Cybersecurity subforum

[Spacebar96]

That's a good idea, if the moderator can create another child board where discussion about cyber security and bitcoin are been analyse. Since bitcoin gave it user more power to secure their wallet. It will be helpful and serves as a reminders to people on how to secure their wallet.

[takuma sato]

Is there any list of supported hardware for Coreboot or Libreboot?
I know there are some premade stuff that work on Thinkpads but it could be issue to run this bios on custom made desktop computers.

Check your laptop brand and board here:

https://coreboot.org/status/board-status.html

Basically, stick to Lenovo. x230 is probably the best you could get with an i7. With Libreboot x200 or t400 for a bigger laptop and that's about it. There is a whole subject on what's better, Libreboot or Coreboot. With Libreboot you get 0 binary blobs but you lack microcode updates which are available in Coreboot (at the expense of having to use some proprietary blobs but it's considered not a problem and ME is of course disabled). You need to hardware flash for both, i think except the x60 which can be done by downloading the rom.

This is possible in theory, but more simple way of introducing a global kill switch would be to just turn of the internet, like we can see it's happening in some countries during riots.
Internet is centrally controlled and controllers don't have to worry about people like you who run custom bios on computers.
If they really want to hurt Bitcoin (and everything else) this is what they would do because it's more simple.

It would be overkill to cut the entire internet since it would crash the stock market. They can just keep Bitcoin running under a network that is compromised because no one paid attention to this.

[coinmanhere]

I support this idea I think it is important enough to have its own separate section. To be frank it is way too important to have its own section, I think we as a community should be more open minded than start with "I don't think so" mentality.

[takuma sato]

The fact that Luke Dashjr got 3 $million worth of BTC hacked made me remember this thread. If someone with such level of expertise gets his networth hacked, it proves that cybersecurity is a crucial subject in Bitcoin and there should be a sticky guide about it, since a lot of people would find this forum when starting.

It also proves Bitcoin is not ready for prime time when it comes to self-custody of funds. Most people would probably be safer leaving it on a regulated exchange or buying through an ETF than exposing them to potential hacks unfortunately.

[TheBeardedBaby]

It's not a bad suggestion but I feel it would be more suitable to be like a news feed kind of type to post the latest, hacks, breaches, bugs where people can actually see if they are affected or not.

Of course, place to discuss cybersecurity is always good, but less likely to be crated.

[BenCodie]

Hi takuma sato. I think you are 100% on the money with this suggestion and I am passionate about supporting it. I made a thread here with another request.

I would love to constantly maintain and update that topic with more resources, I believe that more than one topic per request mightn't be good practice or something as someone told me to lock my thread for making an additional request. Would you be open to locking this thread so we can continue the discussion there? I have given you credit in my OP and also some merit for being the person who came up with the idea first. The reason for the request is so that I can maintain and build on the original post.

Thanks!

[NotATether]

One of two conditions must be satisfied in order to create a board:

1- there have to be sufficient number of threads about this topic in other boards to the point where that board is full of those kind of threads,
2- (for local boards) there is a large megathread.

These are from my own observation and are not in any rules or moderator posts or anything like that.

[Helena Yu]

1- there have to be sufficient number of threads about this topic in other boards to the point where that board is full of those kind of threads,

I've collected a list about cyber security that the moderators often move the topic to off-topic board. I think those threads are deserve to be placed in new board either cybersecurity or hardware and software security, it's really bad to be placed in off-topic board where it's full of non sense thread like what's the best music, how to live longer, do you have pet etc.

1. Password managers or passwords from memory
2. Bitcoin and Antiviruses
3. Computer and Phone Security Questions
4. How to detect fraudulent websites.
5. I think google is spying on us ,when our phones are in the room
6. The best note taking apps for Windows?
7. LastPass - Notice of Recent Security Incident
8. Recommended 2FA app for Windows 
9. What do you use for generating strong passwords?
10. Is my iPhone hacked?
11. Hackers exploit critical VMware flaw to drop ransomware & miners
12. What about a smartphone keyboard 
13. Are they set a broker in my pc and stealing my data ? 
14. [Warning]: Password Manager LassPass has been breached, accessed customer data 
15. Probably a childish question 
16. Privacy frontends for popular services (yt, reddit, twitter, fb, insta, etc)
17. I Always Use 12 to 20 Characters Long Password 🔑 For my accounts
18. Do not rely on your OS security 
19. Hackers stolen Last Pass users passwords and sensitivw information
20. Copy link to clipboard - Nifty app for android 
21. Passwords - 8 characters at least, lower, upper, number, symbol

Sometime I think rather than this topic get moved to off-topic board, why it's not moved to serious discussion board?

To be honest there's many threads in serious discussion board are full of non sense thread and many people doesn't care with it since the signature isn't visible, so the board get less traffic.

Rather than serious discussion almost get abandoned, I would say it's better for the administrators too enable signature space on that's board, so it will increase the traffic and moderators can just increase the minimum quality or strict rules just like Bitcoin technical discussion board.

[BenCodie]

1- there have to be sufficient number of threads about this topic in other boards to the point where that board is full of those kind of threads,

I've collected a list about cyber security that the moderators often move the topic to off-topic board. I think those threads are deserve to be placed in new board either cybersecurity or hardware and software security, it's really bad to be placed in off-topic board where it's full of non sense thread like what's the best music, how to live longer, do you have pet etc.

1. Password managers or passwords from memory
2. Bitcoin and Antiviruses
3. Computer and Phone Security Questions
4. How to detect fraudulent websites.
5. I think google is spying on us ,when our phones are in the room
6. The best note taking apps for Windows?
7. LastPass - Notice of Recent Security Incident
8. Recommended 2FA app for Windows 
9. What do you use for generating strong passwords?
10. Is my iPhone hacked?
11. Hackers exploit critical VMware flaw to drop ransomware & miners
12. What about a smartphone keyboard 
13. Are they set a broker in my pc and stealing my data ? 
14. [Warning]: Password Manager LassPass has been breached, accessed customer data 
15. Probably a childish question 
16. Privacy frontends for popular services (yt, reddit, twitter, fb, insta, etc)
17. I Always Use 12 to 20 Characters Long Password 🔑 For my accounts
18. Do not rely on your OS security 
19. Hackers stolen Last Pass users passwords and sensitivw information
20. Copy link to clipboard - Nifty app for android 
21. Passwords - 8 characters at least, lower, upper, number, symbol

Sometime I think rather than this topic get moved to off-topic board, why it's not moved to serious discussion board?

To be honest there's many threads in serious discussion board are full of non sense thread and many people doesn't care with it since the signature isn't visible, so the board get less traffic.

Rather than serious discussion almost get abandoned, I would say it's better for the administrators too enable signature space on that's board, so it will increase the traffic and moderators can just increase the minimum quality or strict rules just like Bitcoin technical discussion board.

This is a fantastic list. Great work! I will continue on to help build on top this list too some time this week.

[Mpamaegbu]

Would it be a good idea to have cybersecurity subforum?

I'm all for it. It's a great idea to have such a subforum. Cyber security is a thing with anything and everything online and it will be nice to have a dedicated section of this forum for it just like what we've with "Reputation". We know where to check the integrity of users or companies when in doubt for verification or to open scam accusations on them. It should also be so for Cyber security.

[n0nce]

One of two conditions must be satisfied in order to create a board:

1- there have to be sufficient number of threads about this topic in other boards to the point where that board is full of those kind of threads,
2- (for local boards) there is a large megathread.

These are from my own observation and are not in any rules or moderator posts or anything like that.

I know that these are the (unwritten?) rules for new subforums, but I don't completely agree with them.

When you 'are your own bank', especially for newcomers into the whole field, having a place to find educational materials about basic cybersecurity practices (topics such as: how to secure your machine, proper backup practices, encryption guides, signature guides, pgp guides, ...), while also being a place for asking questions.

You and I wouldn't believe at what kind of basic level most people struggle with even using computers. Meanwhile we encourage them to be their own bank, without even having a central place that teaches them security concepts and decreases the likeliness of them losing it all.

To get back to my view on rules for new subforums: I do think that in some cases, people don't even bother creating threads about some topics, if they know they belong and will be buried immediately in off-topic, altcoin discussion, or something like that, where they won't get useful interaction and opinions. They will just go somewhere else. As a matter of fact, I sometimes just choose to talk to people in private about Lightning related stuff, since we don't have a Lightning board.
Therefore, it could (this is a hypothesis) be the other way round: creating a subforum, even without existing megathreads, may encourage and attract discussion about that topic. I personally believe that Lightning and Cybersecurity would be two boards where this could take place.

[BenCodie]

1- there have to be sufficient number of threads about this topic in other boards to the point where that board is full of those kind of threads,
2- (for local boards) there is a large megathread.

These are from my own observation and are not in any rules or moderator posts or anything like that.

If there is not even a remotely relevant place to post these kinds of topics, then they won't be posted. That's the case with cybersecurity at the moment.

[NotATether]

1- there have to be sufficient number of threads about this topic in other boards to the point where that board is full of those kind of threads,
2- (for local boards) there is a large megathread.

These are from my own observation and are not in any rules or moderator posts or anything like that.

If there is not even a remotely relevant place to post these kinds of topics, then they won't be posted. That's the case with cybersecurity at the moment.

I sometimes don't end up posting that kind of stuff for that reason, and it sucks.

But where would we place a Cybersecurity board? Under Trading Discussion? Or somewhere else?

I support your petition but if we are going to see a change then you need to be able to demonstrate that there is a majority consensus in favor of the idea. Perhaps run a poll or something?

[BenCodie]

1- there have to be sufficient number of threads about this topic in other boards to the point where that board is full of those kind of threads,
2- (for local boards) there is a large megathread.

These are from my own observation and are not in any rules or moderator posts or anything like that.

If there is not even a remotely relevant place to post these kinds of topics, then they won't be posted. That's the case with cybersecurity at the moment.

I sometimes don't end up posting that kind of stuff for that reason, and it sucks.

But where would we place a Cybersecurity board? Under Trading Discussion? Or somewhere else?

I support your petition but if we are going to see a change then you need to be able to demonstrate that there is a majority consensus in favor of the idea. Perhaps run a poll or something?

I was going to start a poll in the thread that I created, weirdly there was no option to do so under additional options though.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Rather than serious discussion almost get abandoned, I would say it's better for the administrators too enable signature space on that's board

I never understood why signatures don't appear in Serious Discussion board. Like, is it because it attracts spam? By that reasoning, should signatures be disabled on the entire forum? Are the rest of the discussions not considered serious?

To get back to my view on rules for new subforums: I do think that in some cases, people don't even bother creating threads about some topics, if they know they belong and will be buried immediately in off-topic, altcoin discussion, or something like that, where they won't get useful interaction and opinions.

I think what we need is simple: a brand new sub-board, with a sticky mega-list thread which is moderated in a divided manner. So that if you're having a query, you can check the thread.

[nutildah]

Rather than serious discussion almost get abandoned, I would say it's better for the administrators too enable signature space on that's board

I never understood why signatures don't appear in Serious Discussion board. Like, is it because it attracts spam? By that reasoning, should signatures be disabled on the entire forum? Are the rest of the discussions not considered serious?

Its a good compromise and an alternative to banning signatures altogether.

The forum is now at its lowest traffic ranking since before Nov. 2013. For the record:

Similarweb Global Rank for Bitcointalk (taken from what is currently available and archived)

Sept 2022 - 35,390
Apr 2022 - 33,489
Jul 2020 - 24,833
Jul 2019 - 7,717
Jul 2018 - 2,671
Aug 2017 - 1,890
Feb 2016 - 7,762
Nov 2013 - 33,073

At the same time, there is no motivation to attract more traffic. As theymos recently explained, the forum is doing quite well financially. Bitcointalk really just has one purpose now and theymos has one job, and that is to make sure satoshi's posts remain accessible and in tact.

... and Hal's posts, can't forget him. Same goes for a handful of other early innovators and developers.

I believe this trend is due to a couple of reasons. Nobody wants to hear about the first reason, so let's just talk about the second, which is signature campaigns have steadily diminished the quality of discussion on the forum for years. They encourage people to post for no reason other than to get paid, which leads to a lot of inconsequential jabber that quickly buries actual substance. Those casually visiting the forum have no motivation to wade through it for the occasionally interesting tidbits. Thus, a lot of former visitors have stopped coming here altogether.

At the same time, some businesses still find sig campaigns to be a worthwhile expensive, and this is the reality even if for reasons I can't explain.

You can still post in Serious Discussion if you want. Just let the people who want it enjoy a spam-free section of the forum.

[Helena Yu]

I never understood why signatures don't appear in Serious Discussion board. Like, is it because it attracts spam? By that reasoning, should signatures be disabled on the entire forum? Are the rest of the discussions not considered serious?

Its a good compromise and an alternative to banning signatures altogether.

I believe this trend is due to a couple of reasons. Nobody wants to hear about the first reason, so let's just talk about the second, which is signature campaigns have steadily diminished the quality of discussion on the forum for years. They encourage people to post for no reason other than to get paid, which leads to a lot of inconsequential jabber that quickly buries actual substance. Those casually visiting the forum have no motivation to wade through it for the occasionally interesting tidbits. Thus, a lot of former visitors have stopped coming here altogether.

You need to look it in the bigger picture, I can say if the forum disabling the signatures in every boards, it will be the end of this forum.

It's not surprising if there's an user become active in this forum because of signature campaign and they need to maintain their quality post to able stay in their campaign. This will encourage them to improve their quality post, increase the merit flow, increase the discussion, using feedback and flag correctly and trying to not break the forum rules. Because they're don't want to get red tagged, their account will become worthless.

Can you imagine if the forum ban the whole signatures? any user doesn't care anymore with appropriate use of feedback, flag and trust, they will trolling in this forum since they have nothing to lose. I wouldn't be surprised if many accounts will get red painted due to personal problem or something like that.

I don't see any problem if there's a user only have purpose to earn money in this forum, I believe they're came from poor country and they need to feed their family. At least this forum is an angel for them and it's good since this forum is really important for them.

This forum already offer a good feature, let me show it:

1. You don't want to see an user wear avatar and signature? click Profile - Look and Layout Preferences -  Don't show users' avatars. and Don't show users' signatures.

2. You see an off topic and low quality post? report the post to the moderators.

3. The moderators didn't take any action with your report? click ignore on that's annoying user.

[BlackHatCoiner]

I believe this trend is due to a couple of reasons. Nobody wants to hear about the first reason, so let's just talk about the second, which is signature campaigns have steadily diminished the quality of discussion on the forum for years.

How sure are you about that?

There is no doubt that signature campaigns have incentivized some users to give more importance to the quantity of their posts rather than their quality, so they can fulfill the post quota. But it has also incentivized knowledgeable users to assist anyone who's in trouble. Compare stackexchange with our Dev & Tech board. The former is alive, because a few developers are in charge of it (Pieter Wuille and Murch for the most part), and as far as I know, they get paid to moderate it. And sometimes, a SE post is left unanswered. Try out asking something in the Dev & Tech, and get zero assistance. I assure you that there will be greater chance, if nobody is paid to help.

Secondly, in the early days of this forum, there were no signature campaigns. Do you think those discussions were more constructive than today's? Find me more than three constructive discussions from this old, random page of the Bitcoin Discussion: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=1.52480

[BenCodie]

You need to look it in the bigger picture, I can say if the forum disabling the signatures in every boards, it will be the end of this forum.

Definitely not true. Yes, posts will decrease, however the quality and relevance of posts will dramatically increase in my opinion. There are a lot of people's posts where I just look at them and think; what in the world is this? Then the answer is - a lame attempt to either grow their rank or to increase their posts for the signature campaign they are a part of.

Will it hurt post activity? Sure. Will it kill the forum? Definitely not. I believe that it will improve it and make the forum more what it was originally for - discussing bitcoin and its related topics.

I think that it is very unlikely that signature campaigns will be removed any time in the future though. They have been a part of the forum for a long time and I don't see why they would be dis-allowed...unless all of a sudden all of the managing staff start to care about the quality so much that they are willing to piss off the vast majority of members who participate in campaigns, campaign managers, service advertisers, etc.

A more relevant question is - when did this thread become about signature campaigns? Can this conversation not happen somewhere other than in the thread that is about requesting a Cybersecurity forum? The topics are not even slightly related.

[AbuBhakar]

The fact that Luke Dashjr got 3 $million worth of BTC hacked made me remember this thread. If someone with such level of expertise gets his networth hacked, it proves that cybersecurity is a crucial subject in Bitcoin and there should be a sticky guide about it, since a lot of people would find this forum when starting.

It also proves Bitcoin is not ready for prime time when it comes to self-custody of funds. Most people would probably be safer leaving it on a regulated exchange or buying through an ETF than exposing them to potential hacks unfortunately.

By making a few searches on Reddit, I found a lot of cybersecurity channels listed below which can help everyone that has concern about it.

• https://www.reddit.com/r/cybersecurity/
• https://www.reddit.com/r/hacking/
• https://www.reddit.com/r/CyberSecurityAdvice/
• https://www.reddit.com/r/Hacking_Tutorials/
• ...and many more

I'm just saying that there are a lot of existing forums specialising in this subject. But I'm not against the idea because it will be convenient if we have our own.