Oder.. wie wäre es denn mit der extrem abgefahrenen Idee, mal auf unnötige Webanwendungen zu verzichten? Hardware Wallet hin oder her.. Muss wirklich alles im Browser gemacht werden? Sind die erhöhten Risiken das wirklich Wert? Dass die Aufmerksamkeit immer zu 100% da sein muss? Reicht nicht einfach ein klassisches und etabliertes Desktop Wallet?.. Ich sehe keinen Grund auf Webanwendungen zurückzugreifen wenn es native Anwendungen gibt. |
|
|
|
Why are we, as a community, allowing a company like BitPay to insert themselves in to all our transactions, to collect our data, to spy on us, to report us to the government, and take a cut for the privilege?
Such companies will exist as long as people are going to use and support them. I am not using BitPay and will never be. Everyone is free to decide how he handles a payment. If someone chooses to use BitPay to give aways his data, i couldn't care less. That's not my business. You can't force other people to be privacy-orientated or non-retarded or whatever. If they decide to giveaway their data (hello facebook, tiktok, etc..), they are free to do so. |
|
|
|
Und sollte es Kraken klar werden das du ein Mixer nutzt können die dein Account Flaggen und verlangen daß du mit der Adresse eine Nachricht signierst zb. Das kann genauso gut harmlos sein, oder dazu führen daß du am Ende eine Menge Geld verlierst.
Bevor ein Exchange verlangt, dass ein Nutzer eine Nachricht signiert (das ist aus vielerlei Gründen nicht so einfach durchzusetzen: Inkompatibilität bzw. Fehlen eines Standards zum signieren von Nachrichten mit Segwit; Unwissenheit und Ahnungslosigkeit eines durchschnittlichen Nutzers; ... ), verlangt dieser einen Nachweis über die Herkunft des Geldes  Geflaggt werden könnte der Account bestimmt, aber eine Nachricht signieren.. eher unwahrscheinlich IMO. Direkt von Exchanges zu schicken ist generell Bad practice.
Da stimme ich dir natürlich völlig zu. Sollte niemals gemacht werden. |
|
|
|
Address reuse leads to a reduction of privacy for everyone. Not just the sender and receiver.
If you care about your privacy, do something for it. Don't rely on others. It is absolutely irrelevant what someone else is doing if you want to preserve your privacy. If you rely on others, you already have lost. There are multiple ways to increase the privacy with bitcoin. But relying on others to not reuse addresses definitely is not one of them. Posting an address on a website that remains static means everyone will be able to trivially gain insight into the finances of the OP. Posting an address that changes means that everyone can closely watch the OP's website to gain insight into his finances, but the casual observer will be unable gain substantial insight to how much the OP is receiving, and an observer would be unable to know how much the OP received before they start watching his website.
So? Again, if OP doesn't care and just wants to be able to receive donations.. then what is the problem with it? If OP doesn't want this to be the case, that's absolutely fine. But if he doesn't care, there is no reason to change the address for each donation. |
|
|
|
Dass die unterschiedlichen Skripttypen übersehen werden passiert relativ häufig. Immer darauf achten, dass die Adressen übereinstimmen  Was spricht denn eigentlich dagegen Electrum zu nutzten? Oder Wasabi? Gibt ja noch einige Desktop Wallets, die ja auch mit Trezor funktionierten. Electrum und Wasabi sind beide besser als irgendeine Chrome Webanwendung. |
|
|
|
Ist das wirklich anonym?
Denke, der Bitcoin-Kauf kann dann doch sicherlich nachverfolgt werden - oder irre ich mir hier?
Es heißt doch nicht "Bitcoin anonym kaufen + damit bezahlen", sondern "Bitcoin kaufen + anonym damit bezahlen". Das ist ein kleiner aber feiner Unterschied Natürlich kann dein Kauf zurückverfolgt werden. Immerhin hat die Handelsbörse jegliche Daten von dir. Wenn deine Coins aber danach anonymisiert werden, kann kein Zusammenhang, zwischen den Coins die du beim Kauf erhalten hast und den Coins die du nach dem Mixen erhältst, hergestellt werden. |
|
|
|
You mean that they clearly keep a track of almost everything we do on the internet while using their "masked" IP?
Most (if not all of them), yes. Then even if paid (or highly paid ones), I believe all of them will be able to have all the data whatever you utilize through their services? What about VPS like Amazon AWS?
Even if paid, this does not guarantee that they don't keep any logs which might help to identify you. You definitely shouldn't rely on this. Using a VPS, of course the network activity gets logged. How else would it be able to easily proof how people abuse their service to do illegal stuff? Do they also keep track of everything that's being done inside their remote area? Even if they don't keep any track of it, will my ISP be able to track what I'm doing in there?
Probably, they do. Without any logs, considering you are using encrypted communication properly (e.g. no root certificates from an ISP installed on your computer like in some countries) then no, the ISP won't be able to track anything you do there. |
|
|
|
The first was her deposit TO the casino.
The second was the casino's pay-out to the player - which she says never appeared in her wallet.
No, it wasn't. As i tried to explain earlier.. look at the address as a bank account. You either pay to that bank account or receive money from that bank account. You can't sent money twice to the same bank account and say once i sent the money and once i received it.. This simply doesn't make sense. If your "friend" or whoever you are helping, did not receive a transaction ID, he/she should contact the casino or whoever should have sent any funds back. At the very least, we need to know the address your friend send the deposit to and preferably from which address. |
|
|
|
No phishing emails so far. If nothing arrives in the next week, I can assume there is no ongoing data leak.
That's to be expected. To be honestly.. if there would be an ongoing leak a.k.a. the attacker still have control over their systems, ledger would have proven to be the worst company in terms of customers data protection. I really can't imagine that their server are still compromised, that would require some exceptionally bad incident response. Guess that's not impossible tho.. |
|
|
|
There is a quote posted by khaled0111 that you probably missed.
Actually didn't know that! I guess if you really want to preserve a document, laminating isn't the way to go. But for a paper wallet which you might use once in a while, that's fine as long as its not the only backup (which it never should be) or as long as the other backups are preserved with a more appropriate method. |
|
|
|
But, he later mention that the easiest way is to make use of password managers, I strongly disagree to this. Password managers synchronized online and you will provide it with a email and a password [...]
I have never met a person using a password manager which stores a backup online. Usually people either don't use a password manager, or they use a proper one. I'd also discourage people from using password managers which store the encrypted file online. But using a standard password manager where the database is only kept locally (and has to be backed up locally) is absolutely fine. Obviously, a compromised system may lead to the compromise of all passwords. |
|
|
|
Are you sure about that? Are you speaking from experience? Lamination is a good way to protect paper from unintentional spills or greasy fingers.
Usually, if the only person claiming something without any actual backup is just a random person on the internet... take it with a grain of salt. I'm not sure why laminating a paper wallet would be any worse than not laminating it. I can't think of a good reason for that. Further, he suggests to store the paper inside of a book. That is fine as long as he doesn't rely on it as a security fasctor. But putting a laminated paper inside of the book wouldn't have any disadvantages. |
|
|
|
|
Kannst du bestätigen, dass der Adresstyp übereinstimmt?
Was für Adressen siehst du in Chrome, und welcher in der Suite? Bzw. wie fangen die Adressen an, mit 1.., 3.. oder bc1.. ?
Wenn das nicht übereinstimmt, dann liegt es daran, dass in Chrome und über die Suite nach verschiedenen Skripttypen "gesucht" wird.
Sollte das Anfangszeichen übereinstimmen, liegt es nicht daran.
|
|
|
|
Als Neuling würde ich dir zu Kraken raten. Die bieten nicht nur die Option BTC einfach zu kaufen/verkaufen, sondern sind von der Sicherheit her auch top. Kraken benutzt Sicherheitsmechanismen in ihrem Exchange, die habe ich noch bei keiner anderen Krypto-Handeslbörse hier gesehen. Damit kann man als Anfänger sicherlich nichts falsch machen.
Bei interesse findest du die Anleitung hier: REFLINK ENTFERNT
Klassischer Referral-Link Spam. Mach dich mit den Regeln hier vertraut und hör auf deine Website zu spammen. Drei Posts, dreimal deine beschissene Website gespammt. Du wirbst damit, dass ein von dir geworbener User dauerhaft 5% weniger Gebühren erhält - das ist natürlich schön. Blöd nur, dass er bis zu 20% weniger Gebühren zahlt, wenn er sich über einen regulären Link anmeldet. Wieso der Account noch nicht genuket ist, ist mir nicht klar.. Ist ja wohl mehr als offensichtlich, dass es sich hierbei um einen Spam Account handelt.. |
|
|
|
Die Frage ist eher, unterstützt Wasabi keinen Import von Legacy private keys?
Wasabi unterstützt derzeit (leider) garkeine Imports. Weder in das aktuelle HD Wallet (was ja Sinn macht), noch in ein neues Wallet. Einfachheit für Benutzer, bla bla bla. Hoffe das Feature wird noch kommen.. |
|
|
|
Address reuse leads to a reduction in privacy for everyone,
If OP is planning to post his address on a website, he obviously doesn't care that the address is being associated with his website. Just as you have your address posted on your profile. If you (as a sender; e.g. as donator) care about your privacy, you should not rely on the receiver. That would be a huge mistake. If you care about your privacy, make sure that you send mixed coins. But don't rely on the receiver to always generate a new address for everyone. and incremental reduction in security
Calling address reuse a reduction in security is exaggerated. Ideally, the OP should generate a new address each time he receives a transaction
In OP's case this might not be necessary. So there is literally no good reason for him to invest time and work into something he might not need at all. If i understood him correctly, a single static address is absolutely fine for him. |
|
|
|
|
You should consider to stop using their service if they are creating so much trouble for you.
How did you fix the problem the first time? Did it fix itself? Did you contact the customer support?
Whatever it is, do the same. And maybe consider to switch to another service..
|
|
|
|
I've installed Electrum on my desktop and opened up the wallet with my seed. But at the bottom it says Balance 0 mBTC. So WTF?
Do the addresses start with the same character ( 1.., 3.. or bc1..)? If this is the case and your wallet on your desktop is connected to the internet, then i'd assume that your mobile wallet is a watch-only wallet. This would explain why you aren't able to spend any BTC. Did you import an address at any time? How did you receive the funds you are trying to spend now? Did you receive a transaction or were you told to import something into your wallet? |
|
|
|
It has been so long, at the time they were recommended.
I doubt they were recommended at all. I never heard of that "wallet". Where was it recommended? I can't imagine anyone actually recommending it  |
|
|
|
Please don't call it "a number". It's such a misnomer that it almost hurts us when we read it.  To avoid any confusion in communication, this string of alphanumeric characters is best referred to as a Bitcoin address (BTC address) or your public key. If you are correcting other people while sounding like a douche, at least don't make mistakes. For example, i could quote your post and say: Please don't call an address a public key. It is such a misnomer that it almost hurts my brain when reading that you don't know the difference while correcting others. Am i going to do it? No. Instead, i'm going to say: Dear BurningChrome, please keep in mind that an address is not the public key. With P2PKH for example, the address is the hash of the public key. Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
