Atomic Wallet hacked! Get your funds out now!

[enquirer]

Why people keep saying open source is safer? When was the last time any of you have taken a time and go search for security bugs in any open source project? Nobody pays for such activity. On the other hand, malicious actors have huge monetary incentives to pour over open source code and find ways to steal coins. Quite possibly Atomic theft code is hiding in some open source Javascript library they inadvertently imported into their Electron app.

[NotATether]

I have several cryptocurrencies that I stake in Atomic Wallet. Unstaking usually takes a few days. Has anyone seen any information on what to do in this situation? Or maybe any suggestions? I'm using the desktop version and haven't opened the wallet in over a week.

Don't open the wallet until they unstake and then transfer the coins out to other wallets or exchanges (if you need to convert them into other cryptos first).

[raumonds]

Looks like Atomic Wallet had a major oopsie! Time to uninstall faster than a hacker can say gotcha!

[glendall]

ah this is crazy , how bad is the security of this detention wallet , they can enter without a seed , can not believe how smart this person is to infiltrate every wallet , hopefully the investigation can be resolved and there are not many victims here ,

[digaran]

Yeah, about that!
It happens when you let third parties to manage your funds, when will people learn that bitcoin is money and since there is no central safe keeping party to insure the safety of your funds, you should never put your funds in the hands of crypto-bank wannabes.


Everytime you want to move some coins, you should generate change addresses offline, move what you have and send the change to the addresses which you generated offline using an address generator which has no access to the internet.

There is no such a thing as a safe and secure wallet in crypto world.

You are your bank, the safety of your coins depends on mathematics and you alone, don't let others to keep them safe because you'd be disappointed.


You are either up for the task, or you should stick with central banks.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

Well, after I read it here I checked my wallet and it was untouched.

Had no problem loving some stuff somewhere else, even left some coins there just to see what happens ( of course just some small $ ) .

Guess the hacker has some kind of tool to find the wealthy wallets so he doesn't waste his time.
I mean, even atomic said/claimed only 1% of the wallets they have are affected.

Still, enough damage was done and I'm not sure atomic will come back from this. They also did a lot of empty promises about their own token. Still can't trade or exchange those old AWCp86 token anywhere and only watching the price drop by around 70% over the months. 

[davide72]

It's terrible to lose your money in this way, I've lost it too, but there is still a lot of work to be done on wallet security.

[CypherMonk]

8 months ago, some guy on YouTube had his atomic wallet hacked and all ($900) worth of Bitcoins were stolen from it. (for some reason the idiot hacker did not steal his other assets.) He had 2FA enabled and changed his password multiple times: https://youtu.be/0QBu4BncFqQ

It is incredibly shocking how lax the security of this wallet is, if a random guy can just break into your secured wallet and steal the coins inside.

I think that in most cases, these exchanges are stealing people's money while claiming it's the worst of hackers. But what do I know, there's no evidence to back this up because they have been wiping their trails clean so far. But one day, all will be out in the open and everyone will know.

[pooya87]

Yeah, about that!
It happens when you let third parties to manage your funds, when will people learn that bitcoin is money and since there is no central safe keeping party to insure the safety of your funds, you should never put your funds in the hands of crypto-bank wannabes.

Since Atomic Wallet was not a custodial wallet, users weren't exactly putting their funds in the hands of the company behind the wallet. They had control over their own funds but the problem was that because the wallet is closed source they didn't know who else also has access to their keys and consequently their funds.

[riantolie]

Yeah, about that!
It happens when you let third parties to manage your funds, when will people learn that bitcoin is money and since there is no central safe keeping party to insure the safety of your funds, you should never put your funds in the hands of crypto-bank wannabes.

Since Atomic Wallet was not a custodial wallet, users weren't exactly putting their funds in the hands of the company behind the wallet. They had control over their own funds but the problem was that because the wallet is closed source they didn't know who else also has access to their keys and consequently their funds.

Damn, that's why open source is the best option. I don't think Atomic Wallet will recover from that, who would put their coins there after that accident?

[PX-Z]

Damn, that's why open source is the best option. I don't think Atomic Wallet will recover from that, who would put their coins there after that accident?

After this incident? I don't think people will trust again atomic wallet after claiming their wallet is a "non-custodial" yet there are servers behind saving everyone's private key or seed. They should close or end their wallet's service. But before that they should be responsible their users lost funds.

[Wrathofcoins]

The worst thing its we have received a few big blows on wallets this year.

Ledger on hardware wallets, and now this from atomic.... that arent good news, the only we can think know its, who are gonna be the next? who its lying and surviving yet?.

This its not good for the crypto community in the eye of the people who its not in crypto, only gives them more shit to talk and with some "reliable" facts.

I feel really sorry for those who lose their funds. And thank you NotATether to spread the new and try to save the funds of the mayority of people.

[bct_ail]

there are servers behind saving everyone's private key or seed.

Is there any evidence for this?

[Who is John Galt?]

there are servers behind saving everyone's private key or seed.

Is there any evidence for this?

This was told by the representative of a cybersecurity company Match Systems Joseph Anderson. According to him, Atomic Wallet stored all private keys of users on their servers.

[moha sasa]

Now they say the loss is more than a $100 millions!!

[Who is John Galt?]

Now they say the loss is more than a $100 millions!!

The other day they made a statement in which they said that they were cooperating with various investigators, but they did not find the reasons for the hack. And after that, they say that they carefully study everything to make sure that users are safe, and recommend updating the wallet software to the latest versions. It is rather strange to talk about security if the reason for the hack is not determined.

They also stated that they do not store users' private keys. This has been questioned before by various investigators.

In general, nothing becomes clearer from the statement of Atomic Wallet, they are just trying to put a good face on a bad game.

[pooya87]

You know what the worst part of this types of wallets is? They demand your trust in their product but they do not accept any kind of liability. A kind of a blind trust if you ask me.

11. Limitation Of Liability.
Licensor shall not be liable to licensee, or any other person or entity claiming through licensee any loss of profits, income, savings, or any other consequential, incidental, special, punitive, direct or indirect damage, whether arising in contract, tort, warranty, or otherwise. These limitations shall apply regardless of the essential purpose of any limited remedy. Under no circumstances shall licensor’s aggregate liability to licensee, or any other person or entity claiming through licensee, exceed the financial amount actually paid by licensee to licensor for the software.

We all know that in the end, some people will not care about their security and still continue using closed source wallets. So maybe at least these users should demand that the developers be liable for any damage. I'd say that's the least they can ask for their trust in a software they can't trust any other way.