Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.misc > #388 > unrolled thread
| Started by | True Satan <true_satan@fastmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-02-13 20:54 +0000 |
| Last post | 2014-02-14 12:23 +0000 |
| Articles | 4 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.misc
Deep Web Trading Site Silk Road 2 Hacked True Satan <true_satan@fastmail.co.uk> - 2014-02-13 20:54 +0000
Re: Deep Web Trading Site Silk Road 2 Hacked cykros@devio.us - 2014-02-13 21:10 +0000
Re: Deep Web Trading Site Silk Road 2 Hacked RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-02-14 11:04 +0000
Re: Deep Web Trading Site Silk Road 2 Hacked True Satan <true_satan@fastmail.co.uk> - 2014-02-14 12:23 +0000
| From | True Satan <true_satan@fastmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-13 20:54 +0000 |
| Subject | Deep Web Trading Site Silk Road 2 Hacked |
| Message-ID | <ldjbee$1tf$1@dont-email.me> |
"http://www.deepdotweb.com/2014/02/13/silk-road-2-hacked-bitcoins-stolen- unknown-amount/" Either the admins and staff of the site were incredibly stupid (you don't leave all the doors and windows open at your version of Fort Knox) or are behind the theft of an as yet undetermined quantity of Bitcoin. The failure bears uncanny similarity to the Mt.Gox fiasco in that they lay the blame on the Bitcoin protocol yet said protocol has had the flaw they are highlighting from its inception and it is both very well known and warned about by Bitcoin developers. Use of official Bitcoin clients fully mitigates the flaw...it would seem that like Mt.Gox they crafted their own system and the known flaw was not mitigated within it.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cykros@devio.us |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-13 21:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ldjccs$944$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388 |
True Satan <true_satan@fastmail.co.uk> wrote: > "http://www.deepdotweb.com/2014/02/13/silk-road-2-hacked-bitcoins-stolen- > unknown-amount/" > > Either the admins and staff of the site were incredibly stupid (you > don't leave all the doors and windows open at your version of Fort Knox) > or are behind the theft of an as yet undetermined quantity of Bitcoin. > The failure bears uncanny similarity to the Mt.Gox fiasco in that they > lay the blame on the Bitcoin protocol yet said protocol has had the flaw > they are highlighting from its inception and it is both very well known > and warned about by Bitcoin developers. Use of official Bitcoin clients > fully mitigates the flaw...it would seem that like Mt.Gox they crafted > their own system and the known flaw was not mitigated within it. First Post! :-P Either one is really entirely plausible. Blindspots exist for everyone, and even when you have the luxury of having a big team working on security for a server, things can and often do get missed. Scale that down to a one or two man operation with extremely little trust going out from there, and you have a recipe for a vulnerable server. But naturally, they also are running a criminal underground site whose name they got by opportunistically jumping on the name and style of a popular site that had just been popped. Neither option would really surprise me here; it may be interesting to see how this affects things for them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-14 11:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ldkt7p$o1s$2@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #390 |
cykros@devio.us wrote: > True Satan<true_satan@fastmail.co.uk> wrote: >> "http://www.deepdotweb.com/2014/02/13/silk-road-2-hacked-bitcoins-stolen- >> unknown-amount/" >> >> Either the admins and staff of the site were incredibly stupid (you >> don't leave all the doors and windows open at your version of Fort Knox) >> or are behind the theft of an as yet undetermined quantity of Bitcoin. >> The failure bears uncanny similarity to the Mt.Gox fiasco in that they >> lay the blame on the Bitcoin protocol yet said protocol has had the flaw >> they are highlighting from its inception and it is both very well known >> and warned about by Bitcoin developers. Use of official Bitcoin clients >> fully mitigates the flaw...it would seem that like Mt.Gox they crafted >> their own system and the known flaw was not mitigated within it. > > First Post! :-P > > Either one is really entirely plausible. Blindspots exist for everyone, > and even when you have the luxury of having a big team working on security > for a server, things can and often do get missed. Scale that down to a > one or two man operation with extremely little trust going out from there, > and you have a recipe for a vulnerable server. But naturally, they also > are running a criminal underground site whose name they got by > opportunistically jumping on the name and style of a popular site that > had just been popped. Neither option would really surprise me here; > it may be interesting to see how this affects things for them. > There's an old saying: "don't blame on malfeasance that which can more easily be explained by incompetence" or something like that. Maybe somebody got rich off of this. But already the luster is coming off of Bitcoin. These recent vulnerabilities and loss of value make Bitcoin not worth the effort, and people won't have any trust in it - the source of its value. Meanwhile, Dogecoin, on the other hand .. Much success! Many value!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | True Satan <true_satan@fastmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-14 12:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ldl1sn$aq8$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #390 |
To be fair though in the two recent cases the vulnerability was the same one; one that had been both known about for years (literally) and fully mitigated in the official client. The two sites who had issues didn't use the official client but instead coded their own systems while ignoring good advice and paying no heed to known vulnerabilities...hardly the fault of Bitcoin!
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | comp.misc
csiph-web