Sent to wrong address; how did I do this?

[realnowhereman]

I was moving money out of mybitcoin.

Somehow I've entered the wrong address in the send field.

Now I know bitcoin is completely one time, and can't be undone; I'm going to have to accept the loss on the chin.  What I don't understand is how I've done it.  I can't find where I got the wrong address from.  It's never been used before in the block chain, I can't find it on Mt.Gox or Britcoin, in my wallet or via a Google Search.

It looks nothing like the right address, so it's not a typo.  I've thought and thought, and can't understand how I've done this.  I must have cut and paste it from somewhere, but I have no clue where.  I ask here only in case anyone else has done such a crazy thing but knows what they did.

At first I was going to blame mybitcoin; but my browser form history shows this unknown address in the mybitcoin send field; so it is without doubt my fault.  I just wish I knew how I'd done it.

(If you happen to have just received a magical 20.99 BTC from no one and felt like generously returning it to me, the transaction (and public key) was:
http://blockexplorer.com/address/1Bh33GzKW1Ercd7K2B9Rubh1t3SEVrYNwq)

[1713523476]

1713523476

[dikidera]

Did you know you just invented a new way to scam people from bitcoins?

[realnowhereman]

Panic over; I found it the transfer went through to my britcoin account.  Perhaps britcoin changes the receiving address regularly, and that's why I thought I'd got it wrong.

Perhaps it changes it when it gets 1 confirmation, but doesn't credit the account until its received six.   All perfectly reasonable, and the mistake was all mine.

Did you know you just invented a new way to scam people from bitcoins?

Surely not?

I gave the link to the transaction that I made as proof that I made it; the owner of the target address would know if they were the owner or not, and would know if they had unexpectedly received 20.99.  They would then have either been generous or not (and I wouldn't blame anyone not being in that situation -- it would have been my own stupid fault).

Perhaps I'm not twisted enough to see what the scam is.  Care to enlighten me?

[Kakoon]

Wow, do bitcoins really 'disappear in thin air' when you enter a non-existing address? That makes no sense. It means that more and more bitcoins will get lost?

[bitlotto]

Wow, do bitcoins really 'disappear in thin air' when you enter a non-existing address? That makes no sense. It means that more and more bitcoins will get lost?

There is a little check to make sure it "looks" like a real address. But yes, coins can get lost. That makes the remaining ones more valuable though!

[realnowhereman]

Wow, do bitcoins really 'disappear in thin air' when you enter a non-existing address? That makes no sense. It means that more and more bitcoins will get lost?

Bitcoin addresses are self-consistent.  They include four (I think) bytes of checksum as well as the public key.  That means it's unlikely to be able to mistype a valid address.

It was this property that made me so confused; I just couldn't work out where I'd gotten a valid address from.

[bitlotto]

Wow, do bitcoins really 'disappear in thin air' when you enter a non-existing address? That makes no sense. It means that more and more bitcoins will get lost?

Bitcoin addresses are self-consistent.  They include four (I think) bytes of checksum as well as the public key.  That means it's unlikely to be able to mistype a valid address.

It was this property that made me so confused; I just couldn't work out where I'd gotten a valid address from.

Perhaps a man in the middle attack. While using the internet (even TOR) the website page could have been altered on its way to you. Someone could have been looking for Bitcoin addresses on its way to you and altered it with their own hoping you'll send to the wrong address.

[realnowhereman]

Bitcoin addresses are self-consistent.  They include four (I think) bytes of checksum as well as the public key.  That means it's unlikely to be able to mistype a valid address.

It was this property that made me so confused; I just couldn't work out where I'd gotten a valid address from.

Perhaps a man in the middle attack. While using the internet (even TOR) the website page could have been altered on its way to you. Someone could have been looking for Bitcoin addresses on its way to you and altered it with their own hoping you'll send to the wrong address.

Ah -- I see; you mean I was being scammed rather I was scamming?  I never even thought of that possibility.

[Meni Rosenfeld]

Bitcoin addresses are self-consistent.  They include four (I think) bytes of checksum as well as the public key.  That means it's unlikely to be able to mistype a valid address.

It was this property that made me so confused; I just couldn't work out where I'd gotten a valid address from.

Perhaps a man in the middle attack. While using the internet (even TOR) the website page could have been altered on its way to you. Someone could have been looking for Bitcoin addresses on its way to you and altered it with their own hoping you'll send to the wrong address.

Ah -- I see; you mean I was being scammed rather I was scamming?  I never even thought of that possibility.

That too, but I don't think that's what dikidera talked about. The fact that you link to a transaction in BE doesn't prove you made it (you can just go over a block and pick a random transaction). The correct counterargument to the possibility you might be scamming is that if you were not the sender, you would have no way of knowing that the receiver will be surprised by the transaction.

[realnowhereman]

Perhaps a man in the middle attack. While using the internet (even TOR) the website page could have been altered on its way to you. Someone could have been looking for Bitcoin addresses on its way to you and altered it with their own hoping you'll send to the wrong address.

Ah -- I see; you mean I was being scammed rather I was scamming?  I never even thought of that possibility.

That too, but I don't think that's what dikidera talked about. The fact that you link to a transaction in BE doesn't prove you made it (you can just go over a block and pick a random transaction). The correct counterargument to the possibility you might be scamming is that if you were not the sender, you would have no way of knowing that the receiver will be surprised by the transaction.

Quite so.  I would have to be a fairly amazing scammer to pick the one transaction that happened to be unexpected.

[cypherdoc]

Bitcoin addresses are self-consistent.  They include four (I think) bytes of checksum as well as the public key.  That means it's unlikely to be able to mistype a valid address.

It was this property that made me so confused; I just couldn't work out where I'd gotten a valid address from.

Perhaps a man in the middle attack. While using the internet (even TOR) the website page could have been altered on its way to you. Someone could have been looking for Bitcoin addresses on its way to you and altered it with their own hoping you'll send to the wrong address.

Ah -- I see; you mean I was being scammed rather I was scamming?  I never even thought of that possibility.

That too, but I don't think that's what dikidera talked about. The fact that you link to a transaction in BE doesn't prove you made it (you can just go over a block and pick a random transaction). The correct counterargument to the possibility you might be scamming is that if you were not the sender, you would have no way of knowing that the receiver will be surprised by the transaction.

another way he could have scammed us is if he sent those btc's to one of his own addresses.
i recall seeing on another thread that btc can't be sent to an invalid address; someone has to receive those coins.

[cypherdoc]

Bitcoin addresses are self-consistent.  They include four (I think) bytes of checksum as well as the public key.  That means it's unlikely to be able to mistype a valid address.

It was this property that made me so confused; I just couldn't work out where I'd gotten a valid address from.

Perhaps a man in the middle attack. While using the internet (even TOR) the website page could have been altered on its way to you. Someone could have been looking for Bitcoin addresses on its way to you and altered it with their own hoping you'll send to the wrong address.

Ah -- I see; you mean I was being scammed rather I was scamming?  I never even thought of that possibility.

That too, but I don't think that's what dikidera talked about. The fact that you link to a transaction in BE doesn't prove you made it (you can just go over a block and pick a random transaction). The correct counterargument to the possibility you might be scamming is that if you were not the sender, you would have no way of knowing that the receiver will be surprised by the transaction.

another way he could have scammed us is if he sent those btc's to one of his own addresses.
i recall seeing on another thread that btc can't be sent to an invalid address; someone has to receive those coins.

ah, sorry, he was asking if someone would return the exact amount back to him.  rare amt i'd presume.  thought he was asking for small contributions to cover his loss.

[bitlotto]

another way he could have scammed us is if he sent those btc's to one of his own addresses.
i recall seeing on another thread that btc can't be sent to an invalid address; someone has to receive those coins.

I remember reading though that someone created a "timestamp" script that hashed a file, and output a valid looking address. The user would then send something like 0.01 to that address and the hash would be stored in the network forever recording the hash of the file proving it has existed for some time.

[cypherdoc]

another way he could have scammed us is if he sent those btc's to one of his own addresses.
i recall seeing on another thread that btc can't be sent to an invalid address; someone has to receive those coins.

I remember reading though that someone created a "timestamp" script that hashed a file, and output a valid looking address. The user would then send something like 0.01 to that address and the hash would be stored in the network forever recording the hash of the file proving it has existed for some time.

http://blockexplorer.com/block/00000000000997f9fd2fe1ee376293ef8c42ad09193a5d2086dddf8e5c426b56

[cypherdoc]

http://blockexplorer.com/address/1111111111111111111114oLvT2