coinbase and bitstamp) refuse to open new accounts.
The probability (with the MtGox and the Silkroad scandals in mind) that these Banks are also shutting down the accounts of bitstamp and Coinbase is not low.
Then we would loose even more important exchanges, people with FIAT on these exchanges will not be able to withdraw any more.
People who are exchanging btc locally are also in danger to get imprisoned for money laundering already.
All this would be a very hard hit to bitcoin.
What do you think? I this a realistic scenario? Should we really worry?
Unicredit in Slovenia (the bank Bitstamp uses) and Sillcon Valley Bank (the bank Coinbase uses) are both declining bank accounts to new bitcoin-related firms.
So for new companies in the bitcoin business it will be probably nearly impossible to get banking accounts, if even these banks which already have bitcoin related accounts (coinbase and bitstamp) refuse to open new accounts.
The probability (with the MtGox and the Silkroad scandals in mind) that these Banks are also shutting down the accounts of bitstamp and Coinbase is not low.
Then we would loose even more important exchanges, people with FIAT on these exchanges will not be able to withdraw any more.
People who are exchanging btc locally are also in danger to get imprisoned for money laundering already.
All this would be a very hard hit to bitcoin.
What do you think? I this a realistic scenario? Should we really worry?
Lets assume the was no "leak" from the cold wallets and Mtgox made up transactions and sold bitcoins they never possesed and made new "goxcoins" out of thin air up to 700k.
Btc withdrawals would be paid with realbtc, but they ran out.
This would be a classical ponzi.
Btc withdrawals would be paid with realbtc, but they ran out.
This would be a classical ponzi.
Possible, how could one be stole so much and not notice?
Nobody external could have noticed. Only Karpeles himself. But its possible that HE made up these transactions with new goxcoins out of thin air
so he knew it anyway Lets assume the was no "leak" from the cold wallets and Mtgox made up transactions and sold bitcoins they never possesed and made new "goxcoins" out of thin air up to 700k.
Btc withdrawals would be paid with realbtc, but they ran out.
This would be a classical ponzi.
Btc withdrawals would be paid with realbtc, but they ran out.
This would be a classical ponzi.
Re: Mtgox lost 744,408 BTC due to malleability-related theft!!!
a nice analysis of Mtgox's current financial situation from Ryan Selkis. I am amazed by the details he provided.
source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/209050732/MtGox-Situation-Crisis-Strategy-Draft
source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/209050732/MtGox-Situation-Crisis-Strategy-Draft
In the paper it says: "The cold storage has been wiped out due to a leak in the hot wallet".
How is this possible?
??. Are they coupled?. Or is it a huge theft by Mark Karpeles???Has someone an answer for this?
So, if the Hot Pocket (wallet) was less then 2% it was topped off by the Frigid Wallet.
Yes, but not automatically, otherwise it would not be a cold (frigid) wallet by definition, or am i wrong?
700,000 plus coins poof!
$35M, Jesus!
2nd biggest steal in bitcoin history
you have forgotten a "0", it's $350M
Re: Mtgox lost 744,408 BTC due to malleability-related theft!!!
a nice analysis of Mtgox's current financial situation from Ryan Selkis. I am amazed by the details he provided.
source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/209050732/MtGox-Situation-Crisis-Strategy-Draft
source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/209050732/MtGox-Situation-Crisis-Strategy-Draft
In the paper it says: "The cold storage has been wiped out due to a leak in the hot wallet".
How is this possible?
??. Are they coupled?. Or is it a huge theft by Mark Karpeles???Has someone an answer for this?
Re: BITSTAMP SEPA account "no transfer" countries/banks' list (upd 2014-02-21 upd2)
I am located in Germany
I just opened a new Bitstamp account 2 days ago.
Verification was done in 24 hours.
Immediately after verification i send an xxxEUR amount from Hypovereinsbank (Member of Unicredit) (SEPA) from Germany.
Amount was deposited on Bitstamp 16 hours later (very fast!)
Bought some bitcoins immidiately, then I withdrew some of these bitcoins to my external wallet (done within 15 minutes)
So I am a very happy customer so far. Everything works fine, smooth and very fast.
I did not try fiat withdrawal yet...
I just opened a new Bitstamp account 2 days ago.
Verification was done in 24 hours.
Immediately after verification i send an xxxEUR amount from Hypovereinsbank (Member of Unicredit) (SEPA) from Germany.
Amount was deposited on Bitstamp 16 hours later (very fast!)
Bought some bitcoins immidiately, then I withdrew some of these bitcoins to my external wallet (done within 15 minutes)
So I am a very happy customer so far. Everything works fine, smooth and very fast.
I did not try fiat withdrawal yet...
Repost for visibility:
Today on #bitcoin
gmaxwell: wumpus: yea, I understand they had timed automatic reissues...
this was also something I didn't know prior to monday before last and is one of the other reasons my "they couldn't have lost much!" position softened to "I have no freeking clue."
alpha125: gmaxwell: where did you find out abotu the automatic reissues?
gmaxwell: alpha125: from mtgox staff and magicaltux ... I had assumed previously that any reissues were manual via customer support but apparently it was just timed.
gmaxwell: you'll also note that they've kept increasing their fees and then even mad paying fees mandatory.
gmaxwell: This suggested to me that they totally misunderstood their problems. (and— I reported that I believed this months ago too)
gmaxwell: e.g. they noticed lots of txn getting stuck, they didn't understand it was because they were producing invalid txn (even though it was reported to them) and so they thought it was just 'full blocks'
gmaxwell: and they increased their fees from 0.0001 to 0.0005 — which was enough to may more than virtually every txn— and then later to 0.001 which is basically astronomic. And then they made it mandatory.
gmaxwell: of course their stalled txn had nothing to do with fees.
Edit: Just to clarify, only quoted relevant parts (maybe I should have inserted "[...]" where applicable). Full text here: http://pastebin.com/DaSph9uT
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg5278421#msg5278421gmaxwell: wumpus: yea, I understand they had timed automatic reissues...
this was also something I didn't know prior to monday before last and is one of the other reasons my "they couldn't have lost much!" position softened to "I have no freeking clue."alpha125: gmaxwell: where did you find out abotu the automatic reissues?
gmaxwell: alpha125: from mtgox staff and magicaltux ... I had assumed previously that any reissues were manual via customer support but apparently it was just timed.
gmaxwell: you'll also note that they've kept increasing their fees and then even mad paying fees mandatory.
gmaxwell: This suggested to me that they totally misunderstood their problems. (and— I reported that I believed this months ago too)
gmaxwell: e.g. they noticed lots of txn getting stuck, they didn't understand it was because they were producing invalid txn (even though it was reported to them) and so they thought it was just 'full blocks'
gmaxwell: and they increased their fees from 0.0001 to 0.0005 — which was enough to may more than virtually every txn— and then later to 0.001 which is basically astronomic. And then they made it mandatory.
gmaxwell: of course their stalled txn had nothing to do with fees.
Edit: Just to clarify, only quoted relevant parts (maybe I should have inserted "[...]" where applicable). Full text here: http://pastebin.com/DaSph9uT
If this automatic resend is really true, mtgox could have lost HUGE amounts of money in a short period of time:
A thief could have simply withdrawn his btc from his goxwallet to an external btc wallet, they would be resend automatically (or even two or three or four times) due to the malleability without even the need to contact customer support, and then he could redeposit these external bitcoins (now much more) back into his mtgox btc account. Then he could start this cycle again. Because this cycle does not involve any fiat withdrawals or fiat deposits at all, the cycle could have been done very fast and a lot of times with exponentially more bitcoins each time.
This would be really disastreous to mtgox.
You are wrong, the only change that you can safely say the miners won't accept is changing the proof of work from SHA to something else.
Thanks Denton for this answer.
But what´s happening if additional Information has to be put into the input of the SHA hashing (like timestamps, Transaction ID´s etc.) so that they are not malleable any more.
Can this be done in software or is the ASIC hardware wired in a way lets say:
Input 2000 Bytes -->Output SHA(2000Bytes), but if you need 500 bytes more for the additional information, the current ASIC hardware is not capable of doing this?