Antpool set to return 83.4btc transaction fee paid.

[EL MOHA]

The record breaking high transaction fee of 83 bitcoin paid for a transaction of bitcoin which the block was mined by Antpool had earlier reported here which was found out to be a hacked wallet due to weak randomization of seed has been after a tweet on X. Now the pool that got lucky to mine the block in which is AntPool is ready to return the excess fees. Although it is not mandatory to return the fees but they are willing to return it.

Now the procedure is to just sign a message using the private of the sending address. The procedure is as explained here by AntPool with deadline set to 10 December.

My problem or say concern is what if the hacker is still in possession of the keys and ends signing the message.

Should Antpool decides to be careful and send the excess bitcoin back to that address as any new address collected by them might also belong to the hacker and in sending it back to the address again what if the sweeping malware is still on the address and the bitcoin is immediately sent out again to the hacker new address is there away for the network to block this kind of immediate transaction again from that same account for the main time. Just like double spending sometimes is rendered invalid by most nodes.

If you’re the owner and you are not if the private key is with the hacker and they could use it to Sign the message what will you do at this moment?

[pinggoki]

If you’re the owner and you are not if the private key is with the hacker and they could use it to Sign the message what will you do at this moment?

If it's possible to contact them then probably I would send them all the necessary information that I am going to need to prove that it's my bitcoin and I think that Antpool is smart enough to know that there's a possibility that the address that will sign the message might be hacked so they will definitely cooperate on that matter.

[jackg]

There might be other ways ownership could be proven too without signing a message. Such as: showing authentic conversations between the owner and whoever they acquired the funds from (could be socially engineered but may be harder if done using accounts that have kyc or are from a prominent figure that can vouch too), signing addresses that paid that one (especially if there's an old input that can be signed along with the address that was hacked or a screenshot of a withdrawal and additional proof - such as a forwarded email and corresponding exchange statements).

[MusaMohamed]

The record breaking high transaction fee of 83 bitcoin paid for a transaction of bitcoin which the block was mined by Antpool had earlier reported here which was found out to be a hacked wallet due to weak randomization of seed has been after a tweet on X. Now the pool that got lucky to mine the block in which is AntPool is ready to return the excess fees. Although it is not mandatory to return the fees but they are willing to return it.

It is not a first time a mining pool shows intention to return over paid transaction fee by mistake like this one.

It shows they are not a greedy pool but with the emergence of seizure, sanctions on platforms that be used for money laundering, mining pools like Antpool will have to be careful.

It can be a hacked, it can be a money laundering activity.

Bitcoin miner F2Pool returns 19.8 bitcoin to Paxos after overpaid fee

[Marvelman]

If you’re the owner and you are not if the private key is with the hacker and they could use it to Sign the message what will you do at this moment?

I'd suggest reaching out to Antpool to clarify what happened.  Maybe share more proof that you're the rightful owner and hope they're sensible enough not to send the coins back to an address that has already been compromised. 

[Jegileman]

If you’re the owner and you are not if the private key is with the hacker and they could use it to Sign the message what will you do at this moment?

As the original owner of the wallet, I should have enough evidence to show to antpool that I am the real owner of the wallet. Antpool are very smart and I know that by signing a message won’t be all they need from the original owner to just do and they’ll send the excess bitcoin fees back. It is great that they are willing to send back, but it will take a long procedure and vigorous investigation and proofs by the original owner before they will send the bitcoin back.

[boyptc]

Antpool is no dumb if there will be some bad actors trying to fool them and will claim that they are the rightful owner of that transaction and BTC.

It's going to take time but that person probably is aware of how he's going to contact Antpool and ask for that retrieval of his fund. Well, it's a nice gesture that Antpool has thought of returning it anyway.

The owner must be happy and he just needs to prove that he's the one.

[TimeTeller]

Antpool is no dumb if there will be some bad actors trying to fool them and will claim that they are the rightful owner of that transaction and BTC.

It's going to take time but that person probably is aware of how he's going to contact Antpool and ask for that retrieval of his fund. Well, it's a nice gesture that Antpool has thought of returning it anyway.

The owner must be happy and he just needs to prove that he's the one.

The amount involved is staggering and who knows antpool also wanted to see who's gonna claim such amount of btc.
But if nothing else, that's really a nice gesture from the mining pool, not all have that kind of initiative to return it to the rightful owner.
The problem also lies the fact that how can the owner see such antpool announcement before the deadline? Unless, he is very attentive with all the news or notifications pertaining to crypto.

[Cricktor]

The malicious actor has apparently the private key of the wannabe "cold storage" of the legit owner. What the malicious actor likely doesn't have is the private key of the owner's address where the coins came from to be transfered to his (bad) "cold storage".

The legit owner should have better possibilities to prove his legit ownership to Antpool than the hacker. I wish the owner good luck and success to regain about 60% of the stolen coins. And hopefully the owner rethinks how to safely transact and store his coins.

[Myleschetty]

The record breaking high transaction fee of 83 bitcoin paid for a transaction of bitcoin which the block was mined by Antpool had earlier reported here which was found out to be a hacked wallet due to weak randomization of seed has been after a tweet on X. Now the pool that got lucky to mine the block in which is AntPool is ready to return the excess fees. Although it is not mandatory to return the fees but they are willing to return it.

Now the procedure is to just sign a message using the private of the sending address. The procedure is as explained here by AntPool with deadline set to 10 December.

My problem or say concern is what if the hacker is still in possession of the keys and ends signing the message.

If the hacker can manage to send the previous transaction with 83BTC as transaction then he's still in possession of the wallet key and in this situation the only to verify the true ownership is through the signing message from self-custodial wallet address that the wallet owner once send BTC to before the hacking accident.

[boyptc]

Antpool is no dumb if there will be some bad actors trying to fool them and will claim that they are the rightful owner of that transaction and BTC.

It's going to take time but that person probably is aware of how he's going to contact Antpool and ask for that retrieval of his fund. Well, it's a nice gesture that Antpool has thought of returning it anyway.

The owner must be happy and he just needs to prove that he's the one.

The amount involved is staggering and who knows antpool also wanted to see who's gonna claim such amount of btc.
But if nothing else, that's really a nice gesture from the mining pool, not all have that kind of initiative to return it to the rightful owner.

Yeah, can commend them and any other pools that have been returning such tremendous amounts that has been overpaid for the fee by the owners of it and did an honest mistake.

The problem also lies the fact that how can the owner see such antpool announcement before the deadline? Unless, he is very attentive with all the news or notifications pertaining to crypto.

It's now his problem and we have to wait until the given deadline because someone who has lost that amount are probably lurking on news like this.

Otherwise, then like the thoughts of other people that it's money laundering.

[EL MOHA]

If the hacker can manage to send the previous transaction with 83BTC as transaction then he's still in possession of the wallet key and in this situation the only to verify the true ownership is through the signing message from self-custodial wallet address that the wallet owner once send BTC to before the hacking accident.

What you mean is signing message an old receiving address, this is actual a good way but what if the address doesn’t belong to the real owner of the wallet or probably the address private key or seed phrase is no longer available?

 

The malicious actor has apparently the private key of the wannabe "cold storage" of the legit owner. What the malicious actor likely doesn't have is the private key of the owner's address where the coins came from to be transfered to his (bad) "cold storage".

What you meant is the real owner should sign a message from the first address that this wallet was first funded with? Just like I said it could be possible that the coins might have come from exchanges or that wallet keys is no longer available

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

What you meant is the real owner should sign a message from the first address that this wallet was first funded with? Just like I said it could be possible that the coins might have come from exchanges or that wallet keys is no longer available

As I followed news about that case, the owner already signed a message and prove ownership of the address from which the transaction was sent.

The signed message is posted on this account https://x.com/83_5BTC

The rest is verification of the pool and the deal between the pool and the owner. As I know, the pool is ready to pay it back and if ownership is verified, they will proceed those bitcoin back to the owner.

I don't check the address from which bitcoin was sent with the overpaid fee (not sure the X account posted a valid signed message) and it is the pool responsibility to do it.

[Myleschetty]

If the hacker can manage to send the previous transaction with 83BTC as transaction then he's still in possession of the wallet key and in this situation the only to verify the true ownership is through the signing message from self-custodial wallet address that the wallet owner once send BTC to before the hacking accident.

What you mean is signing message an old receiving address, this is actual a good way but what if the address doesn’t belong to the real owner of the wallet or probably the address private key or seed phrase is no longer available?

I am talking about the old wallet that didn't belong to the wallet owner which is someone he knows and have sent cryptocurrency to or received transaction from them who can help him write a signing message which is just like a recommendation letter.
Another means of getting the authority involved, provide proof of ownership and do a physical collection of the BTC.