Fake Bitcoin Transaction

[Mrhemazio]

I just need Advise ..
I saw the following Video about the fake bitcoin transactions ..
I contacted the guy but he didn't reply me..
my question is .. this fake bitcoin transactions it's true or it's available .. thanks to everyone .

[TryNinja]

Which video?

[bob123]

There are no "fake" transactions.
If they are fake, they are not real and therefore are not accepted by the network.

What do you think did you see in this video? What effect did it have?

Which video?

THE video.

[AverageGlabella]

Fake transactions can be made if the network has been compromised but that is why there are nodes constantly verifying the network between themselves and you can be assured that there are currently no transactions in the network which are faked. There was an instance many years ago where the network was compromised and a fake transaction was created which allowed the creation of many millions of Bitcoins but this was quickly corrected by the developers and the nodes started marking that block as invalid so it was not included in the main chain. The main chain just means the chain that has been verified and has reached a consensus decision by node owners that its the real Bitcoin chain. The video you watched is probably using camera tricks and altered Bitcoin wallet files to manipulate you into thinking that you can create fake transaction. Let me guess the video asks you to download some software which gives you this ability? This is probably a virus and will take any Bitcoin that you try to send via their client and send it to their wallets. If this video is on youtube report it so that it can be flagged to the youtube moderators and removed. If fake transactions could be created the whole concept of Bitcoin would be compromised because one of the features of Bitcoin is everything is verifiable through the public ledger called the Blockchain.

If a vulnerability of this severity was discovered and went unnoticed for a long time then the price of Bitcoin would tank a because a fork of the chain before the incident would need to be done and reaching consensus from the majority of nodes can be difficult. This has been demonstrated multiple times in the past through different hard forks which have happened though I think that reaching a consensus through a fake transaction being created would be easier.

[Floofie]

Of course it's not real. The purpose of nodes are to verify each and every transaction on the network. You may be thinking of RBF though. Wait for ~6 confirmations if you're skeptical

My first post 

[BrewMaster]

You may be thinking of RBF though.

even with that, OP's question wouldn't make any sense.
there is a good chance that he was misled into thinking "fake transactions" are a possibility by video designed to either spread FUD about bitcoin or scam people into buying some sort of "fake transaction builder".
there has been similar cases before where newcomers got ripped off.

[The Cryptovator]

Short answer is not true & not available. I am not sure but assuming OP talking about double spent. But it's not fake really. There is few wallet that will allow you to make possible double spent. If a transaction made with lower fees then you may spent this unspent transaction with higher fees to new address before get confirmation on the blockchain. Means your previous transaction will be cancelled but it doesn't mean previous transaction wasn't fake in that case. Perhaps someone could make you fool by double spend if you aren't aware about it. We might give you more accurate answers if you share your video. Always wait for one confirmation at least before make any deal, so it wouldn't fake when confirmed on the blockchain. If you mean transaction on test net then its address type will be different and it will not show on the main chain. So overall there wouldn't be fake bitcoin transaction lately.

[tianxie]

I just need Advise ..
I saw the following Video about the fake bitcoin transactions ..
I contacted the guy but he didn't reply me..
my question is .. this fake bitcoin transactions it's true or it's available .. thanks to everyone .

You are probably referring to the double spend when mempool is full and reversing the transaction when you add a tx with higher fee, right?

It works, but the transaction will be reversed

[mindrust]

Don't believe everything you see on youtube. Most of them are scammers.

If a bitcoin transaction gets a confirmation, there is no turning back from there.

You can re-route/increase fee (and possibly cancel?) the transaction only before you get a confirmation from the miners.

[hosseinimr93]

If a bitcoin transaction gets a confirmation, there is no turning back from there.

It's not 100% true.
A miner (attacker) with a very big hash power may be able to reverse transactions with 1 confirmation.
That's why exchanges usually wait for 6 confirmations.

Assume that you have received a transaction that has 1 confirmation. There's a possibility that another miner has mined an alternative block which has now 1 confirmation. Now we have two chains. The alternative chain may receive next confirmations and becomes the main chain.

[akhjob]

If a bitcoin transaction gets a confirmation, there is no turning back from there.

It's not 100% true.
A miner (attacker) with a very big hash power may be able to reverse transactions with 1 confirmation.
That's why exchanges usually wait for 6 confirmations.

Assume that you have received a transaction that has 1 confirmation. There's a possibility that another miner has mined an alternative block which has now 1 confirmation. Now we have two chains. The alternative chain may receive next confirmations and becomes the main chain.

I understand that with huge hash power we can possibly reverse a transaction in theory. But practically we haven't seen such a case where a bitcoin transaction with 1 confirmation being reversed as of now. Or do we have such a case? Isn't this more tedious and unprofitable?

[ranochigo]

I understand that with huge hash power we can possibly reverse a transaction in theory. But practically we haven't seen such a case where a bitcoin transaction with 1 confirmation being reversed as of now. Or do we have such a case? Isn't this more tedious and unprofitable?

Most merchants accept transactions with X confirmations depending on the amount of Bitcoins being transacted. It's far more unprofitable trying to reverse transactions with one confirmation unless it is way more than 12.5 BTC (2 Blocks required) and the price of devoting hashpower to try to race the remaining of the network by mining on a fork.

It's actually rather expensive trying to reverse a transaction with a (one) confirmation than an unconfirmed transaction with the participation of a mining pool (as demonstrated before).

[mamuu]

maybe examples this wallet  transactions ? same time in and out ?

https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1AcKSgE4k7sXwMxZUxVnhkPdoeAHCBYzmW

[mindrust]

If a bitcoin transaction gets a confirmation, there is no turning back from there.

It's not 100% true.
A miner (attacker) with a very big hash power may be able to reverse transactions with 1 confirmation.
That's why exchanges usually wait for 6 confirmations.

Assume that you have received a transaction that has 1 confirmation. There's a possibility that another miner has mined an alternative block which has now 1 confirmation. Now we have two chains. The alternative chain may receive next confirmations and becomes the main chain.

Have this ever happened before? I don't mean alts, on btc?

I am not aware of such case but theoretically it is possible I guess. I don't think anyone should worry about it though.

[ranochigo]

maybe examples this wallet  transactions ? same time in and out ?

https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1AcKSgE4k7sXwMxZUxVnhkPdoeAHCBYzmW

It's not a fake transaction; It is totally possible to have transactions that are perceived to be made after each other.

It's likely that the transactions are made sequentially with them right after one another, the second transaction being orphaned and only confirmed after the first transaction was broadcasted, them being broadcasted simultaneously, etc. As long as it conforms to the protocol rules, it is not a fake transaction.