Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 1335. (Read 3917468 times)

The transaction between myself and friedcat hadn't been finalized.

How does this give a 3000+ dollar debt to the issuer? Wouldn't they be ambivalent to share sales not involving them?

Edit:  Session Fixation attacks, based on my cursory understanding, would not be limited by the use of 2FA.
However, after the compromise I both enabled 2FA and deposited some BTC in the account.  BTC is still there.
It's just unclear what happened.  Buyer beware.

Hello, everyone.

I wanted to let everyone know about the compromise of my GLBSE account on 8/23.

The price dip for ASICMINER indeed resulted from the compromise of my account.  3000 shares were sold at 17:00 GLBSE time (?) for approximately 23 BTC.

The most important message I have for you is that GLBSE is not secure without 2FA enabled.  I had recently created the GLBSE account for the specific purpose of owning ASICMINER.  The account was created on a system lacking any prior security compromises.  The account password was a new, unused 14 character, mixed case, mixed character class.  

Taking responsibility for the fact 2FA was not enabled on my account contributed to the theft of the shares.  On the flip side of this GLBSE is a dangerous place for the uninitiated with Google 2FA.  I say this since my impression was that Google 2FA was only available to smart phone users.  This is why I didn't use it.

Nefario has investigated GLBSE logs in attempt to establish any pattern or method used to compromise the account.  Nefario's judgement is that it is unclear how my account was compromised.  Nefario gave no further  information regarding IP accesses, but only suggested that:



There are a number of possible reactions to what I've said.  Such as,

1.  Use 2FA, stupid.
My use case is pretty clearly stated above.  If you don't tell users it's dangerous not to use 2FA, and at the same time not provide the links to any necessary security software that is 3rd party OSS and not supplied by Google directly, then there is a certain element of negligence on the part of GLBSE.

In fact, if it's so dangerous, evidenced by my predicament, GLBSE should not allow account creations without the use of the Google 2FA.

2.  GLBSE negligence you say?  Hog-wash.  
No, GLBSE is a financial institution and should not leave it's users unaware and unprepared - which, yes, requires a higher level of user notification and security requirements - only to be raped.

Food for thought.  Do you think Bank of America Web portals are vulnerable to Nefario's suggestion of Session Fixation?  If that were the case my BoA account would be f'ed right now.
It isn't.  And none of any other my important online accounts have been tampered with.


Nefario's position is the same as past incidents of this nature involving shareholders.  I presented the option to Nefario of me reimbursing those who purchased the ASICMINER shares as a result of the compromise in exchange for the recall/reversal of the share sale.  Nefario declined any share reversals.  

A 22 BTC theft costing me both a good investment opportunity and a $3000+ debt to the security issuer.


I sincerely wish ASICMINER success.  Enjoy my the cheap shares.  

Give him a few days. You were correct in assessing that the "extra shares" are the 10% bonuses. However not all 200K shares were distributed, which is why at the end there will still be some shares leftover, which will get distributed to shareholders after all accounts are settled. If you didn't receive your bonus and you are a block buyer you need to PM him.

Ooooh, I did not read that in the post you link to


In his last post today Friedcat said:


I assumed those shares were the 'extra' free shares block buyers were promised (I did not receive any extra shares today )

So I am still a bit confused...

The difference gets distributed to existing shareholders.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1107204

Congrats !

So what is the next step ?

Design ready to go to the foundry ? Or how does this work ?

edit: how many shares have been sold in total? What will happen with the remainder (if total sold <200K) or will Bitfountain hold a matching number of shares, so ASICMINER / Bitfountain is still 50% /  50% holding ?

Congrats to everyone on a successful IPO!

Update

All pending orders are either executed or cancelled. There is still one trade unpaid yet.

The IPO is finally closed. Extra shares have been sent. Please check, and contact me if there's any mistakes. Thanks.

Glad it passed. Have the coins been sold yet to raise the capital?

No. midterm the most (because of the need to break even with hardware, or sell it at the right time). Miners who hold on to their BTC are investors, but they don't have to be.

I figured anybody who's investing in an ASIC operation would be aware of this, but I'll spell it out for you:
The incentive structure of mining dictates that it will sooner or later become a sustenance business with low profit margins. The reason why some people still make considerable profit (and others don't) is because the technology spread is so large. The miners with the best hardware and the largest competitive advantage make the most profit. And as long as we haven't hit the technological barrier (found the most efficient solution) miners constantly have to adapt their operation to stay competitive.

As such ASICminer is in a perfect position. It fuels the need for miners to stay competitive, and gets a piece of the action. If done right the company can get a foothold in the sustained development and supply of mining hardware and equipment. This is an attractive place to be in because the need to stay competitive for miners won't go anywhere soon.

Like it or not, this operation needs fiat money to start production of the ASIC

In order to get that fiat coins need to be sold

That leaves this company with the question:

Do we sell coins at this exchange rate so we can definitely start in 2 weeks or do we wait 2 weeks and possibly have a different rate, which might make it easier (higher exchange rate) or not possible (lower exchange rate) to start the operation

From a business standpoint it is a no-brainer: sell as many coins as we need at this exchange rate to get the ASIC from the foundry

If there is NO ASIC there's no mining operation and no hardware selling company... period

I'm appreciative of the transparency of the operation thus far, friedcat. Respectable Bitcoin companies offering public shares should look at ASICMINER and follow suit.

Keep it up!

Also, are you planning on trading the 8000 BTC on an exchange, or finding a private party who wants to buy? According to ClarkMoody, selling 8000 on MtGox right now at $10.5 would net $82183.90, with slippage of $1816.25. Selling privately for $10.5 would get $84000, but price could drop before finding somebody... hmm...

Mining bitcoins is an investment in to bitcoin in long term.

not to self: log in to bitcointalk more often. i totally missed this. (me and my five shares totally matter. )

Update

The motion has been passed.

Voted Yea:46649
Voted Nay:17439

8,000 BTC will be exchanged for fiat within a relatively short time. We will not dump too fast if the bid wall is not thick enough.

When we start to pay for our expenses, the financials will be given to the public, while details of each spending will be given to board members.

You could take out a fiat based investment loan and use the 8000btc as collateral placed on deposit with Patrick Harnett. This way you get the fiat and keep the bitcoins.

It wouldn't be shorting the asset. It would be transferring value to a more stable priced asset in anticipation of volatility.  You can be long on bitcoin and mining but still understand volatility is a short term factor in the success or failure of this security.

Read the OP from HorseRider. ASICMiner is not a BTC investment fund. It's a hardware company. And as such it has to act accordingly, which includes minimize the risk of bankruptcy or failure to attract the necessary funds for strategic operations.

I voted no, shorting assets on an operation that in essence has it's position in regard to bitcoin long seems like the worst move I've ever heard.