Someone is sending out 0.001 BTC's to hundreds of random people. Who and why?

[1PFYcabWEwZFm2Ez5LGTx3ftz]

^{I've split this into a separate topic from here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=254489.0}

Event:

I recently received 0.001 BTC to an address, which I didn't even know I had - after some digging, I realized it was a "change" address, which was technically "public" on the blockchain since 2013 May, but which I never ever purposefully gave to anyone.

The only possibility, how someone could have known this address, is to "find" it on the blockchain.

The transaction, in which I was sent 0.001 BTC https://blockchain.info/tx/f6f2e613f6653a3b47f92fd70ff4d1ccc847811294f734a5e9f310c5b9eb063a , also included hundreds of 0.001 BTC sent to other addresses (and a few larger sums too).

I have several hypothesis on why this was done:

1.
Someone is trying to create confusion and scare people, by trying to make them to believe, that an address collision has happened. This hypothesis is reinforced by the facts that:
a) the first 3 answers were "maybe it's a bug", "maybe it's an address collision", "it's definitely an address collision - this has happened before";
b) when I even suggested the idea that this could have been done on purpose, I was immediately called "naive" and "paranoid" and that I "probably won it on satoshidice and forgot about it".

2.
Someone is trying to "launder" his/her bitcoins, and even goes to the extreme of sending some BTC to random people, to better hide the money trail.

3.
Some sort of denial-of-service-attack/network-spamming?
a) I don't think so, because to spam the network you could send BTC back and forth between the addresses that you own, there is no need to send BTC to other people.

To make some things absolutely clear:
1. Address collision did NOT happen.
2. I did NOT use this address anywhere - the ONLY way it could have been found, is on the blockchain.

[1715423815]

1715423815

[1715423815]

1715423815

[1715423815]

1715423815

[klmist]

I think it's a probe to test and see which new addresses are associated with that old one; when you spend that 0.001 BTC along with some of your other inputs they will become linked and they'll know that the same person that owned that old change address owns some other inputs that might not be otherwise associated with it. You could delete that change key from your wallet, or first import it somewhere else -- maybe redeem it on mtgox or something and thus foil their scheme :p

[BitCoiner2012]

I think it's a probe to test and see which new addresses are associated with that old one; when you spend that 0.001 BTC along with some of your other inputs they will become linked and they'll know that the same person that owned that old change address owns some other inputs that might not be otherwise associated with it. You could delete that change key from your wallet, or first import it somewhere else -- maybe redeem it on mtgox or something and thus foil their scheme :p

Clever... All of it.

[BitAddict]

I think it's a probe to test and see which new addresses are associated with that old one; when you spend that 0.001 BTC along with some of your other inputs they will become linked and they'll know that the same person that owned that old change address owns some other inputs that might not be otherwise associated with it. You could delete that change key from your wallet, or first import it somewhere else -- maybe redeem it on mtgox or something and thus foil their scheme :p

Clever... All of it.

Wow, great deduction. I never thought about that.

[scotaloo]

Dude, seriously? You are one paranoid guy, earlier you thought somebody who needed their wallet password bruteforced was trying to start a media scare, and now this?

This happens all the time, anyone can send anyone BTC for any reason, scripts go haywire, people copy & paste the wrong address, people send money "for lulz" and as someone else pointed out, to probe addresses to see if their alive, or to see if they spend that BTC in a joint transaction so that they can see other addresses that the person owns.

People come here all the time with wallets that need bruteforcing or to ask about money they randomly received, they're two very common threads, use the search or just browse the forum and you'll see.

Damn dude whats wrong with you? Take your meds.

[1PFYcabWEwZFm2Ez5LGTx3ftz]

Dude, seriously? You are one paranoid guy, earlier you thought somebody who needed their wallet password bruteforced was trying to start a media scare, and now this?

This happens all the time, anyone can send anyone BTC for any reason, scripts go haywire, people copy & paste the wrong address, people send money "for lulz" and as someone else pointed out, to probe addresses to see if their alive, or to see if they spend that BTC in a joint transaction so that they can see other addresses that the person owns.

People come here all the time with wallets that need bruteforcing or to ask about money they randomly received, they're two very common threads, use the search or just browse the forum and you'll see.

Damn dude whats wrong with you? Take your meds.

Better to be paranoid, than an idiot. So your hypothesis is, that someone sent 0.001 BTC * 1000 = 1 BTC = ~80 USD to random strangers just "for lulz". Seriously? SERIOUSLY?

The hypothesis that it was done to probe and track addresses actually makes a lot of sense, but it is also scary, because if that is true, then it means that someone is willing to spend ~80 USD just to be able to potentially track ~1000 of bitcoin addresses.

Am I paranoid, for pointing out, that even the ddos of mtgox was called "Bitcoin was hacked" in mass-media?
Am I paranoid, for pointing out, how much FUD and anti-bitcoin propaganda is in mass-media?
Am I paranoid, for believing, that since mass-media loves spreading anti-bitcoin propaganda, and has called ddos of one bitcoin exchange as "Bitcoin hacking", that they will also call bruteforcing of a bitcoin wallet as "Bitcoin hacking"?

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Yes, I remember giving away a total of 10 BTC randomly on coinchat when we had a launch party.

[scotaloo]

Better to be paranoid, than an idiot. So your hypothesis is, that someone sent 0.001 BTC * 1000 = 1 BTC = ~80 USD to random strangers just "for lulz". Seriously? SERIOUSLY?

Lol, yeah I might do that now for the lulz actually, probably encode a few msgs too, it's phun to make the script to do it, something to do. I planned to send every bitcoin address with a balance a satoshi at xmas, I would've if it wasn't for the tx fee's. $80 don't matter to the average person.

[1PFYcabWEwZFm2Ez5LGTx3ftz]

Yes, I remember giving away a total of 10 BTC randomly on coinchat when we had a launch party.

Was that sarcasm? Giving away 10 BTC to promote your business to people on the same website as you, is in no way equal to silently scanning the blockchain and sending totally random people 10 BTC.

Consider this real world example:

If you had a launch party for your business, and then gave away presents to people who attended your launch party, everything would be fine.

But if you went to the street, and began to give away dollars to random strangers passing by, you would be arrested in 30 minutes, and charged with "conspiracy to cause social disorder" at best, or "terrorism" at worst.

[scotaloo]

But if you went to the street, and began to give away dollars to random strangers passing by, you would be arrested in 30 minutes, and charged with "conspiracy to cause social disorder" at best, or "terrorism" at worst.

You never saw the Youtube video of that guy who gave away $10,000 to random people on the street for no reason? No charges their my friend.

Please take your meds, seriously I'm worried at this point.

[1PFYcabWEwZFm2Ez5LGTx3ftz]

But if you went to the street, and began to give away dollars to random strangers passing by, you would be arrested in 30 minutes, and charged with "conspiracy to cause social disorder" at best, or "terrorism" at worst.

You never saw the Youtube video of that guy who gave away $10,000 to random people on the street for no reason? No charges their my friend.

Please take your meds, seriously I'm worried at this point.

Took me 15 seconds of googling to find some examples:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/08/drunk-man-arrested-for-gi_n_227955.html Drunk Man Arrested For Giving Away Money In Spain
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGtxzNSHfu4 Man Gets Arrested For Giving Away Money
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3Aipf3wz0o Man Arrested For Feeding The Homeless!?

And will you please stop insulting me? If you have a different opinion, but don't have any arguments to support it, it will NOT make your opinion more valid simply because you keep calling me a drug addict/paranoid. I am neither.

[scotaloo]

And will you please stop insulting me? If you have a different opinion, but don't have any arguments to support it, it will NOT make your opinion more valid simply because you keep calling me a drug addict/paranoid. I am neither.

Whoa, who said anything about drug addict?

Look, I'm saying your a bit over-paranoid, somebody today thought I was paranoid for wanting my tx id's removed, I'm not here to argue with you, I don't really care what you do/say tbh but it's a little scary though, you don't need to be that paranoid.

Anyways, I'm out, I've got an Eric to find.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

No charges were filed and random youtube videos are not valid citations.

Let's go back on topic: it's most likely an address probe

[1PFYcabWEwZFm2Ez5LGTx3ftz]

_{Whoa, who said anything about drug addict?}

^{You told me to "take my medicine", like I am supposedly addicted to some medicine (drugs), which I must take.}

No charges were filed and random youtube videos are not valid citations.

Let's go back on topic: it's most likely an address probe

I agree. Then the question is: who would be willing to spend 80 USD to probe 1000 addresses? And there may have been more transactions like this, so a lot more than 80 USD could have been actually spent.

[scotaloo]

I agree. Then the question is: who would be willing to spend 80 USD to probe 1000 addresses? And there may have been more transactions like this, so a lot more than 80 USD could have been actually spent.

Me. I just did it, not a 1000 addresses but not far off and not to probe, for the lulz, I made sure to include your address too

[1PFYcabWEwZFm2Ez5LGTx3ftz]

I agree. Then the question is: who would be willing to spend 80 USD to probe 1000 addresses? And there may have been more transactions like this, so a lot more than 80 USD could have been actually spent.

Me. I just did it, not a 1000 addresses but not far off and not to probe, for the lulz, I made sure to include your address too

Liar.

Here is the transaction: https://blockchain.info/tx/e631eba8669d07f4be996886cf03902e2e16e55805ad702ca1348b514d4f456f , you only sent to 3 addresses (the one with highest BTC amount probably belonging to you).

I really don't understand what your motivation is trying to trick people.

No one spends 80 USD to probe addresses if they don't have an agenda behind it.

[1PFYcabWEwZFm2Ez5LGTx3ftz]

To get back on topic again: who would be willing to spend 80 USD to probe 1000 addresses?

If someone has skills in tracking transactions, it would be interesting to know, who is behind this. It may be nothing sinister. Or it may be a government preparing for a mass "money laundering" lawsuit.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

I sent you $80 USD to your address. Now be less crazy.

If it was $800 or $8000 then you may have a point. $80 for 1000 addresses is 8 cents per address.

[scotaloo]

Liar.

*facepalm*

LOL! That wasn't the only tx dude, read my previous posts and you'll understand why I sent your BTC in a single tx.

Also you could send 0.00001BTC to 1000 addresses and it'll cost you even less again.

[QuestionAuthority]

I sent you $80 USD to your address. Now be less crazy.

If it was $800 or $8000 then you may have a point. $80 for 1000 addresses is 8 cents per address.

If I agree that I'm batshit insane will you send me $80 too. lol

[AliceWonder]

Could it be an encoded message, where they mined the blockchain for addresses that had letters in the right place to make their message?

[yona]

That would be s
Super elaborate and expensive

[Inedible]

Better to be paranoid, than an idiot. So your hypothesis is, that someone sent 0.001 BTC * 1000 = 1 BTC = ~80 USD to random strangers just "for lulz". Seriously? SERIOUSLY?

I know. It's a ridiculous suggestion.

Next they'll be telling us someone spent 10,000 Bitcoin on a pizza lol

[AliceWonder]

It only cost $80 (or whatever) if they were the sender's coins to begin with.

If from stolen private keys, it didn't cost them anything.

Think about it - what better way is there to get back at your ex than to send their bitcoins to a bunch of random people.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

I think it's a probe to test and see which new addresses are associated with that old one; when you spend that 0.001 BTC along with some of your other inputs they will become linked and they'll know that the same person that owned that old change address owns some other inputs that might not be otherwise associated with it. You could delete that change key from your wallet, or first import it somewhere else -- maybe redeem it on mtgox or something and thus foil their scheme :p

I had just the same thought.

But once coin control is incorporated in the mainline client, this no longer will be a problem. Then you will be able to select which exactly coins you send to what address.

[jhansen858]

Dude, seriously? You are one paranoid guy, earlier you thought somebody who needed their wallet password bruteforced was trying to start a media scare, and now this?

This happens all the time, anyone can send anyone BTC for any reason, scripts go haywire, people copy & paste the wrong address, people send money "for lulz" and as someone else pointed out, to probe addresses to see if their alive, or to see if they spend that BTC in a joint transaction so that they can see other addresses that the person owns.

People come here all the time with wallets that need bruteforcing or to ask about money they randomly received, they're two very common threads, use the search or just browse the forum and you'll see.

Damn dude whats wrong with you? Take your meds.

Nice try NSA... Shake your fist and say the words out loud,  "And I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for you meddling kids"

[jhansen858]

Dude, seriously? You are one paranoid guy, earlier you thought somebody who needed their wallet password bruteforced was trying to start a media scare, and now this?

This happens all the time, anyone can send anyone BTC for any reason, scripts go haywire, people copy & paste the wrong address, people send money "for lulz" and as someone else pointed out, to probe addresses to see if their alive, or to see if they spend that BTC in a joint transaction so that they can see other addresses that the person owns.

People come here all the time with wallets that need bruteforcing or to ask about money they randomly received, they're two very common threads, use the search or just browse the forum and you'll see.

Damn dude whats wrong with you? Take your meds.

Better to be paranoid, than an idiot. So your hypothesis is, that someone sent 0.001 BTC * 1000 = 1 BTC = ~80 USD to random strangers just "for lulz". Seriously? SERIOUSLY?

The hypothesis that it was done to probe and track addresses actually makes a lot of sense, but it is also scary, because if that is true, then it means that someone is willing to spend ~80 USD just to be able to potentially track ~1000 of bitcoin addresses.

Am I paranoid, for pointing out, that even the ddos of mtgox was called "Bitcoin was hacked" in mass-media?
Am I paranoid, for pointing out, how much FUD and anti-bitcoin propaganda is in mass-media?
Am I paranoid, for believing, that since mass-media loves spreading anti-bitcoin propaganda, and has called ddos of one bitcoin exchange as "Bitcoin hacking", that they will also call bruteforcing of a bitcoin wallet as "Bitcoin hacking"?

I could easily see this as an experiment by someone to see how much you really can track in the block chain just by "tagging" addresses. 

[hashman]

I'm not sure I follow the "address probe" reasoning. 
Don't change addresses on the block chain already have some money on them?  They are already "tagged".. 
But if there isn't much there, and somebody is grasping at straws looking for any information at all.. 

In any case, the next step for you sleuths out there is to see what those 1000 addresses have in common, i.e. to see why the lulz giveaway targeted them.  Any common addresses in their input branches? 

[Trongersoll]

I'd be interested to know if the transactions start going in the other direction. What can you gain from knowing an address is valid? Could something like the vanity software find the other part?

[keystroke]

Here's another transaction like this. I know because I received 0.001 BTC.

https://blockchain.info/tx/4c6e38a39ac940460495bfa4f9a4ec406029b83cde820d3e01fc192433712fa9

[QuestionAuthority]

Money mapping... It is a sort of traffic analysis technique. It could be just some random researcher.

That's the most reasonable thing said so far.

[Viceroy]

It's the US Federal Government finding the criminals who adopted the ponzi scheme known as bitcoin to attempt to wash their ill gotten gains.  Duh.  The NSA's budget is the largest black ops budget in the world.  100 x  0.001 transactions costs only a penny.  Imagine how much they could learn if they applied $100k to the "problem".


We know from Casey Jones arrest that the DEA holds bitcoin (at least they hold his).  To the address owners... ever buy anything on silk road?  

Nice try NSA... Shake your fist and say the words out loud,  "And I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for you meddling kids"

Given the recent revelation from Snowden it's clear that the NSA has been around decades longer than bitcoin.  They are adding bitcoin information to the omnipotent data they already own, if they didn't invent bitcoin to begin with.  It's a perfect way to identify every criminal they want to find, isn't it?  Every bitcoin transaction is recorded in a public record.  Not a good choice for criminal activity.  Coke encrusted cash is a much easier thing to deal with but I bet the NSA has been scanning dollar bills serial numbers from the time before they started embedding money with RFID.

all your base are belong to us. (CATS: You have no chance to survive make your time.)

[Trongersoll]

It's the US Federal Government finding the criminals who adopted the ponzi scheme known as bitcoin to attempt to wash their ill gotten gains.  Duh.  The NSA's budget is the largest black ops budget in the world.  100 x  0.001 transactions costs only a penny.  Imagine how much they could learn if they applied $100k to the "problem".


We know from Casey Jones arrest that the DEA holds bitcoin (at least they hold his).  To the address owners... ever buy anything on silk road?  

Nice try NSA... Shake your fist and say the words out loud,  "And I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for you meddling kids"

Given the recent revelation from Snowden it's clear that the NSA has been around decades longer than bitcoin.  They are adding bitcoin information to the omnipotent data they already own, if they didn't invent bitcoin to begin with.  It's a perfect way to identify every criminal they want to find, isn't it?  Every bitcoin transaction is recorded in a public record.  Not a good choice for criminal activity.  Coke encrusted cash is a much easier thing to deal with but I bet the NSA has been scanning dollar bills serial numbers from the time before they started embedding money with RFID.

all your base are belong to us. (CATS: You have no chance to survive make your time.)

Really? you think Bitcoin is on NSA's radar? Do you think that they have nothing better to do? They do have a charter that they are supposed to operate within, they don't get to do what ever they dream up. Sure, if what they are looking at is involved with BTC they'll get what they need, but overall i doubt that they care. besides, they probably understand BTC better than we do. There is a book called "The Puzzle Palace" that can give some insight into their mindset. Of course things have changed a bit since 9/11.

[Clark]

Money mapping... It is a sort of traffic analysis technique. It could be just some random researcher.

That's the most reasonable thing said so far.

I was also going to suggest this.

Some researchers at some economics department have probably sent out multiple transactions like this and are mapping where the money is going.

Perhaps they choose the 'random' addresses in the list to be change addresses on purpose (easy enough to find).

[Trongersoll]

Money mapping... It is a sort of traffic analysis technique. It could be just some random researcher.

That's the most reasonable thing said so far.

I was also going to suggest this.

Some researchers at some economics department have probably sent out multiple transactions like this and are mapping where the money is going.

Perhaps they choose the 'random' addresses in the list to be change addresses on purpose (easy enough to find).

Or it is a psych experiment to see if a thread like this one pops up and the reactions.

[CasinoBit]

The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction has to make sense. - Tom Clancy

/thread

[whiskers75]

Yes, I remember giving away a total of 10 BTC randomly on coinchat when we had a launch party.

Really? I remember getting a few mBTC here and there, but a party?

[btceic]

It's scotaloo, he is sending out hundreds or thousands of .0001's with messages embedded in them to try and extort people or to just f**k with them.

[scotaloo]

It's scotaloo, he is sending out hundreds or thousands of .0001's with messages embedded in them to try and extort people or to just f**k with them.

lol, where is the embeded messages then? would you like me to embed some more for you?

[firefop]

It only cost $80 (or whatever) if they were the sender's coins to begin with.

If from stolen private keys, it didn't cost them anything.

Think about it - what better way is there to get back at your ex than to send their bitcoins to a bunch of random people.

It's an interesting point -

If I were going to write a wallet stealing software, I'd think it would be hilarious to just distribute the balance to random people.

~

What if there's a clandestine service designed to 'clean' coins. What does the turn around time on a laundry service need to be? What would be the fee incurred (what if it isn't a service but code developed for personal use).

Lets assume it's a service.
Lets assume they take btc and distribute it in tiny pieces to 10000 different change addresses. Lets assume some percentage of those addresses (10%?) are randomly selected off the block chain and not controlled by the client or the service.

Now you've broken up the clients bitcoin into 10000 pieces, and introduced a 1000 false leads for LE to follow.
Now you do it again with different source address using say... 9000 new client controlled addresses and 1000 false leads.
You run this all at the same time (cycling through groups of false leads for 10 different clients) for 10 cycles.
Now you've muddied it even further. aka everything links to everyone. . . if you got enough big enough clients you could literally spam every address with some amount of coin (over time).

If you did the payments over a long enough period of time... the client addresses would eventually accumulate enough of a balance to be 'spent' probably used to buy some good or service that could then be resold (or cashed out) in some way.

Then you can get really diabolical and trade private keys off the blockchain and obfuscate the trail even more.

In summary, you've got some clients 'cleaning' bitcoin (but it takes a long time) - you've got a bunch of random people being investigated if the client is ever investigated - you've got the service making a tiny fee by owning some addresses that are somehow included in the above process - and anyone who investigates it, ends up wasting time investigating thousands of nerds who just buy bitcoin and use it for stuff like gyft cards, alpaca socks and silver.

[blockgenesis]

These 0.001 BTC transactions indeed randomly restore traceability of transactions once they are spent, regardless of the real motivation of the sender. Not very nice.

And given the number of transactions that have already spent these 0.001, it is apparently working well.

[gmaxwell]

If people who have some of these want to get together and jointly spend them, ala  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=139581.0  that might sound fun.

[1PFYcabWEwZFm2Ez5LGTx3ftz]

Dude, seriously? You are one paranoid guy, earlier you thought somebody who needed their wallet password bruteforced was trying to start a media scare, and now this?

People come here all the time with wallets that need bruteforcing or to ask about money they randomly received, they're two very common threads, use the search or just browse the forum and you'll see.

Damn dude whats wrong with you? Take your meds.

Actually, I was RIGHT.

Look at this message from "binaryFate" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=254422.20:
"For everyone to know: acs26 just replied to my PM, giving me a link to download is wallet.dat. Which happends to be only a windows executable starting with "wallet.dat". You propose to help and then...  Sad
As a side note to you acs26, you're really dumb trying to trick someone like that. Because when claiming you have such technical problems, you have significant chances to reach somebody not using windows (I'm on linux and don't care about your .exe), and anyway very significant chance that the person is not a moron as you might expect."

So, I was right when I warned everyone that it was a fake post, and that the poster had some sinister agenda.

[blockgenesis]

If people who have some of these want to get together and jointly spend them, ala  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=139581.0  that might sound fun.

Now that's fun!

[1PFYcabWEwZFm2Ez5LGTx3ftz]

I sent you $80 USD to your address. Now be less crazy.

If it was $800 or $8000 then you may have a point. $80 for 1000 addresses is 8 cents per address.

1. I was right (read two posts above) about a guy asking for his wallet to be "brute-forced" having a sinister agenda (while many called me crazy and paranoid... well, who is the "crazy" one now?).

2. Why in the world would you pay me 80 USD just to get me to stop talking? It is reasonable to believe, that you have an agenda too.

3. You said that "If it was $800 or $8000 then you may have a point."... well, user "keystroke" confirmed that he/she received 0.001BTC in a similar transaction, but it was a different transaction than the one in which I received it, that means there are MANY such transactions, and that means that it IS $800 or $8000 or even more spent, and that means that even YOU agree that I DO have a point.

[Amph]

he is welcome

[Viceroy]

I sent you $80 USD to your address. Now be less crazy.

If it was $800 or $8000 then you may have a point. $80 for 1000 addresses is 8 cents per address.

1. I was right (read two posts above) about a guy asking for his wallet to be "brute-forced" having a sinister agenda (while many called me crazy and paranoid... well, who is the "crazy" one now?).

2. Why in the world would you pay me 80 USD just to get me to stop talking? It is reasonable to believe, that you have an agenda too.

3. You said that "If it was $800 or $8000 then you may have a point."... well, user "keystroke" confirmed that he/she received 0.001BTC in a similar transaction, but it was a different transaction than the one in which I received it, that means there are MANY such transactions, and that means that it IS $800 or $8000 or even more spent, and that means that even YOU agree that I DO have a point.

Dude, TradeFortress is a suspected criminal actor:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=256008.0

[blockgenesis]

Actually, re-thinking the de-anonymization attack theory, 0.001 BTC would actually need to be sent to addresses that have already spent bitcoins in order to restore traceability of transactions. If no transaction happened from that address, then there is nothing to de-anonymize. So far, all Bitcoin addresses receiving 0.001 BTC that I have looked seems to have never sent any bitcoins. So, unless I'm missing something, it's probably not meant to be used for network analysis. But this could have been the case.

[AliceWonder]

Dude, seriously? You are one paranoid guy, earlier you thought somebody who needed their wallet password bruteforced was trying to start a media scare, and now this?

People come here all the time with wallets that need bruteforcing or to ask about money they randomly received, they're two very common threads, use the search or just browse the forum and you'll see.

Damn dude whats wrong with you? Take your meds.

Actually, I was RIGHT.

Look at this message from "binaryFate" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=254422.20:
"For everyone to know: acs26 just replied to my PM, giving me a link to download is wallet.dat. Which happends to be only a windows executable starting with "wallet.dat".

So, I was right when I warned everyone that it was a fake post, and that the poster had some sinister agenda.

I can confirm, I got that same PM but I just ignored it.

[AliceWonder]

Dude, TradeFortress is a suspected criminal actor:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=256008.0

I'm not fond of his lending service, I think that it is dangerous, but that's just a difference of opinion.
He's a little harsh sometimes but I suspect he's a straight-up guy.

Some people don't like him because he was kind enough to use his own funds to spread the truth about ripple - in a way that some consider astro-turfing. But he's right about ripple and I'm glad that message was spread.

And for the record, I've not received anything from him, this post is not bought.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

FYI, you can say Viceroy aka buyer is bought.

[Viceroy]

You mean you think someone pays me to call out criminal actors?   Tell me TF, why would any legitimate person who is not a criminal need to "wash" their bitcoins?   But don't do it here, come to my thread and defend yourself like a real man.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=256008.0

[kokojie]

Dude, seriously? You are one paranoid guy, earlier you thought somebody who needed their wallet password bruteforced was trying to start a media scare, and now this?

This happens all the time, anyone can send anyone BTC for any reason, scripts go haywire, people copy & paste the wrong address, people send money "for lulz" and as someone else pointed out, to probe addresses to see if their alive, or to see if they spend that BTC in a joint transaction so that they can see other addresses that the person owns.

People come here all the time with wallets that need bruteforcing or to ask about money they randomly received, they're two very common threads, use the search or just browse the forum and you'll see.

Damn dude whats wrong with you? Take your meds.

Better to be paranoid, than an idiot. So your hypothesis is, that someone sent 0.001 BTC * 1000 = 1 BTC = ~80 USD to random strangers just "for lulz". Seriously? SERIOUSLY?

The hypothesis that it was done to probe and track addresses actually makes a lot of sense, but it is also scary, because if that is true, then it means that someone is willing to spend ~80 USD just to be able to potentially track ~1000 of bitcoin addresses.

Am I paranoid, for pointing out, that even the ddos of mtgox was called "Bitcoin was hacked" in mass-media?
Am I paranoid, for pointing out, how much FUD and anti-bitcoin propaganda is in mass-media?
Am I paranoid, for believing, that since mass-media loves spreading anti-bitcoin propaganda, and has called ddos of one bitcoin exchange as "Bitcoin hacking", that they will also call bruteforcing of a bitcoin wallet as "Bitcoin hacking"?

Someone tipped over $4000 on reddit, in one tip. So yes, really.