Topic: [ANN] [CVC] CIVIC Tokensale Successfully Completed - page 51. (Read 173784 times)
Civic is starting to show its true potential now. I am predicting the price to go past $1 by the end of the year.Good times ahead.
CoinSwitch is now supporting Civic. It can be purchased from https://www.coinswitch.co/exchange/btc/cvc/0.1
I'm pretty sure that this is an exploit of civic. According to the whitepaper this expoit is easily possible and in theory cannot be avoided. In addition to that flaw airports will never except an identity that an user has made of a photo off his passport and is verified by some cheesy verification company instead of a goverment issued passport with live-security-symbol.
Why do you think so? 
I formatted my phone yesterday and now unable to find login option in Civic app..
can anyone assist me?
can anyone assist me?
I want to ask for the name of the team that audit Civic code, can you imagine what will happen to people's privacy if CIvic was hacked, because one thing I know any thing that is hack-able will be hacked, it is just a matter of when
If it's running on a blockchain, it won't be hacked. It is reasonably safe to assume that the blockchain is practically completely secure.
Buyed some more, had a buy order at lower price that triggered tonight.
Wouldn't be easy to find out who leaked their key? That's theft of service basically.
LoL try to find it out. A system secured by that assumption that nobody will leak or share public keys ^^
Civickey on the moon!!!
Go go civic on 0,70
Buyed some more, had a buy order at lower price that triggered tonight.
Wouldn't be easy to find out who leaked their key? That's theft of service basically.
LoL try to find it out. A system secured by that assumption that nobody will leak or share public keys ^^
Civickey on the moon!!!
I want to ask for the name of the team that audit Civic code, can you imagine what will happen to people's privacy if CIvic was hacked, because one thing I know any thing that is hack-able will be hacked, it is just a matter of when
Buyed some more, had a buy order at lower price that triggered tonight.
LoL try to find it out. A system secured by that assumption that nobody will leak or share public keys ^^
Sounds like fud to me...
Wouldn't be easy to find out who leaked their key? That's theft of service basically.
LoL try to find it out. A system secured by that assumption that nobody will leak or share public keys ^^
Wouldn't be easy to find out who leaked their key? That's theft of service basically.
I'm pretty sure that this is an exploit of civic. According to the whitepaper this expoit is easily possible and in theory cannot be avoided. In addition to that flaw airports will never except an identity that an user has made of a photo off his passport and is verified by some cheesy verification company instead of a goverment issued passport with live-security-symbol.
Q:
The attestation is nothing but a hash of the PII + signature of the validator. So if a service provider needs to verify somebody he could just ask another service provider give me the public key of the validator and then just look at the blockchain and verify it himself without paying something in a smart contract.
Example: Service providers could just share all public keys that they have (lets say on a website where all service providers register their known information, public key = validator). And when they then receive a PII from user they could just try to decrypt every attestation on the blockchain and check if the plain text of that decrypted text includes a hash that matches the hash of the PII that he has received from user. Like that service providers would lower their costs massivly and validators provit would decrease massivly.
Isn't that a HUGE problem? Normally in order to get this adopted goverments should join the party as validators. And the whitepaper states on page 13 paragraph 2 "Civic's ecosystem will be designed to incentivice participation of trustworthy IDV providers known as validators, wo may be include financial instiutations, goverments....". How do they want incentive them? The will earn not much if the service providers share there keys and everything is visible on the blockchain.
The attestation is nothing but a hash of the PII + signature of the validator. So if a service provider needs to verify somebody he could just ask another service provider give me the public key of the validator and then just look at the blockchain and verify it himself without paying something in a smart contract.
Example: Service providers could just share all public keys that they have (lets say on a website where all service providers register their known information, public key = validator). And when they then receive a PII from user they could just try to decrypt every attestation on the blockchain and check if the plain text of that decrypted text includes a hash that matches the hash of the PII that he has received from user. Like that service providers would lower their costs massivly and validators provit would decrease massivly.
Isn't that a HUGE problem? Normally in order to get this adopted goverments should join the party as validators. And the whitepaper states on page 13 paragraph 2 "Civic's ecosystem will be designed to incentivice participation of trustworthy IDV providers known as validators, wo may be include financial instiutations, goverments....". How do they want incentive them? The will earn not much if the service providers share there keys and everything is visible on the blockchain.
Why would anyone share their keys for free if they could get paid to share them?
If one service provider has the key he could just share them with other paid or not paid. This is not avoidable that your key as a validator will get public someday, maybe somebody posts it on the internet or tells it somebody else.
Q:
The attestation is nothing but a hash of the PII + signature of the validator. So if a service provider needs to verify somebody he could just ask another service provider give me the public key of the validator and then just look at the blockchain and verify it himself without paying something in a smart contract.
Example: Service providers could just share all public keys that they have (lets say on a website where all service providers register their known information, public key = validator). And when they then receive a PII from user they could just try to decrypt every attestation on the blockchain and check if the plain text of that decrypted text includes a hash that matches the hash of the PII that he has received from user. Like that service providers would lower their costs massivly and validators provit would decrease massivly.
Isn't that a HUGE problem? Normally in order to get this adopted goverments should join the party as validators. And the whitepaper states on page 13 paragraph 2 "Civic's ecosystem will be designed to incentivice participation of trustworthy IDV providers known as validators, wo may be include financial instiutations, goverments....". How do they want incentive them? The will earn not much if the service providers share there keys and everything is visible on the blockchain.
The attestation is nothing but a hash of the PII + signature of the validator. So if a service provider needs to verify somebody he could just ask another service provider give me the public key of the validator and then just look at the blockchain and verify it himself without paying something in a smart contract.
Example: Service providers could just share all public keys that they have (lets say on a website where all service providers register their known information, public key = validator). And when they then receive a PII from user they could just try to decrypt every attestation on the blockchain and check if the plain text of that decrypted text includes a hash that matches the hash of the PII that he has received from user. Like that service providers would lower their costs massivly and validators provit would decrease massivly.
Isn't that a HUGE problem? Normally in order to get this adopted goverments should join the party as validators. And the whitepaper states on page 13 paragraph 2 "Civic's ecosystem will be designed to incentivice participation of trustworthy IDV providers known as validators, wo may be include financial instiutations, goverments....". How do they want incentive them? The will earn not much if the service providers share there keys and everything is visible on the blockchain.
Why would anyone share their keys for free if they could get paid to share them?
Q:
The attestation is nothing but a hash of the PII + signature of the validator. So if a service provider needs to verify somebody he could just ask another service provider give me the public key of the validator and then just look at the blockchain and verify it himself without paying something in a smart contract.
Example: Service providers could just share all public keys that they have (lets say on a website where all service providers register their known information, public key = validator). And when they then receive a PII from user they could just try to decrypt every attestation on the blockchain and check if the plain text of that decrypted text includes a hash that matches the hash of the PII that he has received from user. Like that service providers would lower their costs massivly and validators provit would decrease massivly.
Isn't that a HUGE problem? Normally in order to get this adopted goverments should join the party as validators. And the whitepaper states on page 13 paragraph 2 "Civic's ecosystem will be designed to incentivice participation of trustworthy IDV providers known as validators, wo may be include financial instiutations, goverments....". How do they want incentive them? The will earn not much if the service providers share there keys and everything is visible on the blockchain.
The attestation is nothing but a hash of the PII + signature of the validator. So if a service provider needs to verify somebody he could just ask another service provider give me the public key of the validator and then just look at the blockchain and verify it himself without paying something in a smart contract.
Example: Service providers could just share all public keys that they have (lets say on a website where all service providers register their known information, public key = validator). And when they then receive a PII from user they could just try to decrypt every attestation on the blockchain and check if the plain text of that decrypted text includes a hash that matches the hash of the PII that he has received from user. Like that service providers would lower their costs massivly and validators provit would decrease massivly.
Isn't that a HUGE problem? Normally in order to get this adopted goverments should join the party as validators. And the whitepaper states on page 13 paragraph 2 "Civic's ecosystem will be designed to incentivice participation of trustworthy IDV providers known as validators, wo may be include financial instiutations, goverments....". How do they want incentive them? The will earn not much if the service providers share there keys and everything is visible on the blockchain.
Its crazy how many people invest in a project without doing some good research
Curious about how the 660 000 000 millions coins left out off the circulation for now will be integrated into the system ?!?!
That is a lot of coins... no ?!??!
That is a lot of coins... no ?!??!
I have also been concerned about the disbursement of the giant pile of "digital tokens" you're probably tripping over at the office. Do they get in your way.....or is there a nice cleaning lady to stack them neatly for you? Either way.....it'd really be bangin' if you could try to not crash the market....ya know? Thanks yo.
Curious about how the 660 000 000 millions coins left out off the circulation for now will be integrated into the system ?!?!
That is a lot of coins... no ?!??!
That is a lot of coins... no ?!??!
Quote
vinnylingham re: BIP148 - we will make a decision closer to the time, but we are aware of the options.
It's a bigger issue for Bitcoin than for Civic, tbh.
Civic is not yet open source - eventually one day, it will be. Open sourcing security software in the early days is very risky
It's a bigger issue for Bitcoin than for Civic, tbh.
Civic is not yet open source - eventually one day, it will be. Open sourcing security software in the early days is very risky
-- Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/ArkEcosystem/comments/6fw0un/log_of_ama_with_civic_by_vinny_lingham/?st=j3nih9dl&sh=5aacd533
Is Civic open source in the meantime? I think it's a huge barrier for people to enter an identidy security platform when it is no open source. I mean that is simply not acceptable from my point of view. I mean you don't know anyway what Mr. validator does with your PII, but that's why you only confirm validators that you trust. But like this I have to trust a startup that writes some software.
It's not open source. Team doesn't want competitors to know the source. Maybe some day they will go open source!
Store data encrypted in a non open source programm does make not much sense to me. Furthermore non open source identity security is also a big issue.
I don't rely thing most people understand what Civic project is all about, it all stands against what Crypto stands for and Governement can and come in and ask Civic team to supply them their users information like COinbase and won't have any other option but to comply
However if crypto is to be adopted to the mainstream it will need to be regulated. This is why Civic is crucial is getting mass adoption. Plus civic provide better security for future launch. Like it or not Civic will be huge no doubt!!!!
I am curious how all these regulations will work out. The interesting thing I see is while regulators are now dealing with potential regulation for BTC, new protocols like Zcash are on the way to make it even impossible to track anything. I can hardly imagine what the world will be looking like in 10-15 years from now should all these crazy innovations become pervasive reality.
Jump to: