That signature doesn't check out for me, are you sure you didn't edit the message at all after signing?
it doesn't matter. it's the owner of 1A7RdYVo6rVmPXLHeeHqnTym7otCNmCDPb saying he owns 1BPFKnxAENaxp26g8QbWKUWMuedRo5ZjDY, not the other way around. though looks like someone is willing to send to the old address. which is fine, I think. Sending to the 1BPFKnxAENaxp26g8QbWKUWMuedRo5ZjDY address should be fine, but his signed message should be coming from 1BPFKnxAENaxp26g8QbWKUWMuedRo5ZjDY as well ( posted in September last year by letyouearn here ). He's trying to sign a message from 1A7RdYVo6rVmPXLHeeHqnTym7otCNmCDPb, which hasn't been used before by this account as mentioned by another user, so there's no proof that the account is in the hands of the original owner still. That signature doesn't check out for me, are you sure you didn't edit the message at all after signing? -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- The new btc address (1A7RdYVo6rVmPXLHeeHqnTym7otCNmCDPb) is exclusively controlled by the holder of old btc address (1BPFKnxAENaxp26g8QbWKUWMuedRo5ZjDY ). Signature by (1A7RdYVo6rVmPXLHeeHqnTym7otCNmCDPb) is equivalent to signature by old address (1BPFKnxAENaxp26g8QbWKUWMuedRo5ZjDY). -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE----- Version: Bitcoin-qt (1.0) Address: 1A7RdYVo6rVmPXLHeeHqnTym7otCNmCDPb H5jp0WHznh4ukOfoGQgGmCUwAL3h/awI91ObnzQsiqLrLNrsyhxOlc+IDj7XXviMC/o2VQBUjKZa4mo2TZp4DXM= -----END BITCOIN SIGNATURE----- Here is the Unedited Post you are looking for. Please verify it and tell me if its ok for you. That one seems to verify, but like I mentioned above, it doesn't prove that you're the original owner of this account. If you have access to the private key for 1BPFKnxAENaxp26g8QbWKUWMuedRo5ZjDY still (which you said you did a couple posts ago), why not sign the message you posted above with the address 1BPFKnxAENaxp26g8QbWKUWMuedRo5ZjDY to prove that you're the original owner of the account? |
|
|
|
Check out the below signed message.
---BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
The (1A7RdYVo6rVmPXLHeeHqnTym7otCNmCDPb) is exclusively controlled by the holder of (1BPFKnxAENaxp26g8QbWKUWMuedRo5ZjDY). Signature by (1A7RdYVo6rVmPXLHeeHqnTym7otCNmCDPb) is equivalent to signature by (1BPFKnxAENaxp26g8QbWKUWMuedRo5ZjDY)
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1A7RdYVo6rVmPXLHeeHqnTym7otCNmCDPb (bitcoin address)
H5jp0WHznh4ukOfoGQgGmCUwAL3h/awI91ObnzQsiqLrLNrsyhxOlc+IDj7XXviMC/o2VQBUjKZa4mo2TZp4DXM=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Above Signed message is for just reference only that i own this new btc address control too.
That signature doesn't check out for me, are you sure you didn't edit the message at all after signing? |
|
|
|
are there any sr.member slots left open? if so i'd like to join your sig/avatar campaign i've been lurking quite abit now, and i'd like to get back into posting more  All Senior slots are still full. |
|
|
|
Is there an open slot for a hero member available? If so, I am interested. Please let me know.
All hero slots are currently full, sorry! |
|
|
|
In conclusion I think you shouldn't be able to start threads in the lending section until you're a Full Member. It won't stop all scammers but even if new restrictions stop 10% of scams it's worth it, isnt't it?
But what about the valid loan requests from Newbies, Junior members, and Members? Although most newbie loan requests indeed are scam attempts, there are some valid loan requests from newbie ranked members. With that rule you're also throwing all Member ranked users under the bus, and there are lots of valid Member loan requests as well. I don't think a user should have to be on the website for at least four months before they can request a loan, that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Like I mentioned before, I think the newbie loan sub-section would be a good idea to combat all the spammy newbie loan requests we've seen in the past week or two. If people want to loan to newbies, they can take a look in that section. If not, then users can stay in the main loaning area and won't have to filter out the spam requests from newbies. |
|
|
|
I wouldn't say that you'd ever be 100% secure
Why not ? I mean you can't access unless you have my phone , no ? Unless there is a way to get my phone number without actually getting it or bypass it like hackers do on Gmail or some shit like that ... Because on my country nobody use Bitcoin so no one will think on going to Blockchain.info at all . There would be a few ways that a hacker would be able to access your account. If you accidentally logged into a Blockchain.info phishing site for example, they'd instantly be able to log in and empty your balance even with 2FA. If you had a keylogger on your machine, that could be another potential access for hackers, but if you're smart about what you download, and that you're logging into the correct BCI and not a phishing site, you should be safe. |
|
|
|
Nuked. Use Report to moderator button next time. Isn't that only for reporting posts though? I don't see a button on the user's profile to report the member as a whole as an imposter. |
|
|
|
I think basically how it works is that they just store an encrypted wallet file on their servers. So if their database is ever hacked, then the hacker could (potentially) just run off with all the encrypted wallet files they have on their servers.
Why is it impossible to recover a wallet if you forget your password? That's how this system works - since the entire wallet is encrypted, there is no way to decrypt it without the password. So if the password is forgotten, there's no feasible way to crack into the wallet and change the passphrase it's encrypted with, since you'd be trying to crack present-day encryption. It's not like a normal website login, where if you forget your password, all that's needed to let you into your account again is a small change in the database to update your password.
As for storing your bitcoin on Blockchain.info I'd recommend against that. Take a look into a desktop wallet such as Electrum. It's small, efficient and I'd argue that it's more secure than Blockchain.info, since everything is completely under your control.
I know about that (about using desktop wallet) , but I just wanted to know how they store to make sure that everything is ok because I put some Bitcoins little bit everywhere just to make sure I won't lose all at once in case something bad happens , I guess it's the wise thing to do . So basically and if iunderstood you right ... I can be safe from Online logging into my account 100% since I have 2FA (SMS on phone) however if their servers are hacked somehow then the hacker will own the wallet files and if my password is weak It will get cracked however if it's long and complicated then I'am safe 100% from anything ? I wouldn't say that you'd ever be 100% secure, but by using 2FA and a secondary password you should be as secure as you can when using a BCI wallet. But yes, if Blockchain.info was hacked and the hacker had a copy of your wallet file, there's a chance that your password could be cracked if it's weak, but even trying to crack something encrypted with 10 characters will take awhile on current hardware (as long as it isn't a dictionary word or in the list of top 100 used passwords). If you use a long and complicated password (say, 64 random characters or something like that) then there would be an extremely low chance that the hacker would ever be able to crack it. |
|
|
|
I am still new an don't have experience of signing message. Ok. I am providing a signed message with my personal and highly used btc address.
If you don't know how to sign a message take a look at this thread. It's very detailed and you shouldn't run into any problems. |
|
|
|
|
I think basically how it works is that they just store an encrypted wallet file on their servers. So if their database is ever hacked, then the hacker could (potentially) just run off with all the encrypted wallet files they have on their servers.
Why is it impossible to recover a wallet if you forget your password? That's how this system works - since the entire wallet is encrypted, there is no way to decrypt it without the password. So if the password is forgotten, there's no feasible way to crack into the wallet and change the passphrase it's encrypted with, since you'd be trying to crack present-day encryption. It's not like a normal website login, where if you forget your password, all that's needed to let you into your account again is a small change in the database to update your password.
As for storing your bitcoin on Blockchain.info I'd recommend against that. Take a look into a desktop wallet such as Electrum. It's small, efficient and I'd argue that it's more secure than Blockchain.info, since everything is completely under your control.
|
|
|
|
Senior positions all taken still?
Available slots in the OP are always updated, so yes, all the Senior slots are full still. I would like to rejoin this camp.
Starting post: 182(including this one)
Rank: Member(soon to turn full member)
Address:1EjMchjQL6Q6QeX6D8ChvaGSPBVgAVgvU
P.S: Are we allowed to upgrade the payout according to our rank if it changes after getting accepted?
Accepted, spreadsheet updated. As for payments, you'll be paid out at the member rank you signed up as. So if your rank changes to full member later this month, you'll be paid out at a member rank ( 0.055 BTC ) on your payday. |
|
|
|
Or maybe the forum can make a solution as they do it on the gambling section with the "Investor based games", we can open a lending section for newbies. It would be a nice solution.
I was thinking the same thing. I think that a "Newbie Loans" section would be good to have, since it would clear most of the spam out of the main loaning area, but still allow newbies to ask for loans, and for valid loan requests to be fulfilled. |
|
|
|
is there any thread or subforum specialized for reviewing cloud mining site, or multipool?
This thread is probably the closest thing that you're looking for. It's a comparison of all cloud mining websites and their risk of being a ponzi. Fair warning: most of them are ponzis, and I'd stay away from cloud mining unless you want fall victim to a scam. |
|
|
|
Thanks, smoothie, I hadn't noticed the BadBear reference and this is good to know about the signature. I wish the admins were more active in outing scammers and their alt accounts.
The admins work hard to out alt accounts of persistant scammers. Take a look at BadBear's sent trust, he has over 65 sent trust ratings calling out alt accounts of scammers, so I'd argue that they do a fairly good job of keeping users aware of scammers alt accounts. |
|
|
|
Because the previous owner defaulted on a loan. What if he wasn't the actual owner but was hacked and he recovers the account from you? You do know there has been a few hacks as of late as well as the constant barrage of malware?
The point is: You took this risk of losing your coin.
Usually this problem can be prevented if the account owner provides a signed message to the loaner, stating that the account is being used as collateral. However looking through the post history on the ThomM account, there wasn't an address posted until July 21st, 2015 which was after the database hack, but before the Fastminer malware started showing up here. So that's definitely a grey area, but if the loaner can get a signed message from a post a few months old, then there should be no worries about the account being recovered from the original owner. I think leaving neutral trust ratings on defaulted accounts is fair, but I wouldn't agree with negatives. Neutral ratings help just as well as negatives for tracking ownership of the account, but by giving negative trust you basically screw the lender over and they can kiss away any chance of recovering some of their losses, and I don't think they deserve that. |
|
|
|
so he switched it to neutral. stating that the account is currently is in my possession. can I still sell it when it have my name on it? will using trusted escrow so they can vouch for me in case anything bad happens help?
Yeah I don't think you'd have any issues selling the account now, but I wouldn't expect KWH to remove that neutral rating. As for using an escrow, I'd recommend to do so. A trusted escrow should be able to mediate any disagreements that come up during the transaction, so you should be covered pretty well if the other party makes a claim against you. |
|
|
|
Where is the proof that WoodCollector is banned?
Take a look at his profile page. His signature mentions that the WoodCollector account was banned here. Where is the proof that these are his alts?
It's fairly obvious that he was in control of a few alts, as those were really the only people standing up for him, plus IIRC BadBear tagged at least one of them as a WoodCollector alt. Has there ever been an instance of a bitcointalk admin violating the privacy of their users?
It was fairly obvious that those users were alts of WoodCollector. Users figured that out pretty quickly, plus the staff here have tools to find alt accounts of users as well. Don't really think that making his alt accounts public was violating their privacy, when so many people knew already. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
