[SDC] ShadowCash | Welcome to the UMBRA

[Fern]

And Komodo which is the first fork of Zcash

There will be room for all, Shadowcash has great features and good community vibe. It will do well.

Perhaps Bitcoin will eventually take the best features from all these anon coins but in the mean time they will have their time in the sun

[dadon]

And first fork of Zcash, Komodo also on it's way with extras.

There will be room for all, Shadowcash has great features and good community vibe. It will do well.

Perhaps Bitcoin will eventually take the best features from all these anon coins but in the mean time they will have their time in the sun

If the tech is truly built to empower the people not to enrich the developers,speculators I support It 100% , good luck with your project maybe i will buy a few.

[vtr99]

And first fork of Zcash, Komodo also on it's way with extras.

There will be room for all, Shadowcash has great features and good community vibe. It will do well.

Perhaps Bitcoin will eventually take the best features from all these anon coins but in the mean time they will have their time in the sun

Absolutely nothing wrong with diversification, and cooperation between coins. At one point I had a lot of XMR, but a few things turned me off. Especially people like this blazzin fool who only show up to try and disrupt our positive vibe. Now I don't own a single Monero, but I do own a lot of other great coins. I'm sure I speak for most of us here that we wish Zcash the best of luck. I may just pick up a few too.
I believe there will always be room for alt-coins, and that it is quite possible BTC won't always be the top coin.

[aamarket]

Well put. People like vtr99 make the coin and community great.

[Axente]

Its not surprising that blazzin is a big Monero fan, i am sure he fits right in at that cesspool.

Monero is poisoned from the head down as you can see by how they handled this: https://decentralize.today/monero-had-the-same-bug-as-shadow-33a86ddeac2e#.sjo6i1y7j

I have never seen such a toxic community in all my life and it seems that the Monero leaders encourage this sort of behavior.

I thought he said he was leaving? LOL  I guess blazzin just wanted to prove he is a liar one more time.

The best he could do is bring up some ancient history of an SDC flaw that was corrected long ago?

I wasn't one to taunt the Monero kids until now, but since they insist on this kind of pathetic attack, it's going to be even more fun watching SDC dominate their obsolete coin.

There is plenty more on the way. 

I really can't wait for the market being implemented and released. I'm really looking forward to it and expect that SDC will go past Monero at that point.

[coins101]

dadon: That looks a lot like our old wallet :stuck_out_tongue:

I am curious to know why details about in wallet 2FA security features have been removed? 

Several months ago SDC people lost coins because their computers were hacked and they had coins stolen. Coins which were likely dumped on exchanges.

So what's wrong with highlighting that wallets can get a great security feature like 2FA?

[panda86]

Where I can see new roadmap for SDC?

[dadon]

dadon: That looks a lot like our old wallet :stuck_out_tongue:

I am curious to know why details about in wallet 2FA security features have been removed?  

Several months ago SDC people lost coins because their computers were hacked and they had coins stolen. Coins which were likely dumped on exchanges.

So what's wrong with highlighting that wallets can get a great security feature like 2FA?

When did our wallet get hacked again   i have been here for 2 years and the wallet has never been hacked and no coins stollen because of any hack, i think someone didn't encrypt their wallet with a pw and they got their .dat jacked, not our problem.

Just re read your comment because i misread it before i see now you say computer not wallet hacked, i apologise.
but i do remember one of the developers saying in the past when i suggested 2fa for the wallet and this was over a year ago I'm sure, they replied that it was an attack vector and not good for over all security or something along the lines.
Im 90% sure i remember being told that.

[rutherford]

traxx: No but we can come to your house and pick it up?

[vtr99]

dadon: That looks a lot like our old wallet :stuck_out_tongue:

I am curious to know why details about in wallet 2FA security features have been removed? 

Several months ago SDC people lost coins because their computers were hacked and they had coins stolen. Coins which were likely dumped on exchanges.

So what's wrong with highlighting that wallets can get a great security feature like 2FA?

You should always encrypt your wallet, and never download anything you don't trust 100% to a computer where you store coins.

That said, this hack had nothing to do with SDC. If the wallets were properly encrypted, the coin's couldn't have been stolen.

2FA works well for accessing secure online accounts, but it doesn't make much sense for a wallet that is in your control. I personally wouldn't want a 3rd party involved in securing my funds. It essentially takes the decentralization out of it. Like storing your money in a bank. If you want maximum security, you can always store your coins offline.

[coins101]

dadon: That looks a lot like our old wallet :stuck_out_tongue:

I am curious to know why details about in wallet 2FA security features have been removed?  

Several months ago SDC people lost coins because their computers were hacked and they had coins stolen. Coins which were likely dumped on exchanges.

So what's wrong with highlighting that wallets can get a great security feature like 2FA?

You should always encrypt your wallet, and never download anything you don't trust 100% to a computer where you store coins.

That said, this hack had nothing to do with SDC. If the wallets were properly encrypted, the coin's couldn't have been stolen.

2FA works well for accessing secure online accounts, but it doesn't make much sense for a wallet that is in your control. I personally wouldn't want a 3rd party involved in securing my funds. It essentially takes the decentralization out of it. Like storing your money in a bank. If you want maximum security, you can always store your coins offline.

Hold on a second...this is about encrypting the local wallet with its own decentralised 2FA service.

It's an absolute genius of a process that only the user controls. There are no third parties (unless you count Google Authentication as a third party, even though Google doesn't get involved)

[rutherford]

code: 2FA is not necessary.

[coins101]

code: 2FA is not necessary.

Memo to exchanges: see above.

[rutherford]

code: coins101, it doesn't really help a thing to have 2FA in-wallet. If malware is on your computer, it is game over. No 2FA will save you in that case. If they can record keystrokes they can steal your 2FA key when you've typed it and there is no improvement over the typical password protection.

[Automatic Monkey]

You should always encrypt your wallet, and never download anything you don't trust 100% to a computer where you store coins.

That said, this hack had nothing to do with SDC. If the wallets were properly encrypted, the coin's couldn't have been stolen.

2FA works well for accessing secure online accounts, but it doesn't make much sense for a wallet that is in your control. I personally wouldn't want a 3rd party involved in securing my funds. It essentially takes the decentralization out of it. Like storing your money in a bank. If you want maximum security, you can always store your coins offline.

Absolutely! The biggest personal theft I'm aware of involved a fake wallet downloaded from a corrupted link.

Machines are cheap, most of us probably own several coins so you can dedicate a machine to all of them, get rid of the browsers and e-mail, lock it down, back it up, etc. Even if someone steals the machine, as long as you are backed up and encrypted you can be up and running with the coins moved to new addresses before they figure out how to turn the damned thing on. Don't let the bastards win!

[vtr99]

dadon: That looks a lot like our old wallet :stuck_out_tongue:

I am curious to know why details about in wallet 2FA security features have been removed?  

Several months ago SDC people lost coins because their computers were hacked and they had coins stolen. Coins which were likely dumped on exchanges.

So what's wrong with highlighting that wallets can get a great security feature like 2FA?

You should always encrypt your wallet, and never download anything you don't trust 100% to a computer where you store coins.

That said, this hack had nothing to do with SDC. If the wallets were properly encrypted, the coin's couldn't have been stolen.

2FA works well for accessing secure online accounts, but it doesn't make much sense for a wallet that is in your control. I personally wouldn't want a 3rd party involved in securing my funds. It essentially takes the decentralization out of it. Like storing your money in a bank. If you want maximum security, you can always store your coins offline.

Hold on a second...this is about encrypting the local wallet with its own decentralised 2FA service.

It's an absolute genius of a process that only the user controls. There are no third parties (unless you count Google Authentication as a third party, even though Google doesn't get involved)

Google Authentication is absolutely a 3rd party app. You are not completely in control if you depend on authentication from another source.

I keep most of my wallets on offline laptops, and those have at least 4 backups on USB drives.

It makes sense using 2FA on Coinbase, or other online accounts, but it doesn't make any sense to use it on a wallet completely under your control.

What is needed is more education on keeping your wallets safe. More people have lost money keeping coins on an exchange. 

[Sjacmur]

@ up

I dont agree. Is very easy have 2FA on SECOND device like smartfon so you dont have 2FA app on the same hardware like laptop (usually offline but sometimes needed update wallets, synchro blockchain) with wallets. And its very big upgrade your protection.

[aamarket]

@ up

I dont agree. Is very easy have 2FA on SECOND device like smartfon so you dont have 2FA app on the same hardware like laptop (usually offline but sometimes needed update wallets, synchro blockchain) with wallets. And its very big upgrade your protection.

As was said, you would rely on 3rd party and that is not a good idea.

[rutherford]

code: 2FA has its use cases, that's certainly true. But the 2FA as vTorrent provides has no real security benefits.

[rutherford]

code: A true 2FA method would require you to also include a challenge that contains the amount and the receiver. Even that system has its weaknesses but it is definitely not a major improvement.