[2012-12-31] Is Bitcoin Resilient Enough to Take on Cyber Threats in 2020?

[Jgilpulg]

Just like other industries, the crypto industry must also prepare to respond to the ever-changing crypto-security threats.

https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-cybersecurity-proof-or-not/

[1714606021]

1714606021

[1714606021]

1714606021

[squatter]

Is Bitcoin resilient enough? Yes. Are Bitcoin exchanges and other services resilient enough? No, and they never have been.

Dumb article, not worth reading. The author is trying to apply broad cybersecurity trends to cryptocurrency businesses, but they fail miserably.

[gentlemand]

We wouldn't be here if Bitcoin itself wasn't bulletproof.

But the state of security elsewhere is nowhere near keeping pace with the speed of everything getting interconnected. People have every conceivable detail of their entire lives on phones now - banking, addresses, contacts, crypto, photos of their peckers, balls, ring pieces and minges - yet millions or billions are using devices that manufacturers give up on updating years before they're obsolete.

There's yet to be a sustained conversation about a crypto heavy world in a world where the devices you use it on, let alone the third party services you choose to use, are too slack or stupid to stay ahead of the scum who want to steal it.

[CryptoBry]

Is Bitcoin resilient enough? Yes. Are Bitcoin exchanges and other services resilient enough? No, and they never have been. Dumb article, not worth reading. The author is trying to apply broad cybersecurity trends to cryptocurrency businesses, but they fail miserably.

The only thing I like with that article is its prediction that cryptocurrency is to gain more momentum in 2020 and therefore there will be more security threats though it should really be noted that this has nothing to do with the Bitcoin's infrastructure and ecosystem which we know remains to be very safe and hack-free. In all cases of security issues, the victims are the many exchanges and other similar entities like wallets exploiting the cryptocurrency business. And in my view, this can be the same thing for as long as there will be cryptocurrency industry and for as long as hackers are existing (and they are growing by leaps and bounds due to the possible take home pay).

[1Referee]

In all cases of security issues, the victims are the many exchanges and other similar entities like wallets exploiting the cryptocurrency business.

The victims are the imbeciles using centralized services to store coins.

Exchange hacks (even if they are real) can still be exploited by exchanges to claim that not 5000BTC has been hacked, but 7000BTC, where the other 2000BTC ends up in the pockets of the operators. It's less likely to happen on an exchange such as Coinbase, but come on, so many other exchanges are operated by people you don't know anything about.

Bitcoin is THE definition of a powerhouse in terms of security. Only people can fuck themselves up badly.

[squatter]

The victims are the imbeciles using centralized services to store coins.
[...]
Bitcoin is THE definition of a powerhouse in terms of security. Only people can fuck themselves up badly.

I don't disagree, but it's a frustrating issue since people are generally horrible at computer security. They use weak passwords (if any at all), they don't practice security through isolation, and with Bitcoin they often don't use cold storage. The sad truth is that for some people, an exchange account secured with 2FA is probably safer than holding bitcoins themselves.

Not to mention the established culture -- at both the retail and institutional levels -- of qualified custodians keeping physical possession on behalf of investors. When I look at the holdings of Coinbase and consider how large Bakkt or Fidelity's holdings might get, it scares the crap out of me. I'm not sure this problem is going to get better.

[CryptoBry]

The sad truth is that for some people, an exchange account secured with 2FA is probably safer than holding bitcoins themselves.

I agree with this. This can be the reason why as of now centralized platforms remain to be the most popular as opposed to decentralized ones. The many exchanges and wallets are flourishing because more and more people in cryptocurrency are trusting them due to its more convenient factor. And we could not really blame people for doing so because admittedly there is a learning curve here and not all people have the time and the tenacity to learn even the basics more more advanced things on holding and securing their own digital assets. Hopefully, there would be a good service that can successfully tackle these problems but at the same time can offer really secure and safe options.

[Kyraishi]

Bitcoin has never had any major vulnerabilities that led to significant monetary loss AFAIK.

In almost all cases, the people at fault are bitcoin businesses who act as counterparties to users who deposit their coins on a third party site. These businesses clearly either a) intentionally holding customer funds for their own gain or b) not investing enough into security.

So yes, clear distinction to be made between the two. Hacks are going to continue to happen, but the BTC network is secure as always with the decentralized hashpower.

[Harlot]

When we are talking about direct attacks to Bitcoin's network like a 51% attack I'm still confident enough to say that the possibility of this happening is less likely but if we are talking about much external factors affect Bitcoin such as governments having unfavorable laws and whales pulling down the price you know these threats are more likely to affect Bitcoin and its price since it directly affects the deman for Bitcoin and are more likely to happen compared to a 51% attack.