instawallet has fallen new owner stealing

[davout]

BRB, building instawallet clone on .com address for phishing attack.

Be careful, you'll end up with customers.

[davout]

By the way, can someone change the title of this thread ?
You don't have to trust me, but if you want to accuse me, do it in a scam accusations thread.

[SgtSpike]

Never doubt the stupidity of people. Just because a direct route of information is ssl encrypted  does not mean every place he could have sent relevant information is encrypted as well. Information gathering is key to an operation, and if the reward is high enough plenty of these 'hackers' would spend enough time to not only gather info from unencrypted data, but also try to get a keylogger or any other type of malicious software onto the victims computer. If the reward is high enough, the difficulty doesn't matter; It is only a matter of time. Is it the easiest possibility? No, so occam's razor applied you might find that it is a simple case of misplaced coins from a fallible human being.

Just please don't think the use of one ssl encrypted site means much to a dedicated wardriver. Trust me; it doesn't.

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

[davout]

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

I think what he's trying to say is that wardrivers will also go around randomly and infect people with malware through whatever vulnerability they can find. Honestly I haven't heard about this and I think it's doubtful that this is what happened.

[battmann]

Never doubt the stupidity of people. Just because a direct route of information is ssl encrypted  does not mean every place he could have sent relevant information is encrypted as well. Information gathering is key to an operation, and if the reward is high enough plenty of these 'hackers' would spend enough time to not only gather info from unencrypted data, but also try to get a keylogger or any other type of malicious software onto the victims computer. If the reward is high enough, the difficulty doesn't matter; It is only a matter of time. Is it the easiest possibility? No, so occam's razor applied you might find that it is a simple case of misplaced coins from a fallible human being.

Just please don't think the use of one ssl encrypted site means much to a dedicated wardriver. Trust me; it doesn't.

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

See:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=150724.msg1609919#msg1609919

[fcmatt]

Never doubt the stupidity of people. Just because a direct route of information is ssl encrypted  does not mean every place he could have sent relevant information is encrypted as well. Information gathering is key to an operation, and if the reward is high enough plenty of these 'hackers' would spend enough time to not only gather info from unencrypted data, but also try to get a keylogger or any other type of malicious software onto the victims computer. If the reward is high enough, the difficulty doesn't matter; It is only a matter of time. Is it the easiest possibility? No, so occam's razor applied you might find that it is a simple case of misplaced coins from a fallible human being.

Just please don't think the use of one ssl encrypted site means much to a dedicated wardriver. Trust me; it doesn't.

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

give up. he made a suggestion and he will stick by it no matter the debate. his .0001% guess overrides all the other more likely guesses. he is obviously right. :-)

[SgtSpike]

Never doubt the stupidity of people. Just because a direct route of information is ssl encrypted  does not mean every place he could have sent relevant information is encrypted as well. Information gathering is key to an operation, and if the reward is high enough plenty of these 'hackers' would spend enough time to not only gather info from unencrypted data, but also try to get a keylogger or any other type of malicious software onto the victims computer. If the reward is high enough, the difficulty doesn't matter; It is only a matter of time. Is it the easiest possibility? No, so occam's razor applied you might find that it is a simple case of misplaced coins from a fallible human being.

Just please don't think the use of one ssl encrypted site means much to a dedicated wardriver. Trust me; it doesn't.

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

See:

https://bitcointalk.org/annoyance.php

So the wardriver sets up a fake instawallet and redirects the user's traffic to said fake instawallet.  Wouldn't the SSL certs prevent this from happening?  The user's browser would warn him that it is not a valid cert, this looks like the wrong website, etc?

Otherwise, I don't know what you are attempting to infer by sending me to that link.

[battmann]

Never doubt the stupidity of people. Just because a direct route of information is ssl encrypted  does not mean every place he could have sent relevant information is encrypted as well. Information gathering is key to an operation, and if the reward is high enough plenty of these 'hackers' would spend enough time to not only gather info from unencrypted data, but also try to get a keylogger or any other type of malicious software onto the victims computer. If the reward is high enough, the difficulty doesn't matter; It is only a matter of time. Is it the easiest possibility? No, so occam's razor applied you might find that it is a simple case of misplaced coins from a fallible human being.

Just please don't think the use of one ssl encrypted site means much to a dedicated wardriver. Trust me; it doesn't.

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

See:

https://bitcointalk.org/annoyance.php

So the wardriver sets up a fake instawallet and redirects the user's traffic to said fake instawallet.  Wouldn't the SSL certs prevent this from happening?  The user's browser would warn him that it is not a valid cert, this looks like the wrong website, etc?

Otherwise, I don't know what you are attempting to infer by sending me to that link.

I'm saying you need to start playing the lotto. It's perfect for you ^.^

[SgtSpike]

Never doubt the stupidity of people. Just because a direct route of information is ssl encrypted  does not mean every place he could have sent relevant information is encrypted as well. Information gathering is key to an operation, and if the reward is high enough plenty of these 'hackers' would spend enough time to not only gather info from unencrypted data, but also try to get a keylogger or any other type of malicious software onto the victims computer. If the reward is high enough, the difficulty doesn't matter; It is only a matter of time. Is it the easiest possibility? No, so occam's razor applied you might find that it is a simple case of misplaced coins from a fallible human being.

Just please don't think the use of one ssl encrypted site means much to a dedicated wardriver. Trust me; it doesn't.

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

See:

https://bitcointalk.org/annoyance.php

So the wardriver sets up a fake instawallet and redirects the user's traffic to said fake instawallet.  Wouldn't the SSL certs prevent this from happening?  The user's browser would warn him that it is not a valid cert, this looks like the wrong website, etc?

Otherwise, I don't know what you are attempting to infer by sending me to that link.

I'm saying you need to start playing the lotto. It's perfect for you ^.^

The lotto is a stupid way to lose a lot of money.  You're still not getting your point across.  Please say whatever you mean instead of attempting to make inferences through irrelevant links and phrases.

[battmann]

Never doubt the stupidity of people. Just because a direct route of information is ssl encrypted  does not mean every place he could have sent relevant information is encrypted as well. Information gathering is key to an operation, and if the reward is high enough plenty of these 'hackers' would spend enough time to not only gather info from unencrypted data, but also try to get a keylogger or any other type of malicious software onto the victims computer. If the reward is high enough, the difficulty doesn't matter; It is only a matter of time. Is it the easiest possibility? No, so occam's razor applied you might find that it is a simple case of misplaced coins from a fallible human being.

Just please don't think the use of one ssl encrypted site means much to a dedicated wardriver. Trust me; it doesn't.

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

give up. he made a suggestion and he will stick by it no matter the debate. his .0001% guess overrides all the other more likely guesses. he is obviously right. :-)

To the bitter end. The idea I suggested is the one and only possibility; I will accept no substitutes! There can only be ONE!!1!!!one!

[battmann]

Never doubt the stupidity of people. Just because a direct route of information is ssl encrypted  does not mean every place he could have sent relevant information is encrypted as well. Information gathering is key to an operation, and if the reward is high enough plenty of these 'hackers' would spend enough time to not only gather info from unencrypted data, but also try to get a keylogger or any other type of malicious software onto the victims computer. If the reward is high enough, the difficulty doesn't matter; It is only a matter of time. Is it the easiest possibility? No, so occam's razor applied you might find that it is a simple case of misplaced coins from a fallible human being.

Just please don't think the use of one ssl encrypted site means much to a dedicated wardriver. Trust me; it doesn't.

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

See:

https://bitcointalk.org/annoyance.php

So the wardriver sets up a fake instawallet and redirects the user's traffic to said fake instawallet.  Wouldn't the SSL certs prevent this from happening?  The user's browser would warn him that it is not a valid cert, this looks like the wrong website, etc?

Otherwise, I don't know what you are attempting to infer by sending me to that link.

I'm saying you need to start playing the lotto. It's perfect for you ^.^

The lotto is a stupid way to lose a lot of money.  You're still not getting your point across.  Please say whatever you mean instead of attempting to make inferences through irrelevant links and phrases.

Lol. If you like you can go back to my first post to attempt to understand what my 'point' was/is

[AbsoluteZero]

On this report:

Quantitative Analysis of the Full Bitcoin Transaction Graph

http://eprint.iacr.org/2012/584.pdf

Page 11

Instawallet has 633,606 in accumulated incoming BTC

At 47.50 it is worth 30 Million Dollars!!!!

If Instawallet has fallen, this is Bitcoin's biggest theft.

[battmann]

On this report:

Quantitative Analysis of the Full Bitcoin Transaction Graph

http://eprint.iacr.org/2012/584.pdf

Page 11

Instawallet has 633,606 in accumulated incoming BTC

At 47.50 it is worth 30 Million Dollars!!!!

If Instawallet has fallen, this is Bitcoin's biggest theft.

Nope, you're wrong. Instawallet is stealing all the coins. To think otherwise is stupids.

www.shitsstupid.com

[AbsoluteZero]

On this report:

Quantitative Analysis of the Full Bitcoin Transaction Graph

http://eprint.iacr.org/2012/584.pdf

Page 11

Instawallet has 633,606 in accumulated incoming BTC

At 47.50 it is worth 30 Million Dollars!!!!

If Instawallet has fallen, this is Bitcoin's biggest theft.

Nope, you're wrong. Instawallet is stealing all the coins. To think otherwise is stupids.

www.shitsstupid.com

I am not saying who stole what.

I am just saying the SIZE!

[battmann]

On this report:

Quantitative Analysis of the Full Bitcoin Transaction Graph

http://eprint.iacr.org/2012/584.pdf

Page 11

Instawallet has 633,606 in accumulated incoming BTC

At 47.50 it is worth 30 Million Dollars!!!!

If Instawallet has fallen, this is Bitcoin's biggest theft.

Nope, you're wrong. Instawallet is stealing all the coins. To think otherwise is stupids.

www.shitsstupid.com

I am not saying who stole what.

I am just saying the SIZE!

Oh I know broski I'm just being a dick. Also plugging my site shitsstupid.com my ladyfriend free drew that for my birthday ^.^ she thinks she cant draw, she did that in about 8 hrs overall. Shits awesome.

[SgtSpike]

Never doubt the stupidity of people. Just because a direct route of information is ssl encrypted  does not mean every place he could have sent relevant information is encrypted as well. Information gathering is key to an operation, and if the reward is high enough plenty of these 'hackers' would spend enough time to not only gather info from unencrypted data, but also try to get a keylogger or any other type of malicious software onto the victims computer. If the reward is high enough, the difficulty doesn't matter; It is only a matter of time. Is it the easiest possibility? No, so occam's razor applied you might find that it is a simple case of misplaced coins from a fallible human being.

Just please don't think the use of one ssl encrypted site means much to a dedicated wardriver. Trust me; it doesn't.

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

See:

https://bitcointalk.org/annoyance.php

So the wardriver sets up a fake instawallet and redirects the user's traffic to said fake instawallet.  Wouldn't the SSL certs prevent this from happening?  The user's browser would warn him that it is not a valid cert, this looks like the wrong website, etc?

Otherwise, I don't know what you are attempting to infer by sending me to that link.

I'm saying you need to start playing the lotto. It's perfect for you ^.^

The lotto is a stupid way to lose a lot of money.  You're still not getting your point across.  Please say whatever you mean instead of attempting to make inferences through irrelevant links and phrases.

Lol. If you like you can go back to my first post to attempt to understand what my 'point' was/is

So you're implying that a wardriver randomly driving by a place:
1) Knows that the person uses Bitcoin
2) Knows that the person is a wealthy Bitcoin holder
3) Finds a security hole in the person's computer allowing the insertion of a keylogger or other malware

Does this not seem unlikely to you?  How does said wardriver know #1 and #2?  In my city of 300,000 people, only 21 of them (average) use Bitcoin.  Does someone drive all around Eugene, Springfield, and the surrounding area looking for hackable wifi and inserting malware into the networks in the hope that they randomly come across someone computer-savvy enough to use Bitcoin, but not so computer-savvy that they know WEP is broken?  And they hope that at least one of those 300,000 people actually has a decent amount of Bitcoin stored up, in an instawallet, so that they can grab it?

It still seems like winning the lottery would be far more likely to happen than a random wardriver hacking someone's Bitcoins away.  Much more likely, in my mind, would be a friend or relative of OP knew about his Bitcoin holdings and got greedy.  It would be trivial to take the Bitcoins with physical access to the computer.

[battmann]

Never doubt the stupidity of people. Just because a direct route of information is ssl encrypted  does not mean every place he could have sent relevant information is encrypted as well. Information gathering is key to an operation, and if the reward is high enough plenty of these 'hackers' would spend enough time to not only gather info from unencrypted data, but also try to get a keylogger or any other type of malicious software onto the victims computer. If the reward is high enough, the difficulty doesn't matter; It is only a matter of time. Is it the easiest possibility? No, so occam's razor applied you might find that it is a simple case of misplaced coins from a fallible human being.

Just please don't think the use of one ssl encrypted site means much to a dedicated wardriver. Trust me; it doesn't.

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

See:

https://bitcointalk.org/annoyance.php

So the wardriver sets up a fake instawallet and redirects the user's traffic to said fake instawallet.  Wouldn't the SSL certs prevent this from happening?  The user's browser would warn him that it is not a valid cert, this looks like the wrong website, etc?

Otherwise, I don't know what you are attempting to infer by sending me to that link.

I'm saying you need to start playing the lotto. It's perfect for you ^.^

The lotto is a stupid way to lose a lot of money.  You're still not getting your point across.  Please say whatever you mean instead of attempting to make inferences through irrelevant links and phrases.

Lol. If you like you can go back to my first post to attempt to understand what my 'point' was/is

So you're implying that a wardriver randomly driving by a place:
1) Knows that the person uses Bitcoin
2) Knows that the person is a wealthy Bitcoin holder
3) Finds a security hole in the person's computer allowing the insertion of a keylogger or other malware

Does this not seem unlikely to you?  How does said wardriver know #1 and #2?  In my city of 300,000 people, only 21 of them (average) use Bitcoin.  Does someone drive all around Eugene, Springfield, and the surrounding area looking for hackable wifi and inserting malware into the networks in the hope that they randomly come across someone computer-savvy enough to use Bitcoin, but not so computer-savvy that they know WEP is broken?  And they hope that at least one of those 300,000 people actually has a decent amount of Bitcoin stored up, in an instawallet, so that they can grab it?

It still seems like winning the lottery would be far more likely to happen than a random wardriver hacking someone's Bitcoins away.  Much more likely, in my mind, would be a friend or relative of OP knew about his Bitcoin holdings and got greedy.  It would be trivial to take the Bitcoins with physical access to the computer.

Thank you for reiterating my main 'point' as you put it; not exactly the word choice I would be using, but whatever works for ya.

Oh, and to answer your list "no" you need to do your homework honey. Piiissseee

[SgtSpike]

Never doubt the stupidity of people. Just because a direct route of information is ssl encrypted  does not mean every place he could have sent relevant information is encrypted as well. Information gathering is key to an operation, and if the reward is high enough plenty of these 'hackers' would spend enough time to not only gather info from unencrypted data, but also try to get a keylogger or any other type of malicious software onto the victims computer. If the reward is high enough, the difficulty doesn't matter; It is only a matter of time. Is it the easiest possibility? No, so occam's razor applied you might find that it is a simple case of misplaced coins from a fallible human being.

Just please don't think the use of one ssl encrypted site means much to a dedicated wardriver. Trust me; it doesn't.

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

See:

https://bitcointalk.org/annoyance.php

So the wardriver sets up a fake instawallet and redirects the user's traffic to said fake instawallet.  Wouldn't the SSL certs prevent this from happening?  The user's browser would warn him that it is not a valid cert, this looks like the wrong website, etc?

Otherwise, I don't know what you are attempting to infer by sending me to that link.

I'm saying you need to start playing the lotto. It's perfect for you ^.^

The lotto is a stupid way to lose a lot of money.  You're still not getting your point across.  Please say whatever you mean instead of attempting to make inferences through irrelevant links and phrases.

Lol. If you like you can go back to my first post to attempt to understand what my 'point' was/is

So you're implying that a wardriver randomly driving by a place:
1) Knows that the person uses Bitcoin
2) Knows that the person is a wealthy Bitcoin holder
3) Finds a security hole in the person's computer allowing the insertion of a keylogger or other malware

Does this not seem unlikely to you?  How does said wardriver know #1 and #2?  In my city of 300,000 people, only 21 of them (average) use Bitcoin.  Does someone drive all around Eugene, Springfield, and the surrounding area looking for hackable wifi and inserting malware into the networks in the hope that they randomly come across someone computer-savvy enough to use Bitcoin, but not so computer-savvy that they know WEP is broken?  And they hope that at least one of those 300,000 people actually has a decent amount of Bitcoin stored up, in an instawallet, so that they can grab it?

It still seems like winning the lottery would be far more likely to happen than a random wardriver hacking someone's Bitcoins away.  Much more likely, in my mind, would be a friend or relative of OP knew about his Bitcoin holdings and got greedy.  It would be trivial to take the Bitcoins with physical access to the computer.

Thank you for reiterating my main 'point' as you put it; not exactly the word choice I would be using, but whatever works for ya.

Oh, and to answer your list "no" you need to do your homework honey. Piiissseee

And I still don't know what your point is.  Is it that a wardriver would randomly stumble across a Bitcoin user, or that a relative/friend is the likely culprit?

[battmann]

Never doubt the stupidity of people. Just because a direct route of information is ssl encrypted  does not mean every place he could have sent relevant information is encrypted as well. Information gathering is key to an operation, and if the reward is high enough plenty of these 'hackers' would spend enough time to not only gather info from unencrypted data, but also try to get a keylogger or any other type of malicious software onto the victims computer. If the reward is high enough, the difficulty doesn't matter; It is only a matter of time. Is it the easiest possibility? No, so occam's razor applied you might find that it is a simple case of misplaced coins from a fallible human being.

Just please don't think the use of one ssl encrypted site means much to a dedicated wardriver. Trust me; it doesn't.

So you're saying that a wardriver, who knows that Bitcoin is only used by 0.007% of the population, is driving around, looking for open or crackable WiFi, in the hopes that one of those 0.007% of people is actually using Bitcoin instawallet (used by even fewer people), and that person just so happens to be accessing their instawallet at the same time said wardriver is watching their network, and that person also just so happens to be accessing their instawallet via http instead of https (even though instawallet is always accessed through https, so there would be no reason for an instawallet URL to be stored as http)?

I feel like it would be more likely for me to win the lottery twice than for this to happen.

See:

https://bitcointalk.org/annoyance.php

So the wardriver sets up a fake instawallet and redirects the user's traffic to said fake instawallet.  Wouldn't the SSL certs prevent this from happening?  The user's browser would warn him that it is not a valid cert, this looks like the wrong website, etc?

Otherwise, I don't know what you are attempting to infer by sending me to that link.

I'm saying you need to start playing the lotto. It's perfect for you ^.^

The lotto is a stupid way to lose a lot of money.  You're still not getting your point across.  Please say whatever you mean instead of attempting to make inferences through irrelevant links and phrases.

Lol. If you like you can go back to my first post to attempt to understand what my 'point' was/is

So you're implying that a wardriver randomly driving by a place:
1) Knows that the person uses Bitcoin
2) Knows that the person is a wealthy Bitcoin holder
3) Finds a security hole in the person's computer allowing the insertion of a keylogger or other malware

Does this not seem unlikely to you?  How does said wardriver know #1 and #2?  In my city of 300,000 people, only 21 of them (average) use Bitcoin.  Does someone drive all around Eugene, Springfield, and the surrounding area looking for hackable wifi and inserting malware into the networks in the hope that they randomly come across someone computer-savvy enough to use Bitcoin, but not so computer-savvy that they know WEP is broken?  And they hope that at least one of those 300,000 people actually has a decent amount of Bitcoin stored up, in an instawallet, so that they can grab it?

It still seems like winning the lottery would be far more likely to happen than a random wardriver hacking someone's Bitcoins away.  Much more likely, in my mind, would be a friend or relative of OP knew about his Bitcoin holdings and got greedy.  It would be trivial to take the Bitcoins with physical access to the computer.

Thank you for reiterating my main 'point' as you put it; not exactly the word choice I would be using, but whatever works for ya.

Oh, and to answer your list "no" you need to do your homework honey. Piiissseee

And I still don't know what your point is.  Is it that a wardriver would randomly stumble across a Bitcoin user, or that a relative/friend is the likely culprit?

I'm gonna go see Dan Deacon at the house of blues.

[thewindrock]

I have gotten several pms from people saying they had the same thing happen. apparently the day the ownership changed is the day my cash got hacked. this is a big scam and obviously several people have been employed to cover it up. well have fun with that im sure what you deserve will come around eventually. seriously the same day ownership changes and a Russian hacker robs me!? I call bullshit. but seriously good job your like Hitler huge accomplishments but really fucked up