This has been posted today by admin of BGL coin, for what I can see is still possible withdraw funds from their exchange
I doubt it's possible to withdraw fund from the exchange. It seems that there is no way to login to the website. I tried to login to the website using VPN from different countries, but I couldn't access it. I tried it with VPNs from some European countries, United States, Canada, Japan, Singapore, India and United Kingdom. |
|
|
|
So, what could've been the problem from your side because even palle11 verified it from verifybitcoinmessage.com/ and CoinEraser also did from one of the sites you couldn't – brainwalletx.github.io.
There was no problem from TheBeardedBaby's side. palle11 signed a new message from a legacy address which was the one verified by him/her and CoinEraser. TheBeardedBaby was trying to sign the message signed from the segwit address which can't be verified at all. Maybe we should just say those signing message from coinoimi should do that using legecy
The best thing anyone can do is to not use coinomi. |
|
|
|
Could have been someone's personal signature text with the forums' ad warning below.
That's not a personal signature. Such information is sometimes displayed below the forum ad banner which is located below the first post of every page. |
|
|
|
I apologise, I have done a fair amount of research my question was just poor. What I am asking is if you can not create someones signature for their transaction how can you compute fake blocks for the chain?
I am not sure I have understood you correctly. But I think your question is "How signatures are verified?". When you broadcast a transaction to the network, you broadcast a hash, a signature and a public key. For verifying your transaction, nodes don't need to recreate your signature at all. Nodes generate a hash using your public key and your signature through some mathematical calculations. If the hash generated by them matches the hash broadcast by you, the transaction is verified. |
|
|
|
- Did you also try verifying the same message with one of the online tools or other wallets?
I just tried that. I was able to verify the message using other tools like electrum successfully. So, a message signed by coinomi from a legacy address can be verified by other tools, but it can't be verified by itself. Edit: I tried this with a segwit address too and I was again successful in verifying the message using electrum. It's weird. Because the message signed by palle11 yesterday isn't verifiable even using electrum. |
|
|
|
There's indeed a bug on that wallet but AFAICR, it doesn't extend to legacy addresses [only the segwit addresses are affected].
I just tested that with signing a message from a legacy address and got the same error. It's really funny how Coinomi works. If you sign a message from Coinomi and then verify the same message without closing "Sign/verify message" window, it's verified successfully. It's verified even with a wrong signature. If you sign a message from Coinomi, close the "Sign/verify message" window and then open it again and verify the message, it can't be verified. |
|
|
|
Trust wallet claimed its community-driven open-source non-custodial wallet. I am not sure if it's 100% true.
They are lying about that. Trustwallet used to be open-source, but it became close-source after being bought by binance. According to github, their code hasn't been updated for four years. The code we see on their github is for an outdated version of trustwallet. |
|
|
|
1. if buy a new phone and install trust wallet, memorize the phrases, receive some tethers and then stop using the phone for good until a future time: is there any chance of your trust wallet getting hacked?
Even if you are sure that your mobile phone is 100% secure and you never connect it to the internet, you can't say that your wallet is completely secure. Trustwallet is close-source and there is no way to know how the keys have been generated. It may be worth mentioning that you should never trust your memory. It's always possible that you forget your seed phrase. |
|
|
|
Wallet is coinomi
I tried to verify the message on Coinomi. It says "Message verification failed". Edit: I just signed a message on Coinomi and verified it with itself to see how it works. Seems that there's a bug on Coinomi. It can't even verify the message signed by itself. As suggested by BlackHatCoiner, don't use Coinomi. |
|
|
|
Please someone should quote and verify for me.
As mentioned by BlackHatCoiner above, the message can't be verified. There's a probability that you made a mistake when copy pasting the signature or the address. Take note that there is no standard algorithm for signing message from segwit addresses. So, a message signed from a certain wallet may not be verifiable through another wallet. What wallet did you use for signing the message? |
|
|
|
And how is this a scam accusation against stake.com?
OP posted this topic initially in "gambling" board, not "Scam accusations".  Source: https://ninjastic.space/post/60918503I'm not sure, but the topic may have been moved to "Scam accusations" board by moderators. Of course, it's possible that OP has moved the topic by himself/herself. |
|
|
|
I hope Stake.com doesn't freeze your $883 winnings, like your initial accusation, have you withdrawn all your winnings...!
According to the the post made by dhru9, he/she has already withdrawn all the balance and there is no way for Stake to freeze the fund. Also, I doubt OP has won 883 dollars. He/she has surely deposited some bitcoin which should be deducted from that 883 dollar. |
|
|
|
I don't have the experience how it works, but I know that one document cannot pass kyc twice. Could it be that OP used another person's document for the verification?
They don't always force users to pass KYC. They ask users to pass KYC only if they think there may be something suspicious going on. Most probably, OP wasn't asked to pass KYC for the second account at all. |
|
|
|
dhru9, you are (unintentionally) help these scammers with backlinks. Please edit your topic and make the links unclickable. To do so, you can put them in code tags. |
|
|
|
No sir Alphanumeric means the address of the Wallet/ Public key is based on mixed characters i think i should edit it and use character on the behalf of Words. Thanks for mentioning anyway.
Simply a crypto wallet address/ public key is combination of alphanumeric characters from 27 to 37 ranges.
You are again wrong. A bitcoin address can have more than 37 characters. Native segwit single-signature addresses include 42 characters. Native segwit multi-signature addresses and taproot addresses include 62 characters. |
|
|
|
Simply a crypto wallet is combination of alphanumeric words from 27 to 37 ranges.
What do you mean by "combination of alphanumeric words"? Can you please elaborate more on this? Do you mean seed phrase? If so, a seed phrase usually includes 12 or 24 words. |
|
|
|
Yes, it is unlikely if we take only one week, but take 30 weeks, and it is not that unlikely anymore, right?
The chance would be only around 9.7% As already calculated, the chance to not win any lottery ticket in a week is 0.338%. This means that the chance to win at least 1 lottery ticket in a week is 99.662% So, the chance to have at least 1 week without any lottery ticket in a 30 week period is around 9.7%. 1 - 0.99662 30 = 0.0966 |
|
|
|
I think US are taking personal to ban proof of work cryptos
From my understanding, it doesn't say anything about banning proof of work cryptocurrencies in the United States. It says that the congress may ban cryptocurrencies mining. |
|
|
|
There are so many complaints about MBit, why do they have such great ratings on review sites?
Are you sure that they have great ratings? Their rating on trustpilot is only 2.2 from 5 and their review page is full of negative reviews. Even if they had a good rating on review websites like trustpilot, it didn't mean they are trustworthy. It's not difficult to buy fake reviews. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
