I dont agree that this has influence on hilariousandco's moderation work, but Im in support of an open discussion regarding the trusted status of Lauda.
If hilariousandco is putting an extortionist in a position of power and authority publicly, then how can we trust him to take moderation actions that are, by definition anonymous? Believing that Lauda behaves like this for the sake of the community does not makes the person believing it a complete morron by default that is no longer able to do what they have been done well for a long time. If you argue like this, no one should read anything you said, because you made the mistake of escrowing for yourself in the past. |
|
|
|
|
I dont agree that this has influence on hilariousandco's moderation work, but Im in support of an open discussion regarding the trusted status of Lauda.
|
|
|
|
Yes I ignored it.
I'm going to ignore it too then. It works both ways, as long as accounts can be escrowed all is fine I guess.  Exactly the maturity level I expected from you. You pondered in my general direction and because I didnt reply, you use it now as an excuse to avoid my direct question regarding a trust rating.
Yes I ignored it.
I'm going to ignore it too then. -snip-
@Lauda, care to elaborate which rating you are referring to? And if u need a signed message, just ask me.
Removed previously perfectly valid trust ratings in order to manipulate the general history/view. Is in strong support of scammers such as Quickseller. Changing trust ratings on and off based on how he feels on a particular day.
Shorena does not seem alike to the person that I've used to know and have interacted in the past. I've stopped trusting them post their actions and strong support of said scammers. It sounds like Lauda is unable to backup his rating in *any* way. The rating is fairly clearly retaliatory in nature. I would suggest involving both Blazed and hilariousandco in the situation, as their credibility will be shot if they allow Lauda to remain on their trust lists. Just the same intransparent shit as always with Laura, 'you may not know my reasons, but the exist. honest!!! More important people know them'.
I have posted a thread to either have hilariousandco removed from being staff or he remove Lauda from his trust list. A thread regarding Blazed is forthcoming is Lauda is not removed from his trust list. Quickseller is now using his alts to pretend he has support for this ridiculous accusation. If he is not willing to stand behind his complaint, should we take it seriously? As someone who knows the repercussions of having your - or one users believe to be yours - identity revealed you can maybe understand why someone would try to avoid attribution to an argument that will be ignored because of the person that made it. Its only logical to discredit those giving Lauda their power since a conversation with Lauda is impossible. |
|
|
|
@Lauda, care to elaborate which rating you are referring to? And if u need a signed message, just ask me.
You don't answer my PM, but you ask me here? This PM? Wondering what happened to you. You don't seem the same person from mid-late 2016.
Yes I ignored it. You ignored my question. Maybe you already forgot. -snip-
@Lauda, care to elaborate which rating you are referring to? And if u need a signed message, just ask me.
Removed previously perfectly valid trust ratings in order to manipulate the general history/view. Is in strong support of scammers such as Quickseller. Changing trust ratings on and off based on how he feels on a particular day.
Shorena does not seem alike to the person that I've used to know and have interacted in the past. I've stopped trusting them post their actions and strong support of said scammers.
-snip- Stating facts, i.e. that you're a confirmed scammer, is not ad hominem in any way.  Its exactly what ad hominem means, you try to refute the argument (you try to hide the discussion in private PMs) by talking negativly (is a scammer) about the person who (quickseller) made it. This does nothing to refute the argument, it makes you look petty. Not that this is new or anyone cares. So can we please drop this topic and focus on my question for a few posts? |
|
|
|
bump
You are beating a dead horse. The community stands behind Lauda. behind an extortionist? Nope. The community has determined he is not an extortionist. The only people to believe such are ones with questionable ethics. :/ To me it looks like there is no consensus among the community members. You can try to dismiss this with personal attacks, but I dont think it will change someones mind. Then again, maybe my understand of 'the community' differs from yours. |
|
|
|
I like to ask this question again. I believe in another thread, they said electrum allows this now?
Yes, have not tried it yet, but since electrum 2.8.x its possible to fully encrypt the wallet file, thus it cant show you the balance until you have entered a password. The thing is i know in electrum ltc, they have this feature. When i log into my electrum ltc wallet, i have to enter a password before it show how many bitcoin balance i have. But do they have this feature for electrum with bitcoin? The thing is even when i start up electrum and it show my bitcoin balance, i cannot send any bitcoin unless you type in the password etc.
So if i do this with electrum, will i have to put in 2 different passwords? Thus when i start electrum, i have to enter a different password. And when i send bitcoin, i use another one? These can't be the same right and would not be recommended?
They should be two separate passwords by design, yes. But again, I havent looked into it, its possible that its implemented poorly. Another thing im curious is would you say its very dangerous to have the bitcoin balance available when you start up electrum?
No. Thus if someone see you have a big balance, well thats not good etc. But even if they see it, if they dont know the password, would that mean thats still pretty safe etc?
You have invited someone into your house. If you have a large amount of coins on your live, every day use wallet, you need to think about your setup, not worry about your guests. |
|
|
|
Hey all. Would you say keeping this seed in your apartment/house is safe at all?
The other thing is if you do this, wouldn't it make sense to keep a few phrases in one area, and the other in another area etc?
Depends. Are you more worried about your house burning down or about someone breaking in and stealing your seed? The other thing is how many words are there? Thus its a 12 word phrase but how many words are there? The other thing im wondering is this.
Its 2048 different words[1]. Let just say your 12 word phrase is ... and im making this 12 word phrase up right now
dog cat ball cow mouse horse tv sofa bed table chair floor
So if this was a real 12 word phrase and you enter it on any computer, well you would open the wallet and have access to whatever bitcoin is in the wallet. But let say you rearrange these words around etc. Would that be possible for it to be a possible 12 word phrase for someone else? The thing is how many combinations are there total? Because couldn't one persons 12 word phrase possibly have say 3 words the same as another user? Or is this not possible?
The security of the seed for 12 words is 128 bit IIRC, which is roughly the same as a bitcoin private key. Its possible to have 3 identical words at the same position, but you still need to match the other 9 to have the same seed. To have the same seed is sufficiently unlikely. Do any of the 12 word phrase from electrum or blockchain use the same words?
IIRC no other wallet uses the same words. What if you know say the first 10 words of the 12 word phrase. Or if someone knows the first 10 words of the 12 word phrase. What are the chances that they could figure out the last 2 words of your wallet and have access to it?
Testing for 2 missing seed words and positions would not take long enough for it to be still secure. If you think you have lost 10 of your 12 seed words you should move to a new wallet with a new seed. I heard someone mentioning brute force but not sure what that is exactly except i heard its like trial and error.
Its exactly that. Test one seed, derive the first x private keys and adresses, check for (historic) balance, repeat until all combinations have been tried. But wouldn't someone need to enter each word that is not known etc? The other thing is after many tries, would you be allowed to make more tries etc? Like imagine you try to log into an email account. After many attempts, you wont be able to log in for a while etc.
You dont need the wallet software for that and I doubt anyone would want to try 2048 missing words for 12 positions, considering only 1 word and its position is unknown. Youd write a script or use an existing one. E.g. btcrecover has some capabilities to check for wrong seed words. It doesnt check against a balance, you need to know an address. For someone malicious it would be relativly easy to change this though. How many words out of the 12 words would you say if someone had access to it or if someone forgot their electrum password, they can still recover their wallet etc?
Gut feeling here, 9 words would be feasible depending on the amount to recover and how much of it you want to invest it computers to recover it. One or two words should be possible on home machines given some time. Does this differ if its blockchain or any altcoin wallet?
Not for blockchain no. The algorithms used are mostly the same. It would be possible to design a seed derivation algorithm that is slow and thus more difficult to brute force, but I dont know if anyone has done something like that. Does anyone know if altcoins have 12 word phrases and if they do, do those words all come from the electrum words etc?
Electrum has several forks for alt coins, e.g. LTC, Doge(?) and BCH (if you consider it an alt). [1] https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/blob/master/lib/wordlist/english.txt |
|
|
|
-snip-
Es gab glaub mal eine Twitter-Serie (auf englisch), wo einige der Big Player kurz und prägnant (140 Zeichen, meist weniger) vorgestellt wurden. Die war sogar witzig, wenn man die Anspielungen verstand (mit sehr pointierten, z.T. wohl nur für Muttersprachler verständlichen Redewendungen) und die Hintergründe bereits kannte. In meiner noch früheren Phase damals hab ich aber kaum einen der Gags verstanden.
-> https://twitter.com/WeRateBitcoinerDa hat man zumindest viele Namen an einem Ort, auch wenn die Anspielungen nicht ad hoc klar sein werden. |
|
|
|
Please helps me quote this post and verify my message, thanks guys! Address: 17Vd3hhLhx1pCK3pwvyyBAqs6nprsve3ay BTC address of Trela - August 22th, 2017 - Bitcointalk H1eVv4HVL16lUu/S1+gfgHkKO/slTC3iXHH+5wrO5bT9Rt85TjZTNtZB3eUhFek6Z3p9kbjNvkVYLhQpqjP5FeQ= Quoted and verifiedReally like how you did the verification via a URL like that, been looking for a service that would allow such a thing rather than having to upload a screenshot. Will definitely be using this service from now on. Thanks for sharing =) You shouldnt... its broken, stupid people keep using it regardless. -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is shorena from bitcointalk.org and today is 2017.08.23
coinig is a broken biece of shit and there is no one to contact for a fix.
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
18uTXyQubfaYrkbQDdaXhzd2ALEY5YN77B
IPJEpdmIE3RWw2JJ6JXjsciYh/IJ9VVsl+1Er14z9ecDfVOB8c93wo1ySGpcdNFJhZ5Wkb2UacCHfQu/mnMdN1Y=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
  |
|
|
|
Moin Leute, Ich wollte mal fragen, ob man irgendwas zu befürchten haben muss, wenn man eine Nachricht Signiert und demjenigen dann die erzeugte Signatur sendet?! So wie ich verstanden habe, erstellt sich die Signatur aus meinem Privaten Key und der Nachricht?! Kann der private Key irgendwie ausgelesen werden? Oder ist das irgendwie unsicher? Wollte nämlich in dem Thema Byteball einsteigen und dieses Tutorial gesehen: https://medium.com/byteball-help/tutorial-on-linking-trezor-wallet-to-byteball-account-via-signing-a-message-b4e390d7e1a8(Step 4) Kann man das so machen oder ist das unsicher? Was ist der Unterschied zwischen Nachricht Signieren und Verfizieren? Sorry, wenn das jetzt eine doofe Frage ist ^^ Gruß und schönes Wochenende! Ein klares, kommt darauf an. Für das signieren einer Nachricht wird - wie du schon sagst - der private Schlüssel benötigt. Er erzeugt die Signatur, wird dieser aber nicht angehängt. Teil der Signatur ist aber der öffentliche Schlüssel. Dieser ist nicht Teil der Adresse. Sollte also das kryptorgraphische Verfahren von Bitcoin (ECDSA) so kaputt sein, dass aus dem öffentlichen Schlüssel in absehbarer Zeit der private Schlüssel errechnet werden kann, dann ist signieren (und Bitcoin versenden) problematisch. Bis dahin, nicht. Oha, daran hatte ich gar nicht gedacht. Ich wollte nämlich gerade eine Signatur für das Bitcointalkforum anlegen, für den Fall, dass mein Account gehackt wird. Wollte das mit Coinomi machen. Jetzt weiß ich nicht, ob deren Verschlüsselung sicher ist. Fürs Forum kann man sich auch einfach eine Electurm Wallet erstellen. Wobei du dich fragen solltest ob deine Coins mehr Wert sind als dein Account hier. Wenn du der Wallet ausreichend vertraust deine Coins zu schützen sollte sie auch gut genug für den Account sein. Meist ist der deutlich weniger Wert. |
|
|
|
I have not confused it
Address:
1DADerDP2D9bpDmaBoJzaniKTVCTRratft
Message is :
Hi this is BitcoinSupremo in her first test to sign a
message. Hope I have done it right.
Its been done using Multibit Classic.
Its missing the signature though. |
|
|
|
the problem with tolerating jerks in your community, friend group, or employees is that all of the nice people quietly drift away maybe what they did wasn't technically against the rules, but the damage is done every time a place becomes a little (or a lot) more hostile
https://twitter.com/ladyaeva/status/894279269521784832 |
|
|
|
Just my 2 cents here, but this will lead to nothing.
Water is wet, but apparently not for bitcoinicon. Have fun with your lawsuit in case that you don't remove the negative rating. When I see them actively trying to make up for their mistake, helping out to prevent similar scams in the future I am willing to forgive them. Malicious or stupid is not decidable from here. Maybe I shouldnt be so forgiving, but thats who I am. Since you benefit from this as well, maybe just for once, you and the others that tend to follow you can not make this another shit show. Im trying to mitigate further damage, while you again torch the earth. |
|
|
|
It's clear that several people have been conned by this particular wallet (not that the wallet-selling-scam is anything new). It also seems that at least a couple of people have been reselling this wallet, possibly without the knowledge that it's empty or broken, or possibly with that knowledge. FWIW, there's no hard evidence that I've found which implicates anyone in this thread (or the others referenced) of being the creator of this wallet / original scammer, so I personally see no reason to assume malice on anyone's part. On the other hand, reselling this wallet (or any for that matter) is at the very best terribly irresponsible. I wouldn't think this needs saying, but buying a wallet of dubious origin is never a good idea. It's trivial to create a wealthy-looking wallet which appears undoctored but is actually devoid of any spendable funds. This particular wallet is not an example of this (it's obviously messed up in several ways), but the bottom line is: caveat emptor!Anybody with a full node and the wallet.dat in question can verify that it contains no spendable funds. (This is not true in general, but is true for this particular wallet.) The email where I was quoted above (highlighted in way-too-much-red) shows how to do this. all have tarnished my name and I am in crypto full time so this for me is a very serious issue.
I don't mean to pick on you, but claiming that your are "in crypto full time" and at the same time were unable to see any problems with this wallet (some of which were very much related to cryptographic mistakes) does little to advance your credibility IMO. Thanks for posting this.
I love surprising arrogant little turds like you...
You're definitely on the right path towards redemption by: 1) Spamming fake negative ratings. 2) Threatening users. 3) Creating, likely, shill accounts to leave positive trust ratings to yourself.
Users like this usually do the most damage to themselves post an accusation. I did none of the above but you have your head so far up your snake butt that you cant see straight. This has gone way above redemption, it's not about making sure you all pay for not talking the time to give me the benefit of the doubt. Just my 2 cents here, but this will lead to nothing. |
|
|
|
I read your post several times and this is what I learned. I hope I get it right. Please verify. Thanks.
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is emsy37 from bitcointalk.org and today is 08/09/27 10:59:51 am. I made this signed message to send my thanks to Shorena for a wonderful signed message tutorial. It will benefit many newbies.
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
171zFe6Atv1F4TTPiZgCL5wzagKFVZwKzX
IGgiFr0pdsQl8ZZdSiipxfVWjIAoXIX/RqNIFphwKL9fLotnJTTMkEAOA5r+26LJLd9pLAH6OzqPrsnbkxTjWJs=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Sorry, but I couldnt verify this. |
|
|
|
-snip-
I sold this file to 4 people, I will gladly send them a refund and create a new video. I would like make it clear that there is no reason for this guy to start targeting my customers work. I am going to fulfill the criteria of your requests and request that he stops posting malicious comments o my threads.
I have no power over them, but I would appreciate if we stayed on topic here. If there should be anything wrong with a contest you did or didnt hold or an ICO or something else, its perfectly fine to make a new thread about it. Present proof - if any - and ask for DT support if needed. A new video, maybe with the help of gurnec if they are willing to chime in, would IMHO be a good step for several reasons. For one its better for your reputation than threads. It also helps spreading awareness of this potential problem. I dont know of a similar case. Depending on your youtube and social media skills, you could also monetize the video to help partially cover for your loses. Speaking of loses, IIRC you said you got 0.1 BTC each for the file, sold it 4 times and that its been a while. Considering the significant price change of BTC I dont think its fair to expect you to repay the full 0.1 BTC each. Maybe adjust by preev rate of last deal or something. I would also expect those claiming a refund to somehow be able to provide evidence that they bought the file from you. and maybe for education's sake put the zip file with the wallet back online? Maybe with a short .txt note added or something so people finding old links know whats up. |
|
|
|
Guys honestly this is not a corrupted wallet it is live on my laptop I assure you that if is is corrupted I have no idea. You could have contacted me to ask me before labeling my profile like this.
Thats not how this works. I'm sorry If you think I tried to scam you but I did not and can assure you this wallet runs.
Feel free to find someone trustworthy that can confirm this and resolve the issue with the other party. I suggest you ask very nicely here -> https://github.com/gurnec/btcrecover/issues/85 for an expert option and provide as much information as needed. My video makes it clear that cracking the wallet is a gamble....
The file itself was looked at by an expert and ruled to be intentionally corrupted. I have many people angry at me because I will not sell the wallet to them!
Its important to understand that I also bought this wallet and it runs for me.
That might just mean that you have no idea what you are looking at. I even made it clear in the video that the wallet was bough and it is not easy to crack the pass. Its very unfair that no one thought to email me first to ask what the situation is....
No, its not. Considering the evidence it is very likely that you did this on purpose. Having to wait for your reply would give you more time to potentially scam more victims, thus the usual approach is to shoot a negative rating first and allow you to answer to it later. But this is the culture of Bitcoin talk its riddled with this kind of behavior. If my feedback was bad then fair enough I understand you guys going to this extreme. I have not had one single person tell me the file is corrupted and I only sold the wallet to 4 People whom I have on skype and they can tell you they also have it as we have been communicating to find out if we can crack it.
-snip-
I'm quite angry and to be honest I'm more than happy to have a video call with each if you and come down to see you in person because all have tarnished my name and I am in crypto full time so this for me is a very serious issue.
Please arrange a time that I can call you and arrange for a meeting, I am not leaving this as is.
No. See above how to sort this. Neither my, nor your face has anything to do with this.
-snip-
This is the truth, I think you are simply out to damage my name... You have no intention to resolve this, you simply want to make me look bad so please accept that you are not as anonymous as you think. I've tried to be civil with you and I will have no choice but to take this up though legal action and through providing legal documentation to the forum.
Good luck. If you instead would like to resolve this issue, start repaying. If I may suggest; a second video explaining what is actually up with the file would also be a good idea IMHO. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
