Bitcoin was hacked, not true!!! You need read this.

[_BlackStar]

“Bitcoin is easy to hack” is an irresponsible argument that often haunts begginers to the crypto world. You all don't need to believe in such opinions so your interest in bitcoin and your trust in bitcoin is lost. Read the quote below and understand it.

Nobody has really succeeded in hacking bitcoin because the security that exists on the bitcoin network is very strong. It's just that bitcoin users should be aware that hackers are always targeting you and your assets. So do your wallet security steps well and keep your privacy.

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the block chain that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the original Bitcoin client, or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major websites using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate wallet security. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as wallet encryption, support for multiple signatures, offline wallets, paper wallets, and hardware wallets. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop. Source

[1714786066]

1714786066

[Oshosondy]

The miners are providing mining hashes that will be difficult to attack the blockchain, the nodes are working in a way invalid transactions can not be accepted, if accepted it will later be rejected, only valid transactions can be valid and remain valid. New people that are using bitcoin should know about this. Wallets can be hacked by hackers, but the blame should be on ignorance of the wallet owner. But this has nothing to do with bitcoin network but the wallet.

[mk4]

It really doesn't help that even mainstream media frequently has this misconception, further fueling the fire of mass misconceptions. Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies is the field that I know well enough to immediately realize how dumb a lot of writers or "journalists" are.

[Darker45]

This is the reason why, just yesterday, I responded to a thread with the subject, Some of the major hacks in the history of Bitcoin/Cryptocurrencies (CHECK OUT), that it is actually misleading. The user, CryptoHeadlineNews, which seems to be a username of a media platform, went on to list down what he/she called as some of the major Bitcoin hacks in history. Under the list are the hacks of platforms Mt Gox, Africrypt, and Zaif. Apparently, what CryptoHeadlineNews referred to when he/she talked about Bitcoin hacks are exchange hacks. Mt Gox is not Bitcoin. Neither are Africrypt and Zaif. It is unfortunate that after more than a decade of Bitcoin existence, Bitcoin is still confused with Bitcoin exchange or Bitcoin wallet.

[pooya87]

Keep in mind that Bitcoin itself can not be hacked, it is a strong protocol and if it is used correctly (eg. waiting for appropriate number of confirmation) the chances of losing money is zero. However your wallet can be hacked.
For example there are lots of cases where the user is too lazy to verify signatures or bother figuring out where the real software is and they end up downloading some malicious software pretending to be something else (eg. fake Electrum) and they end up losing their bitcoins.
Usually the news sites refer to this last part as "a bitcoin hack" which may sound misleading.

[ShowOff]

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate wallet security.

And this quote can explain in its entirety that bitcoin users are obliged to secure their wallets and privacy so that hackers do not have access to the wallet. I read everything you quoted from that source and I justify the explanation because so far bitcoin is your money and your money is your responsibility to keep it safe. It is impossible to hack the bitcoin protocol, so it is the mistakes and carelessness of bitcoin users that are the target of hackers, including any loopholes that might appear in the exchange. In conclusion, the mainstream media always say otherwise because it looks like haters or just to enrich themselves through increasing website traffic.

I know that topics idea like this have been discussed many times here, but it seems worth it to appreciate your thoughts to alert the community and users who are new to this forum.

[CryptocurencyKing]

It's a popular misconceptions with exchange hacks especially, the custodial exchanges and actual Bitcoin hacks. Mind you, a bitcoin jack is impossible or as we have it still but exchange hacks are what occurs every other day. Even at that, its always very difficult for a hacker to actually utilise or spend coins acquired from a heists. This is because, transactions on the blockchain are transparent and can be verifiable by those who know how so, the transactions could be followed up and even locked away.

Bitcoin is safe, super safe but, the safety of your wallet is where the problem always comes. Hence, its as safe as you want it to be. Handle your seed phrase, private key and private details carelessly, you might end up loosing your funds but, having it safe, makes for a zero hack possibility.

[RapTarX]

In theory, a lot of things are possible. In theory, it's possible to have 51% attack on bitcoin chain; anyone can argue that anyone or a group of people may own more than 50% of the hashing power. But practically, it's now impossible. I had a lot of misconceptions on bitcoin chain but after coming here and having more time spent on it, I realized my misconceptions. People have to be involved practically; being bound to the theory will only mislead them.

[DdmrDdmr]

<...>

Unless we go back to August 15th 2010, where someone allegedly deliberately exploited a vulnerability in the software, and managed to create a TX with 2 outputs, each with 92.233.720.368,54 BTCs, totalling therefore over 184 billion bitcoins (!). The incident is known as the Value Overflow incident, and was resolved in just a few hours after some panic rush coding and a chain fork.

I haven’t been able to find anything more specific on the perpetrator and his intent, although the below threads seem to point to it being a deliberate attempt and not a fortunate one.
 

See:
Strange block 74638
overflow bug SERIOUS 74638

[20kevin20]

Say Bitcoin is easy to hack and I'll instantly know how much you know about cryptocurrencies. Someone so ignorant to instantly push away Bitcoin due to something they never even researched would probably have a hard time being convinced otherwise anyway.

I'm not sure if the "security" of Bitcoin lays in the tech itself or there simply are no (big) flaws within the codelines themselves though. They are two different things as far as my knowledge tells me. Any input from a programmer/BTC dev would help

[Zedpastin]

It really doesn't help that even mainstream media frequently has this misconception, further fueling the fire of mass misconceptions. Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies is the field that I know well enough to immediately realize how dumb a lot of writers or "journalists" are.

Bitcoin is built on well used algorithms and cryptography if that failed it would not just be Bitcoin that is compromised but banks and other important industries because they use the best standards that we currently have. Any one saying that Bitcoin can be hacked does not know any thing and are not very good with computers because I think most people who know a little about computers understands that the security issues with Bitcoin are the people controlling the wallets and not the software that Bitcoin is built on.

<...>

Unless we go back to August 15th 2010, where someone allegedly deliberately exploited a vulnerability in the software, and managed to create a TX with 2 outputs, each with 92.233.720.368,54 BTCs, totalling therefore over 184 billion bitcoins (!). The incident is known as the Value Overflow incident, and was resolved in just a few hours after some panic rush coding and a chain fork.

I haven’t been able to find anything more specific on the perpetrator and his intent, although the below threads seem to point to it being a deliberate attempt and not a fortunate one.
 

I think this was quickly fixed? It might sound bad but a rollback or a hard fork could sovle the issue if it was to happen today. I am sure that the consensus would be to fork to not have newly generated Bitcoin on the network and this attack would not be effective.

[Coyster]

I would hold the government and the media responsible for many of these misconceptions about the Bitcoin network, I think most of it is just basically to discredit the network as being dangerous for its users in a bid to promote their CBDC's and to dissuade people from being their own bank, for example, if a user gives his or her seed phrase away and it results in the funds being stolen, then it's down to the users folly, it's not about the network, but if the media picks up this sort of news, they'll sure make it look like the network is to blame for the loss of funds.

[Gambit2s]

Woow a clickbait in bitcointalk never saw this one coming,I clicked the topic thinking a quantum computer or something managed to hack the blockchain but oh well all we get is just an explannation on how strong  the bitcoin network is which was repeated alot in the forum (not joking 1 2 3...) and probably 90% of users already know this fact tbh.

A more interesting topic in my opinion would be a simple explanation on how quantum computers can actually hack or break the blockchain.

So without further ado:

Quantum computing is an emerging branch of computer science still under research and development. Using quantum bits (qubits) and concepts like superimposition and entanglement, quantum computers can potentially execute complex algorithms incredibly faster than current computers. Quantum computers can potentially break the encryption technology used in blockchain. These computers might help an individual to bring in tremendous computing powers and hijack blockchain networks. Quantum computers are still some way from being commercialized, therefore, blockchain networks don’t face an immediate threat from them.

Can Bitcoin survive hackers armed with quantum computers?

In the future, quantum computers might be able to break the encryption algorithms used in Bitcoin. However, quantum computers can’t do that yet. There’s likely a 5-10 years window for Bitcoin to strengthen its security measures so that it can survive hackers armed with quantum computers.

(Btw OP please fix the title my tongue hurts when reading it.)

[_BlackStar]

(Btw OP please fix the title my tongue hurts when reading it.)

I don't need to treat your tongue if you don't like the title, just read it silently and start answering with the keyboard. 


The news media, tech haters, bitcoin haters, governments, and so on can twist facts into something wrong. People who don't know the truth are quite easily swayed by the news they read online, as well as the opinions of bitcoin haters. Bitcoin security standards should serve as a bulwark and that is the reason why we believe in bitcoin. Weak security due to users who do not understand how to secure it properly so it is true that the average case of losing bitcoin stems from user error.

[hatshepsut93]

When people say "Bitcoin hack" you should read it as "bitcoin wallet hack" and not "Bitcoin network hack". And you should take it very seriously, don't think that if the protocol is very secure, then nothing bad can happen to your coins. "Bitcoin is unhackable" can be just as easily misinterpreted by newbies and lead to bad results.

[Gambit2s]

(Btw OP please fix the title my tongue hurts when reading it.)

I don't need to treat your tongue if you don't like the title, just read it silently and start answering with the keyboard. 


The news media, tech haters, bitcoin haters, governments, and so on can twist facts into something wrong. People who don't know the truth are quite easily swayed by the news they read online, as well as the opinions of bitcoin haters. Bitcoin security standards should serve as a bulwark and that is the reason why we believe in bitcoin. Weak security due to users who do not understand how to secure it properly so it is true that the average case of losing bitcoin stems from user error.

Bruh have you looked at it ? my "tongue hurts" was just an expression to point out the grammatical error(s) in your title it should be (You need to read this) and not (you are need to read this).

[Kontibruno]

I think that more enlightenment is still needed concerning bitcoin to the general public, especially media organizations. Being a tool of information dissemination, people that are less informed about the level of technology behind btc believe that these journalists and media organizations are experts on cryptocurrency. Unfortunately, almost all of them know nothing about btc and crypto in general, thereby they continue to spread misinformation to their audience.

[_BlackStar]

Bruh have you looked at it ? my "tongue hurts" was just an expression to point out the grammatical error(s) in your title it should be (You need to read this) and not (you are need to read this).

Done, and now I lock this thread. Thanks