Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[1714807259]

1714807259

[1714807259]

1714807259

[1714807259]

1714807259

[1714807259]

1714807259

[1714807259]

1714807259

[1714807259]

1714807259

[AlexGR]

By the way, there was another message by "Satoshi" recently, denying that he was Craig Wright -- and then adding "We are all Satoshi".  That last part is obviously something that Satoshi would not have written. I can only think that the hacker is aware that everybody is aware that the account has been compromised, and does not care to pretend anymore.

Sound, sensible analysis as always. Good to have you home, professor.

The problem is that the anti-fork message was not spoofed and the writing style matches.
http://pastebin.com/Ct5M8fa2

Here's a quick technical analysis of the email sent to the bitcoin-dev mailing list today at http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html
 
The email was sent from an anonymous email provider called vistomail.com which gives the appearance of being out of service. However you can see the logins at https://webmail.vistomail.com/
 
The vistomail servers are authorised to originate email by their IP address via the SPF DNS records . Satoshi used satoshi@vistomail.com when first announcing Bitcoin http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2009-January/014994.html
 
From this you can safely conclude the email did originate from vistomail.com servers and was not spoofed. It does not prove the account was not hacked of course.
 
Partial headers from the email:
  
Received: from mail.vistomail.com (vistomail.com [190.97.163.93])
        by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2175813F
        for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
        Sat, 15 Aug 2015 19:00:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from DS04 ([190.97.163.93]) by vistomail.com with MailEnable ESMTP;
        Sat, 15 Aug 2015 13:51:14 -0500
 

DNS RECORDS FOLLOW:
  
vistomail.com descriptive text "v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ip4:190.97.163.93 ~all"
vistomail.com has address 190.97.163.93
vistomail.com mail is handled by 10 vistomail.com.

The "we are all satoshi" was spoofed and the writing style or expressions didn't match. So the second doesn't invalidate the first.

Additionally, that particular email address is not known to have been stolen.

Therefore the August message could be legit - it's a very serious risk for BTC. Risk, in the sense that if the proposed fork goes ahead, we'll have Satoshi's second coming after the forkageddon to proclaim Bitcoin is a failure since it failed to protect itself from this kind of attack.

[JorgeStolfi]

By the way, there was another message by "Satoshi" recently, denying that he was Craig Wright -- and then adding "We are all Satoshi".  That last part is obviously something that Satoshi would not have written. I can only think that the hacker is aware that everybody is aware that the account has been compromised, and does not care to pretend anymore.

Theymos is the one who pointed out that that email was spoofed, and even posted the IP from which it was spoofed:

From https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w6vy4/i_am_not_craig_wright_we_are_all_satoshi_satoshi/ :

Code:

Received: from mail.vistomail.com (cpe-104-231-205-87.wi.res.rr.com
    [104.231.205.87])         
    by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 01BCADF
    for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
    Thu, 10 Dec 2015 06:53:42 +0000 (UTC)

This IP is obviously a TW customer in Wisconsin, where Theymos lives.  How much more obvious does he have to make the joke?

Thanks!  So that last email is not relevant to the discussion of the other two.

[Alley]

I guess i better pick up some coins before we go back over 400.

[samson]

By the way, there was another message by "Satoshi" recently, denying that he was Craig Wright -- and then adding "We are all Satoshi".  That last part is obviously something that Satoshi would not have written. I can only think that the hacker is aware that everybody is aware that the account has been compromised, and does not care to pretend anymore.

Sound, sensible analysis as always. Good to have you home, professor.

The problem is that the anti-fork message was not spoofed and the writing style matches.
http://pastebin.com/Ct5M8fa2

Here's a quick technical analysis of the email sent to the bitcoin-dev mailing list today at http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html
 
The email was sent from an anonymous email provider called vistomail.com which gives the appearance of being out of service. However you can see the logins at https://webmail.vistomail.com/
 
The vistomail servers are authorised to originate email by their IP address via the SPF DNS records . Satoshi used satoshi@vistomail.com when first announcing Bitcoin http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2009-January/014994.html
 
From this you can safely conclude the email did originate from vistomail.com servers and was not spoofed. It does not prove the account was not hacked of course.
 
Partial headers from the email:
  
Received: from mail.vistomail.com (vistomail.com [190.97.163.93])
        by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2175813F
        for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
        Sat, 15 Aug 2015 19:00:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from DS04 ([190.97.163.93]) by vistomail.com with MailEnable ESMTP;
        Sat, 15 Aug 2015 13:51:14 -0500
 

DNS RECORDS FOLLOW:
  
vistomail.com descriptive text "v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ip4:190.97.163.93 ~all"
vistomail.com has address 190.97.163.93
vistomail.com mail is handled by 10 vistomail.com.

The "we are all satoshi" was spoofed and the writing style or expressions didn't match. So the second doesn't invalidate the first.

Additionally, that particular email address is not known to have been stolen.

Therefore the August message could be legit - it's a very serious risk for BTC. Risk, in the sense that if the proposed fork goes ahead, we'll have Satoshi's second coming after the forkageddon to proclaim Bitcoin is a failure since it failed to protect itself from this kind of attack.

Anyone can get a vistomail email address, I had one myself once. It's an anonymous speech service which has been around for a long time and they are reliable.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Looks like the community has decided Mike Hearn's name & opinion doesn't mean shit. We found the bottom & decided to go back up. 370-400 will probably be a range we float around for a while.

[lemmyK]

I only started to write a tech report on how a mining cartel with majority hashpower can force a change in the protocol, such as postponing the next halving, in spite of opposition by the "economic majority" -- by sabotaging the old chain while mining the new one.  But, after countless forum discussions, that attack is now well known, and I haven't got enough motivation to finish it.(1)

Thank you stolfi..


Chinese sh*** kill all good on this planet...

[pinger]

Looks like the community has decided Mike Hearn's name & opinion doesn't mean shit. We found the bottom & decided to go back up. 370-400 will probably be a range we float around for a while.

It's just telling everybody bitcoin is death, so everyone has to go XT. Of course we don't give a shit of what he is saying. Is not about the blocksize (something we all agree it has to be changed), is about doing things without a consense, is about Tor censorship and a few more things.

[peonminer]

Shorts covered and we only went up a few $ . . . not good.

[orpington]

Bitcoin "Classic"! What a stupid name. Logically there's nothing really classic about it. They should have spent a little more time thinking up a proper name at least.

Seems that Satoshi disagrees with you: https://github.com/bitcoin-classic

I'm afraid that Classic has nothing to do whatsoever with this "classic", so no he doesn't disagree with me.

[unent]

By the way, there was another message by "Satoshi" recently, denying that he was Craig Wright -- and then adding "We are all Satoshi".  That last part is obviously something that Satoshi would not have written. I can only think that the hacker is aware that everybody is aware that the account has been compromised, and does not care to pretend anymore.

Sound, sensible analysis as always. Good to have you home, professor.

The problem is that the anti-fork message was not spoofed and the writing style matches.
http://pastebin.com/Ct5M8fa2

Here's a quick technical analysis of the email sent to the bitcoin-dev mailing list today at http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html
 
The email was sent from an anonymous email provider called vistomail.com which gives the appearance of being out of service. However you can see the logins at https://webmail.vistomail.com/
 
The vistomail servers are authorised to originate email by their IP address via the SPF DNS records . Satoshi used satoshi@vistomail.com when first announcing Bitcoin http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2009-January/014994.html
 
From this you can safely conclude the email did originate from vistomail.com servers and was not spoofed. It does not prove the account was not hacked of course.
 
Partial headers from the email:
  
Received: from mail.vistomail.com (vistomail.com [190.97.163.93])
        by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2175813F
        for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
        Sat, 15 Aug 2015 19:00:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from DS04 ([190.97.163.93]) by vistomail.com with MailEnable ESMTP;
        Sat, 15 Aug 2015 13:51:14 -0500
 

DNS RECORDS FOLLOW:
  
vistomail.com descriptive text "v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ip4:190.97.163.93 ~all"
vistomail.com has address 190.97.163.93
vistomail.com mail is handled by 10 vistomail.com.

The "we are all satoshi" was spoofed and the writing style or expressions didn't match. So the second doesn't invalidate the first.

Additionally, that particular email address is not known to have been stolen.

Therefore the August message could be legit - it's a very serious risk for BTC. Risk, in the sense that if the proposed fork goes ahead, we'll have Satoshi's second coming after the forkageddon to proclaim Bitcoin is a failure since it failed to protect itself from this kind of attack.

Anyone can get a vistomail email address, I had one myself once. It's an anonymous speech service which has been around for a long time and they are reliable.

Who obtained those headers, and how do do we know they are legit?

Only a few people must have acess to the linuxfoundation.org mail servers. Does the linuxfoundation publish all the headers for the public to view, or do you need access to its mail servers to view them? If I can't view the originals myself I want proof they came from a reliable source.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

By the way, there was another message by "Satoshi" recently, denying that he was Craig Wright -- and then adding "We are all Satoshi".  That last part is obviously something that Satoshi would not have written. I can only think that the hacker is aware that everybody is aware that the account has been compromised, and does not care to pretend anymore.

Sound, sensible analysis as always. Good to have you home, professor.

The problem is that the anti-fork message was not spoofed and the writing style matches.
http://pastebin.com/Ct5M8fa2


The "we are all satoshi" was spoofed and the writing style or expressions didn't match. So the second doesn't invalidate the first.

Additionally, that particular email address is not known to have been stolen.

Therefore the August message could be legit - it's a very serious risk for BTC. Risk, in the sense that if the proposed fork goes ahead, we'll have Satoshi's second coming after the forkageddon to proclaim Bitcoin is a failure since it failed to protect itself from this kind of attack.

The we are all Satoshi message was weak beans. Very weak.

Also, totally spoofed: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w6vy4/i_am_not_craig_wright_we_are_all_satoshi_satoshi/

_Theymos

This is spoofed.

Received: from mail.vistomail.com (cpe-104-231-205-87.wi.res.rr.com
    [104.231.205.87])         
    by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 01BCADF
    for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
    Thu, 10 Dec 2015 06:53:42 +0000 (UTC)

104.231.205.87 is not mail.vistomail.com. It's some residential IP, cpe-104-231-205-87.wi.res.rr.com.

I feel like the mailing list must be seriously misconfigured to allow this sort of spoofing...

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Core supporters took out entire towns with their DDoS attacks. I don't think anything is beneath them at this point TBH.

[r0ach]

Shorts covered and we only went up a few $ . . . not good.

There's no reason to be in the market now until the classic fork is priced in.  The fork will drop it temporarily to at least $320, then set for a new halving rally to probably 800+ after it's all over with.

[xyzzy099]

Who obtained those headers, and how do do we know they are legit?

Only a few people must have acess to the linuxfoundation.org mail servers. Does the linuxfoundation publish all the headers for the public to view, or do you need access to its mail servers to view them? If I can't view the originals myself I want proof they came from a reliable source.

On a mailing list such as the one in question, the headers associated with a list message are replicated to everyone on the list, with each list item they receive from the list.

[peonminer]

Shorts covered and we only went up a few $ . . . not good.

There's no reason to be in the market now until the classic fork is priced in.  The fork will drop it temporarily to at least $320, then set for a new halving rally to probably 800+ after it's all over with.

Guaranteed fork?? when? I saw a comment test 150...

[marcus_of_augustus]

Hearn will be like a ticking time-bomb waiting to go off at R3C ... he's bitcoin's biggest asset right now. Can you imagine that arrogant little snipe not getting his way inside a corporate IT project, just waiting to slip the knife in or totally blow-up the project in a PR nightmare intended to destroy its credibility??

Having a loose cannon like that inside any organisation is dangerous, he was only tolerated in an Open Source project because once he did something just ok ... and then spent the rest of the time sulking and pouting after not getting his way when trying to force crap changes into the codebase.

Pretty sure we can pull the necessary strings to get Mike to do the right thing when the time comes, now he is gainfully occupied finally.

[Patel]

Hearn will be like a ticking time-bomb waiting to go off at R3C ... he's bitcoin's biggest asset right now. Can you imagine that arrogant little snipe not getting his way inside a corporate IT project, just waiting to slip the knife in or totally blow-up the project in a PR nightmare intended to destroy its credibility??

Having a loose cannon like that inside any organisation is dangerous, he was only tolerated in an Open Source project because once he did something just ok ... and then spent the rest of the time sulking and pouting after not getting his way when trying to force crap changes into the codebase.

Pretty sure we can pull the necessary strings to get Mike to do the right thing when the time comes, now he is gainfully occupied finally.

you can bet that employees have to sign NDA's and other anti-nightmare PR form's.

[fisheater22]

Hearn will be like a ticking time-bomb waiting to go off at R3C ... he's bitcoin's biggest asset right now. Can you imagine that arrogant little snipe not getting his way inside a corporate IT project, just waiting to slip the knife in or totally blow-up the project in a PR nightmare intended to destroy its credibility??

Unpleasant Fact #2: He's not unique. The whole Bitcoin core team is exactly like him.
Discouraging.