Instawallet has been leaking wallet URLs to Google making them fully indexed/searchable. Absolutely devastating security hole. I can't see ever trusting them again: http://www.adaptiveglass.com/?p=656I feel like I knew about this a long time ago somehow. Did this happen before? It did. They said it was because it created a new wallet when google bot visted them. Very quick to write it off. I'll try and search the thread later. Great lolz will follow  I found this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=87387.msg982779#msg982779It might have been TorWallet you were thinking of. But I did find this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6785.msg387831#msg387831Didn't follow the thread much further. Obviously, Google indexing instawallet pages is a problem that has existed since it started. It seems like this post wasn't taken seriously at all. |
|
|
|
Instawallet has been leaking wallet URLs to Google making them fully indexed/searchable. Absolutely devastating security hole. I can't see ever trusting them again: http://www.adaptiveglass.com/?p=656I feel like I knew about this a long time ago somehow. Did this happen before? It did. They said it was because it created a new wallet when google bot visted them. Very quick to write it off. I'll try and search the thread later. Great lolz will follow Sweet. My memories are vindicated. |
|
|
|
Instawallet has been leaking wallet URLs to Google making them fully indexed/searchable. Absolutely devastating security hole. I can't see ever trusting them again: http://www.adaptiveglass.com/?p=656I feel like I knew about this a long time ago somehow. Did this happen before? |
|
|
|
|
Put it into an address. Hold an auction for each char of the private key.
|
|
|
|
So, would this be the demise of sites like localbitcoins.com?
Technically, yes. Realistically, no. The government isn't going to be able to regulate cash exchanges for BTC, and they'll be aiming to go after the big fish (unregulated exchanges) anyway. Source: The AMALC dude said it, so it must be true. |
|
|
|
Politics and religion are excellent reasons to break up with a girlfriend. Better a breakup now than a divorce later.
100% yes to this! Disagreements on religion or politics (or money) is a HUGE red flag when talking about getting married. You've got to be on the same page with your spouse on anything that either of you feel passionately about, or it's very likely going to end badly. People have euphoric views on how they will change their spouse's viewpoint, or how it doesn't really matter and they'll just work it out, but that doesn't match reality. Source: Happily married for almost 7 years now. This can also mean that you simply agree to disagree on some subjects. For instance, just because one person is an Atheist and another is Roman Catholic does not mean that they'd be bad for each other. As long as neither of them is a preachy, foaming-at-the-mouth extremist type of person, they should be able to get along fine in that regard. Of course, religion and politics are only a measly two variables in the equation of a relationship. Exactly why I said "either of you feel passionately about". If either the Atheist or the Roman Catholic felt passionately about their religious views, in most cases, that marriage will end badly. Not in all cases, certainly, but in most cases, yes. At the very least, it'll be a source of tension/contention in the marriage. |
|
|
|
a ridiculous guy is now dealing with a guy more ridiculous than him. i find it amusing and appropriate.
ridiculous or not these are my demands. play my game or piss off.
After statements like this, you certainly deserve the scammer tag even if you do pay all of your creditors as far as I am concerned. |
|
|
|
i want to pay back the people i burned. that is why i came back. but i noticed matthews thread and now i am determined. i know matthew doesnt want to settle with me. and thats fine. i get it. but him settling with me is now a firm demand for me settling with me buyers. his actions will determine what happens with other people.
isnt this fun?
No, it's ridiculous. The debt you owe those other people should have nothing to do with whether Matthew pays you on a ridiculous bet. Is there a list of BTC guy's alts? Is CANDIES included?
rockso, trader joe, ninja, and candies. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Anyone who would break up with their girlfriend over their opinion of bitcoin is a sad SOB imo. That's like breaking up with her because of her religion, or simply for her political views.
Politics and religion are excellent reasons to break up with a girlfriend. Better a breakup now than a divorce later. 100% yes to this! Disagreements on religion or politics (or money) is a HUGE red flag when talking about getting married. You've got to be on the same page with your spouse on anything that either of you feel passionately about, or it's very likely going to end badly. People have euphoric views on how they will change their spouse's viewpoint, or how it doesn't really matter and they'll just work it out, but that doesn't match reality. Source: Happily married for almost 7 years now. |
|
|
|
coins is NP. when me and matthew work out a deal i will start paying back.
Why do you need the deal between you and Matthew to work out before you start paying back? You have 1600 BTC - 25 BTC is a drop in the bucket. Refund the guys you owe and stop being a douchebag about it! |
|
|
|
Dear Instawallet, Yesterday I discovered a security flaw with your site, I spent nearly 6 hours working with David Francois Chief Technology Officer at Paymium The security flaw impacted roughly 3000 people that use Instawallet and indirectly Paymimum, Paytunia, Instawire, and Bitcoin Central as all of these companies are yours. After 6 hours of work, I can finally confirm that the security flaw is fixed. The security flaw was serious in my opinion, As all the URL’s of roughly 3000 people were publicly listed. http://www.adaptiveglass.com/?p=656Davout... don't you think this guy deserves some BTC for his work? EDIT: Also, Google is still spitting out one wallet to me: https://instawallet.org/r/aHR0cHM6Ly9pbnN0YXdhbGxldC5vcmc= |
|
|
|
What if later on there's a countersuit against whoever brought this suit, to try to recover lost potential repayments, and the person who brought this suit is not protected by any LLC, resulting in the remaining people who did not want the initial suit getting repaid from this initial suer's personal financial holdings? Could that happen?
... Where is Nolo when you need him?  |
|
|
|
quite many early adopters sit on thousands of coins
they cash out, as soon as it makes them millionaires
Or (as I keep hearing over and over from early adopters who mined when they were worth nothing) most of those coins were deleted inadvertently, through formats of the hard drive, etc. I know of at least one early adopter who has 250k coins, but beyond that, I am not certain who else holds a large number of them still. |
|
|
|
My problem with it is you will give 5% when he has paid 2.5% in less than a year and volume is increasing. He just needs to communicate more is the problem. This plan has proven unsatisfactory because it takes too long: As clients are aware. The theft result in all BTC balances being put on hold for both trading and withdrawal. This is still the case. I will not be doing a balance reset or otherwise manually adjusting your bitcoin balance to reflect the theft. Any new bitcoin deposits you make will be available for use as usual and be reflected on your account overview page. Your balance as of the theft will remain on hold and be released in parts as we begin to recover funds to pay back balances. As funds are available for repayment, they will be dispersed on a pro-rated basis (i.e. if 5% of the funds are available for repayment then 5% of your original pre-theft balance will be unheld and immediately available for trading or withdrawal). https://plus.google.com/109620439233076225324/postsIn retrospect, 0.05 BTC / 1 BTC does seem a bit low. I'd still consider selling though, because future payments aren't exactly a guaranteed thing at this point. |
|
|
|
Bitfloor might also be protected by an LLC or something too, in which case, a lawsuit wouldn't matter.
Clarification. An LLC (or incorporation) doesn't protect the company. It provides liability protection for the owners. The reality is that like most Bitcoin based companies Bitfloor doesn't have any "real" (tangible) assets. You can't get blood from a stone. Unlike a company which has warehouses, inventory, office equipment, etc which can be liquidiated Bitfloor assets would be limited to the brand (which would be destroyed in a bankruptcy), and the code plus any operating capital. Bitfloor has paid out excess operating capital on a quarterly basis so I doubt you are getting more there. The reality is a lawsuit is in nobody best interest. Between court costs, legal fees (including Bitfloor's legal fees which will deplete operating capital) even if one got a judgement for the full amount it simply means Bitfloor would be forced into bankruptcy and creditors would be lucky to get 5 cents on the dollar. The liquidated value of Bitfloor (as opposed to operating value) is very low. For those ganshing at the teeth for a lawsuit here is a practical excercise. 1) Estimate the cash on hand (both BTC & USD) that bitfloor has 2) Estimate what the assets (code base, customer lists) of bitfloor could be sold for in liquidation (note most assets liquidate for 10% to 30% of face value in BK). 3) Add 1 + 2 together and subtract bitfloor estimated legal fees. 3 is the total liquidation value of bitfloor. Divide this by the current amount owed (in USD) and that is % each creditor could expect to receive in liquidation. Now subtract legal fees. Well, that's exactly what I meant. If Bitfloor was started as an LLC, then creditors aren't going to get jack diddly in a lawsuit, and Roman would just shrug it off since it wouldn't affect him directly. If Bitfloor is NOT an LLC, then Roman's assets (whatever those may be) are at stake, and if nothing else, creditors looking for revenge would get the satisfaction of justice being served. For me personally, I'd just like whatever option gets me the most of my money back, and I seriously doubt it'll come through a lawsuit. But, I'd be willing to sell my debt for 0.1 BTC / BTC owed to whomever is interested, because I don't think we'll ever see that much in payback. If that person wants to take my debt on a lawsuit with them, then all power to 'em. |
|
|
|
|
Is there a list of BTC guy's alts? Is CANDIES included?
|
|
|
|
i dont need or want your coins matthew. i just want to stick it in your ass. its not about the money. its the principle. if you want to be a man be a man or shut the fuck up and piss off.  Sweet - so you have 1600 BTC and won't pay back the people you scammed? |
|
|
|
After the previous all time high of 2011, $100 will be the biggest resistance point.
If we cross this, $100 will be a huge support.
I also hope we will make an global agreement of displaying Bitcoin not in BTC anymore but mBTC.
This will make it more attracting for new comers.
I don't like "mBTC" - too many letter smashed together, too nerdy-sounding. There's really no particular reason to hold on to the term BTC at all, in the long term; it's purely arbitrary. (True, in the short term it is useful to impress people with the growth.) I say we just switch to bitcents. One bitcent is almost a dollar now. Perhaps the currency code symbol could be "BCT." Does that open up more possibilities than BTC? my personal preference... mBTC to be refered to as "bit" or "bits" rolls off the tounge really easy if you say it.... "That'l be 2 bits please" Sigg I seriously like that idea. It's perfect, IMO. BRB, going to start a Bit exchange.  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
