New Mt Gox Press Release - Feb 10 - they are claiming flaw in bitcoin protocol !

[Kazimir]

A shitload went for 102.

Not entirely. A shitload went for prices ranging from $600 to $102. ALL open buy orders in that range were filled, only the few at the very bottom went for $102.

This is what happens if some retard dumps 10,000+ coins in a no-limit order

"the retard" might be a leverage trading platform that make margin calls..... so many ppl lost money because of this FUD and its out of their control.

Not sure why you put retard in quotes. Someone dumping 10,000+ coins at an average price of, say, $300 (not sure, depends on how buy orders where distributed in that $102-$600 range) which are worth $600 each a minute later, how is that not retarded?

[1715118144]

1715118144

[hgamezoom]

 ???Is this bug fixed already in other software?

So who can tell how long it will take MtGox to upgrade their withdrawl system to a correct version?

[Kazimir]

Gee, I wonder.. Would it be Bitcoin's fault, or MtGox's?

(click for full res)

[stereotype]

A shitload went for 102.

Not entirely. A shitload went for prices ranging from $600 to $102. ALL open buy orders in that range were filled, only the few at the very bottom went for $102.

This is what happens if some retard dumps 10,000+ coins in a no-limit order

"the retard" might be a leverage trading platform that make margin calls..... so many ppl lost money because of this FUD and its out of their control.

Not sure why you put retard in quotes. Someone dumping 10,000+ coins at an average price of, say, $300 (not sure, depends on how buy orders where distributed in that $102-$600 range) which are worth $600 each a minute later, how is that not retarded?

Tis a Fat-Finger fuckup. Who still wants to credit whales as 'smart' money?  

[crazy_rabbit]

A shitload went for 102.

Not entirely. A shitload went for prices ranging from $600 to $102. ALL open buy orders in that range were filled, only the few at the very bottom went for $102.

This is what happens if some retard dumps 10,000+ coins in a no-limit order

"the retard" might be a leverage trading platform that make margin calls..... so many ppl lost money because of this FUD and its out of their control.

Not sure why you put retard in quotes. Someone dumping 10,000+ coins at an average price of, say, $300 (not sure, depends on how buy orders where distributed in that $102-$600 range) which are worth $600 each a minute later, how is that not retarded?

I think he was trying to say that maybe it was a software decision of a leveraged trading platform. Maybe not a real person making the call. Still- a lot of people got scccrreeewwwed.

[atp1916]

...and away we go.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2096060/bitcoin-price-plunges-as-mt-gox-says-flaw-in-protocol-allows-fraud.html

[yatsey87]

...and away we go.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2096060/bitcoin-price-plunges-as-mt-gox-says-flaw-in-protocol-allows-fraud.html

Is it actually a flaw in the Bitcoin protocol, or something wrong with Gox's software?

[guybrushthreepwood]

???Is this bug fixed already in other software?

So who can tell how long it will take MtGox to upgrade their withdrawl system to a correct version?

I believe so yes. Gox should've sorted this long ago. Seems like an excuse to me.

[murbul]

The malleability issue seems real enough.  Something was published on it on 21 january on bitcoin.it, maybe someone had to try it out

21 January 2013‎

[gmaxwell]

...and away we go.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2096060/bitcoin-price-plunges-as-mt-gox-says-flaw-in-protocol-allows-fraud.html

Is it actually a flaw in the Bitcoin protocol, or something wrong with Gox's software?

Allowing fraud?  Thats exclusively a problem with Gox's transaction handling practices and really has little to do with malleability (which is a long known, usually minor, issue in Bitcoin which is slowly being fixed).

The issue is that fraud is made possible by _failing_ to double-spend when you cancel or reissue a transaction. If you do correctly double-spend then the fraud cannot occur regardless of the malleability. If you don't, it can occur, again— with or without malleability.

See also: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=CAAS2fgTx8UzQiocyNMfMNkt2uUZRTmhagb2BY9TPuAupVjVa2g%40mail.gmail.com&forum_name=bitcoin-development

The malleability issue seems real enough.  Something was published on it on 21 january on bitcoin.it, maybe someone had to try it out

21 January 2013‎

And you'll note that page is citing a forum thread from 2011.  Bitcoin v0.8 rolled out the first round of fixes to eventually remove malleability way back then too... and we've seen bouts of amounts of malleability use on the network, back in 2012 if not sooner— I haven't grepped my logs.

[RGBKey]

...and away we go.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2096060/bitcoin-price-plunges-as-mt-gox-says-flaw-in-protocol-allows-fraud.html

Oh dear gox, what have you done.

[mccoyspace]

It seems more like a protocol exploit than a bug or failure.
But it's one that has now been seen in the wild at least twice:
the ghash.io double-spend attacks against SD and now with withdraws from Gox.

Even if it is an exploit that affects certain types of business practices rather than a real protocol-level failure, it still seems serious.
At the time of the ghash double spend I remember gmaxwell saying essentially 'that's what you get if you base your business model on unconfirmed transactions," which I thought was a bit flip, but now it sounds like mutated transactions can make it into the block chain which seems to cement the obfuscation into a kind of "he said, she said" scenario.  

Even if it has been known about for several years, it has now come to life in a big way. Not good.

[bitjoint]

...and away we go.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2096060/bitcoin-price-plunges-as-mt-gox-says-flaw-in-protocol-allows-fraud.html

We've been Goxxed!... Again!

[StuffOfInterest]

Not entirely. A shitload went for prices ranging from $600 to $102. ALL open buy orders in that range were filled, only the few at the very bottom went for $102.

Dang, that really makes me wish I'd had a standing buy order setup for some ridiculously low price.

[leopard2]

This is a blame game - they want to buy some time.
If the procol got bugs, how come it's only MtGox that has detected this bug?

Precisely. There is that well known post on Reddid where this is explained in detail; obviously it is not a problem for others just Gox, due to their homecooked spagetti code.

A good excuse, but still an excuse.

[dorobotsdream]

from gmaxwell
21 January 2013‎
And you'll note that page is citing a forum thread from 2011.  Bitcoin v0.8 rolled out the first round of fixes to eventually remove malleability way back then too... and we've seen bouts of amounts of malleability use on the network, back in 2012 if not sooner— I haven't grepped my logs.

I overlooked the 2013  

But if it did occur, then a spend with the same input,output and quantity should have shown up to the receiver address right? Just not with the original txout. It wouldn't explain a transaction delay where nothing is transacted or would it?

[deftonikus]

is the situation same for all clones based on Bitcoin?
I mean, do all 1.gen cryptos suffer from this???  

[domob]

FFS I missed the crash, how long was it at 110 for?

I was online at that moment, took me 30 sec to refresh, already was just line down, and back to 500+, so a guess would be: 3 secs
Basically someone just blindly believed mtgox statement and did their own doom. I mean, to be roughly even on sale at 1xx USD, you'd have to have bitcoins since when? 2012? LOL.

Well, not exactly.  The price was in the low 100's not too long ago - last September.  In 2012 you got Bitcoins still much, much cheaper than $ 100!  Seems like the memory is really short in the Bitcoin world.

[leopard2]

Gee, I wonder.. Would it be Bitcoin's fault, or MtGox's?

(click for full res)

ROFL

you made my day 

[sakkosekk]

The malleability issue seems real enough.  Something was published on it on 21 january on bitcoin.it, maybe someone had to try it out

21 January 2013‎

2013, wtf..