Nefario

[SmiGueL]

I'm also 'waiting' for my coins from GLBSE.
I've filled in the requested info immediately after the site asked for it. I even got 2 emails that said: "Your GLBSE account has been partially processed. 90% of your funds have been returned to you with this payment." But never received any coin back.
_{(I got 2 emails because I had multiple accounts)}

Is there anything more I can do to improve the chances to get the coins back?

[1714931455]

1714931455

[ColdHardMetal]

I'm also 'waiting' for my coins from GLBSE.
I've filled in the requested info immediately after the site asked for it. I even got 2 emails that said: "Your GLBSE account has been partially processed. 90% of your funds have been returned to you with this payment." But never received any coin back.
_{(I got 2 emails because I had multiple accounts)}

Is there anything more I can do to improve the chances to get the coins back?

Nefario is in control of all of that, so your best bet is to email him. Now that he's contacted me again I can try and put some pressure on him, but no real guarantee he won't just ignore my emails.

[ColdHardMetal]

If someone can send coins from a specific address is that sufficient proof that they control it without going through any type of signature process?

[memvola]

If someone can send coins from a specific address is that sufficient proof that they control it without going through any type of signature process?

Yes.

EDIT: As arsenische explained below, there are very practical attacks in this case that I hadn't imagined. I'd go with signatures as it shouldn't be that hard to use anyway.

[arsenische]

If someone can send coins from a specific address is that sufficient proof that they control it without going through any type of signature process?

Yes. 

In general I don't think so.... Bitcoin address owner can be asked by a anybody to send bitcoins to any address (for example in exchange for goods or services)... so to my mind it doesn't prove anything.

[arsenische]

If someone can send coins from a specific address is that sufficient proof that they control it without going through any type of signature process?

Yes. 

In general I don't think so.... Bitcoin address owner can be asked by a anybody to send bitcoins to any address (for example in exchange for goods or services)... so to my mind it doesn't prove anything.

Not TO but FROM. However more than one person can be "in control" of an address.

OK. Let me explain it better.

1. We know that Bob owns some bitcoin address.

2. Alice claims she is Bob.

3. We ask her to send coins from Bob's address as a proof.

4. She asks Bob to do it in exchange for the image of her boobs (so Bob thinks he just pays for a photo).

5. We see that money moved from Bob's address and assume that Alice is Bob.

But she is not!

[organofcorti]

If someone can send coins from a specific address is that sufficient proof that they control it without going through any type of signature process?

Yes. 

In general I don't think so.... Bitcoin address owner can be asked by a anybody to send bitcoins to any address (for example in exchange for goods or services)... so to my mind it doesn't prove anything.

Not TO but FROM. However more than one person can be "in control" of an address.

OK. Let me explain it better.

1. We know that Bob owns some bitcoin address.

2. Alice claims she is Bob.

3. We ask her to send coins from Bob's address as a proof.

4. She asks Bob to do it in exchange for the image of her boobs (so Bob thinks he just pays for a photo).

5. We see that money moved from Bob's address and assume that Alice is Bob.

But she is not!

Yes, arsenische has provided a very good example of the classic "Boob in the middle" attack to which many geeks can become victim.

[SebastianJu]

You beat me to it...

...But Bob wouldnt care because of some reason he gets a good amount of bitcoins back in exchange... (I doubt CHM would change the address he sends the money to after the address was verified.)

[organofcorti]

A reason Alice might be doing this is because, while claiming she is Bob, she wants the coins that should be sent to Bob sent instead to another address, probably one controlled by her. The other party asks for proof that she is Bob. Alice provides it by getting Bob to send a certain number of coins to the third party's address as per their specifications.

As a result:
1. The third party pays Alice instead of Bob.
2. Bob loses a certain amount of coin which we hope was worth some boobage.
3. We all lose a little respect for Alice once Bob posts the video of her boobs on xtube.

[SebastianJu]

Then CHM shouldnt allow a change of address simply. It doesnt make sense anyway when the address was verified previously. So that its sure Bob owns the address. If Alice would like to have the btc at another address it wouldnt be a problem to send the btc from the old address to a new address. So CHM wouldnt need to send to another address...

[organofcorti]

There are valid reason Bob might not want a lump sum of coin sent to a wallet where those coins would then be mixed with other coins by which Bob could be identified. If Bob did not want it known he just recieved a large sum, he might want the coins sent to a virgin address.

It's silly, but a possible reason. I agree with you, if the third party were me I would make a stipulation that coins would have to be sent back to the address form which they originated.

[memvola]

OK. Let me explain it better.

1. We know that Bob owns some bitcoin address.

2. Alice claims she is Bob.

3. We ask her to send coins from Bob's address as a proof.

4. She asks Bob to do it in exchange for the image of her boobs (so Bob thinks he just pays for a photo).

5. We see that money moved from Bob's address and assume that Alice is Bob.

But she is not!

Good explanation. I guess having someone sign some random string for boobs is far implausible than having them send 0.00123456 coins to some address.

[organofcorti]

OK. Let me explain it better.

1. We know that Bob owns some bitcoin address.

2. Alice claims she is Bob.

3. We ask her to send coins from Bob's address as a proof.

4. She asks Bob to do it in exchange for the image of her boobs (so Bob thinks he just pays for a photo).

5. We see that money moved from Bob's address and assume that Alice is Bob.

But she is not!

Good explanation. I guess having someone sign some random string for boobs is far implausible than having them send 0.00123456 coins to some address.

You missed the point. Bob is paying for boobage to the address Alice specifies, ie the address the third party specifies. Lots of people pay for porn using bitcoin - er so I've heard, anyway - so this is not implausible at all. The whole attack relies on the third party allowing coins to be sent from the third party to a new address, using coins being sent from a known address to the third party as a factor of identification.

The big problem is that unless Alice specifies to Bob that the coins have to come from a specific address, the coins bob sends may not be from the address in question. If Alice makes such a specification, Bob is unlikely to comply unless he really wants to see boobs.

[deeplink]

Bob is unlikely to comply unless he really wants to see boobs.

With a name like that it is kind of inevitable.

[arsenische]

Bob is unlikely to comply unless he really wants to see boobs.

Alice doesn't want to show her boobs to anybody except Bob. She knows it's Bob's address, that's why she wants to receive coins from it as a proof.

[organofcorti]

Bob is unlikely to comply unless he really wants to see boobs.

Alice doesn't want to show her boobs to anybody except Bob. She knows it's Bob's address, that's why she wants to receive coins from it as a proof.

She wants to receive coins from Bob's address, or she wants Bob to send them to the third party? I thought the idea was to make the third party think she has control of the address.

[arsenische]

She wants to receive coins from Bob's address, or she wants Bob to send them to the third party? I thought the idea was to make the third party think she has control of the address.

Right, that's the idea. I just explained the her story for Bob. Bob would think he has to send bitcoins from his address to prove that he is Bob because Alice doesn't want to show boobs to anybody except him. But in fact there might be no Alice at all, it could be just some anonymous scammer pretending to be Alice for Bob, and pretending to be Bob for us.

[organofcorti]

She wants to receive coins from Bob's address, or she wants Bob to send them to the third party? I thought the idea was to make the third party think she has control of the address.

Right, that's the idea. I just explained the her story for Bob. Bob would think he has to send bitcoins from his address to prove that he is Bob because Alice doesn't want to show boobs to anybody except him. But in fact there might be no Alice at all, it could be just some anonymous scammer pretending to be Alice for Bob, and pretending to be Bob for us.

In my experience, most internet Alices are actually Bobs.

[ColdHardMetal]

One of these has been taken care of and another is in process. If you are the owner of one of the following addresses please contact me.

17fd4pVV5u3GHrqHBc46tzoiDZJ3pMgnjJ
1BBKGnvVkyZ1sFCkZGee3RN7nxoSdm9AHT

[bixcoin]

One of these has been taken care of and another is in process. If you are the owner of one of the following addresses please contact me.

17fd4pVV5u3GHrqHBc46tzoiDZJ3pMgnjJ
1BBKGnvVkyZ1sFCkZGee3RN7nxoSdm9AHT

I confirm that I received 29,34 Bitcoins from CHM to my Adress. Together with 170BC Nefario sent me out of the blue and without further information one day, this totals about 77% of the funds I had on GLBSE the day it was closed. I have no Idea how it comes to this number, but the fact that something keeps coming in, gives me hope that I might still receive some more.