Bitstamp: Less than 19,000 BTC lost !!!

[forbesmining]

Bitstamp i̶s̶ was one of the best exchanges.

[Ryze]

is this going to be another mt.gox moment? i really hope not.. 

[ChuckBuck]

is this going to be another mt.gox moment? i really hope not.. 

No, it isn't.  They're fully functional and operating as we type right now.

They lost 19,000 BTC of their own operational hot wallet, but all customers funds were completely secured, and they've proven in the last week or so to be solvent since the breach.

Gox, on the other hand, shut down, halted all withdrawals, and disappeared with all the customers funds completely, without recourse or paying back the lost coins totalling nearly $500 million.

Huge difference.

[jbreher]

... and they've proven in the last week or so to be solvent since the breach.

Proven solvency? I might have missed it - how have they proven they are not now operating in a fractional reserve manner?

Seriously, hats off to them in their plans to keep their risk exposure down, their seemingly well-laid plans to get back online after a major issue, and their work so far to make customers whole. But in my world, "proof" requires proof.

[redsn0w]

Check the bitcoin address again  : https://blockchain.info/it/address/1L2JsXHPMYuAa9ugvHGLwkdstCPUDemNCf


Bitcoin are still coming ( Maybe a RNG  "bug").

[picolo]

Lol at that.
Moreover, bitstamp stated that it's just a fraction of their reserves, this 19k bitcoins is just a piece of cake out of millions of cakes they have, they also have vcs

19K may be as high as 5% of their users holdings so not a cake out of millions but a cake out of tens of cakes.

If you look at their equity meaning the value they have if you substract all users assets that they should not use, it's probably between 20 and 100%

If you compare 19 000 to their profits it's probably more than their net profit for 2014.

[ChuckBuck]

... and they've proven in the last week or so to be solvent since the breach.

Proven solvency? I might have missed it - how have they proven they are not now operating in a fractional reserve manner?

Seriously, hats off to them in their plans to keep their risk exposure down, their seemingly well-laid plans to get back online after a major issue, and their work so far to make customers whole. But in my world, "proof" requires proof.

The fact that anyone could've withdraw all their funds without a hitch the day they relaunched, proves their solvency (in the short term).  In theory according to what they stated when they reopened, that meant all their users could have up and withdrew and left for good.

As far as the fractional reserve part, we'll have to wait and see.

Mind you, I'm in agreement, that any legitimate exchange should be audited on a regular basis by a third party to ultimately prove solvency.

[Sejuani]

Check the bitcoin address again  : https://blockchain.info/it/address/1L2JsXHPMYuAa9ugvHGLwkdstCPUDemNCf


Bitcoin are still coming ( Maybe a RNG  "bug").

is that the hackers address?

if so, how the heck did you find it.. im relieved though that bistamp is around or else the prices would drop hard.

[jbreher]

The fact that anyone could've withdraw all their funds without a hitch the day they relaunched, proves their solvency (in the short term). 

If _everyone_ temporarily withdrew their funds without a hit the day they relaunched, they would have proven their solvency. The fact that anyone who tried was able to is not proof of solvency.

I'm not sure why I am arguing this. They obviously have handled a major problem in what seems to be a good fashion. But we don't really know, do we?

[picolo]

The fact that anyone could've withdraw all their funds without a hitch the day they relaunched, proves their solvency (in the short term). 

If _everyone_ temporarily withdrew their funds without a hit the day they relaunched, they would have proven their solvency. The fact that anyone who tried was able to is not proof of solvency.

I'm not sure why I am arguing this. They obviously have handled a major problem in what seems to be a good fashion. But we don't really know, do we?

I agree with you, not everyone withdrew their funds; only a small fraction of deposits were withdrawn. They handled the situation very well but the market is tanking very hard now; we touched 175$ on bitstamp.

[opossum]

The fact that anyone could've withdraw all their funds without a hitch the day they relaunched, proves their solvency (in the short term). 

If _everyone_ temporarily withdrew their funds without a hit the day they relaunched, they would have proven their solvency. The fact that anyone who tried was able to is not proof of solvency.

I'm not sure why I am arguing this. They obviously have handled a major problem in what seems to be a good fashion. But we don't really know, do we?

I think it would be difficult to coordinate this kind of systemic withdrawals by all their customers. I would also argue that this would not prove their solvency - they could buy bitcoin from their customers with customer fiat

[picolo]

The fact that anyone could've withdraw all their funds without a hitch the day they relaunched, proves their solvency (in the short term). 

If _everyone_ temporarily withdrew their funds without a hit the day they relaunched, they would have proven their solvency. The fact that anyone who tried was able to is not proof of solvency.

I'm not sure why I am arguing this. They obviously have handled a major problem in what seems to be a good fashion. But we don't really know, do we?

I think it would be difficult to coordinate this kind of systemic withdrawals by all their customers. I would also argue that this would not prove their solvency - they could buy bitcoin from their customers with customer fiat

If everyone withdrew cash and bitcoins, they would need to have customers funds. They should sign Bitcoin addresses and get their bank accounts audited.