I'm bored of those recurring news about services closing down

[malkusch]

The story about getting hacked and having to close down is so old, boring and it still happens and obviously will happen in the future. I don't get why those service just can't have a look what banks are doing when they get robbed. There's so much money involved, I can't believe that there's no insurance who doesn't want to get its part of the pie.

Gox is out, OK. But there are still some other services in the game. Maybe some magic fairy might fly to those services and whisper not to waste all resources on security but start negotiations with insurances.

_{Disclaimer: I don't know in which of those forums this topic is OT. Feel free to move it.}

[Bitalo_Maciej]

Gox is out, OK. But there are still some other services in the game. Maybe some magic fairy might fly to those services and whisper not to waste all resources on security but start negotiations with insurances.

Not sure if you're being serious or trolling

Any self-respecting insurance company wouldn't give you any product without you having sufficient security in the first place. There's a reason why insurance companies ask you whether you have a spiral staircase in your home, a trampoline, and other "dangerous stuff". They will not risk paying for your lack of caution. The same applies to insurance for bigger institutions.

We have to think about security in the first place. Only then we can start thinking about adding things like insurance on top of that.

[malkusch]

Any self-respecting insurance company wouldn't give you any product without you having sufficient security in the first place.

Sure, maybe I was a bit too unclear. Of course the services should have implemented security (like banks don't have to be Fort Nox, but still do have some security implementations). But I'm still wondering why there seems to be no communication with the insurance industry. There's IMO enough money involved to build a contract. I'm just imagining how users will react on a service which might not be the cheapest, but covered against hacker theft by an insurance (which implies massive security implementations).

[Cryddit]

I think that it needs a technology fix.  Especially for entities like exchanges that are supposed to have 100% reserve. 

If you're entrusting someone with your money, as opposed to paying them, then you have a right to expect that they will have that money until you ask for it back.  Well, we have a blockchain.  We ought to be able to prove how much someone has at any moment, provided they publish evidence that they control the coins.  People who entrusted money to them ought to be able to prove that the total amount entrusted to them (and not yet withdrawn or spent) matches the amount they still have. 

It's completely do-able, while maintaining financial privacy for the investors. 

Holy crap, not just for Bitcoin, either.  Think about *ALL* the insolvent banks and the funny business that was going on for years before the crash.  Imagine that those had been detected one day after they started rather than getting worse for years before discovered.