Topic: Bitcoinica lost 43,554 BTC from Linode compromise, suspicious TXIDs publicized (Read 56430 times)
May 28, 2015, 11:29:10 PM
Isn't it a little early for Halloween boys?
May 28, 2015, 07:53:27 PM
I just want to note that after MtGox got severely hacked, it became one of the most secure Bitcoin exchanges out there.
Lol the irony.
May 28, 2015, 10:40:28 AM
Sorry to necro a topic but I have had to block Off Topic due to all the rubbish so just wanted to find a topic that mentioned Linode as it is not specific otherwise to this post.
I have recently moved ciyam.org to Linode and have found in doing so that if I attempt Google searches from ciyam.org that they are being blocked by Google.
This is apparently because Linode is blanket banned by Google due to web-scrapers using them, yet Linode denies this (despite many links you can find showing this) and Linode instead blames their customers for any problems that they have trying to use Google (so it should be believable that one is blocked making one single query via Google through a Linode for "some reason" when one is able to do the identical query through other VPS services without being blocked?).
Personally it is not surprising to now see why so much BTC was lost to Linode as this is a company that fails to take *any responsibility* itself but tries to push that all onto its clients.
I have recently moved ciyam.org to Linode and have found in doing so that if I attempt Google searches from ciyam.org that they are being blocked by Google.
This is apparently because Linode is blanket banned by Google due to web-scrapers using them, yet Linode denies this (despite many links you can find showing this) and Linode instead blames their customers for any problems that they have trying to use Google (so it should be believable that one is blocked making one single query via Google through a Linode for "some reason" when one is able to do the identical query through other VPS services without being blocked?).
Personally it is not surprising to now see why so much BTC was lost to Linode as this is a company that fails to take *any responsibility* itself but tries to push that all onto its clients.
March 07, 2012, 11:20:25 PM
Hahahahaha. Thanks for the tips. Should be bookmarked and stickied!
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
March 07, 2012, 10:37:12 PM
I wrote how to avoid such sutuations:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/my-tips-to-secure-external-bitcoind-67787
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/my-tips-to-secure-external-bitcoind-67787
Your hindsight is remarkable sir!
March 07, 2012, 10:28:35 PM
I wrote how to avoid such sutuations:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/my-tips-to-secure-external-bitcoind-67787
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/my-tips-to-secure-external-bitcoind-67787
March 07, 2012, 07:40:17 AM
Here is my question. Why was it ever a good idea to be running a site like this where someone else has access to your machine? These types of operations should be run from locked up racks.
This is what I first thought when I heard about the Linode hack. It stunned me that people would run these kinds of things from low-end virtual servers. But it just happened that I always worked for companies that were ISPs, had ISP businesses, or had server infrastructure that pre-dated easy virtualization. I was quite surprised to find that use of virtual servers for business-critical infrastructure and highly-sensitive information is now quite common. I'm still not sure how I feel about it.It's not just low-end or high-end VPS. The cloud is just as susceptible to a crime like this, no matter how expensive your instance is.
People seem to have forgotten that some info is private beyond stamping an EULA and saying "you cannot copy this." Let's not get started about the cloud and social networks... the stupidity of the mass is just astonishing. You just have to make something look normal on the surface and they will stop questioning it.
March 07, 2012, 12:44:23 AM
Here is my question. Why was it ever a good idea to be running a site like this where someone else has access to your machine? These types of operations should be run from locked up racks.
This is what I first thought when I heard about the Linode hack. It stunned me that people would run these kinds of things from low-end virtual servers. But it just happened that I always worked for companies that were ISPs, had ISP businesses, or had server infrastructure that pre-dated easy virtualization. I was quite surprised to find that use of virtual servers for business-critical infrastructure and highly-sensitive information is now quite common. I'm still not sure how I feel about it. 
March 07, 2012, 12:37:20 AM
Out of curiosity, I analyzed some of the transactions on the blockchain following the theft. It's my opinion that a small amount of tainted coins (100) were moved to the Virwox exchange shortly after the theft. Being a Virwox customer, I deduced this through knowledge of typical Virwox transactions, and not with any actual confirmation, so I could be mistaken.
March 06, 2012, 04:23:01 AM
Yes, that is it, thanks! Totally forgot that I tried that site. Apologies for the undue paranoia.
I use a different receiving address for every site I use. Then when coins arrive in my wallet I can instantly tell who sent them. For example, only sealswithclubs.org knows the address I use when I'm withdrawing from sealswithclubs.org, and it's labelled in my wallet as "sealswithclubs.org". The address in my signature here is only ever in my signature, and is labelled "bitcointalk forum donation".
March 06, 2012, 04:18:52 AM
Edit: It looks like someone is sending out small amounts of bitcoin to a large number of public addresses in alphabetical order...I think I just got tainted...
But those coins aren't tainted. At least not from the linode theft.
'Only' these 1062 addresses contain coins from the linode theft: http://privatepaste.com/ce5905880d
My guess would be that this transaction was made by http://dailybitcoins.org/ - do you use them?
dailybitcoins.org:
* sends out their payments around 3am (your transaction was at 2012-03-06 03:55:43)
* mostly sends out 0.001 bitcoins, almost never less, with a few bigger (yours has 55 of 0.001, 24 of 0.005, 1 of 0.015 and some change)
* puts the addresses in alphabetical order
* usually has 81 outputs in their transactions (your transaction in blockexplorer: http://blockexplorer.com/tx/de3177f4e929d4deb1984889aa7ad79fd2e78075e41babbda23315bb5135e71f - has 81 outputs)
I think it's a pretty good guess that it's them.
Yes, that is it, thanks! Totally forgot that I tried that site. Apologies for the undue paranoia.
March 06, 2012, 03:12:22 AM
The more layers of complexity, the less people will use Bitcoins. And remember that the average Joe's Bitcoin client doesn't allow you to select the addresses you are sending from.
March 06, 2012, 02:53:52 AM
Edit: It looks like someone is sending out small amounts of bitcoin to a large number of public addresses in alphabetical order...I think I just got tainted...
But those coins aren't tainted. At least not from the linode theft.
'Only' these 1062 addresses contain coins from the linode theft: http://privatepaste.com/ce5905880d
My guess would be that this transaction was made by http://dailybitcoins.org/ - do you use them?
dailybitcoins.org:
* sends out their payments around 3am (your transaction was at 2012-03-06 03:55:43)
* mostly sends out 0.001 bitcoins, almost never less, with a few bigger (yours has 55 of 0.001, 24 of 0.005, 1 of 0.015 and some change)
* puts the addresses in alphabetical order
* usually has 81 outputs in their transactions (your transaction in blockexplorer: http://blockexplorer.com/tx/de3177f4e929d4deb1984889aa7ad79fd2e78075e41babbda23315bb5135e71f - has 81 outputs)
I think it's a pretty good guess that it's them.
March 05, 2012, 11:41:38 PM
http://blockchain.info/tx-index/3059769/de3177f4e929d4deb1984889aa7ad79fd2e78075e41babbda23315bb5135e71f
Edit: It looks like someone is sending out small amounts of bitcoin to a large number of public addresses in alphabetical order...I think I just got tainted...
Nevermind, I am unduely paranoid.
March 05, 2012, 10:21:40 PM
Here is my question. Why was it ever a good idea to be running a site like this where someone else has access to your machine? These types of operations should be run from locked up racks.
March 05, 2012, 08:36:35 PM
+1 to zhoutong. Respect.
Given the community collectively has a massive amount of skilled IT resource available. Why not put up some kind of community raised bounty for those 'skilled enough' to expose the thief.
I wonder if any of the 'anonymous' crowd would like some work...
Given the community collectively has a massive amount of skilled IT resource available. Why not put up some kind of community raised bounty for those 'skilled enough' to expose the thief.
I wonder if any of the 'anonymous' crowd would like some work...
March 04, 2012, 01:14:19 PM
How can you reimburse that much? Have you really made that much profit?
Yes, our historical profit is fairly sufficient to cover the loss from this incident, and we believe that it's the best interest for the community to keep running the business. We will take appropriate strategies and implement more security features to prevent this from happening ever again, even with the presence of dishonest partners or employees.
in fees (https://www.bitcoinica.com/ bottom page) and allows leveraged trading (buying/selling more bitcoins/dollars than you actually have). So when a guy like this short sells for $130,000 worth of bitcoins, Bitcoinica makes around $1500 in, quite literally, no time.
Bitcoinica spreads take the market depth into account. We don't charge fees directly. Most of the time, trading on Bitcoinica is just slightly more expensive than Mt. Gox for heavy traders (who pay 0.3% at Mt. Gox), and usually cheaper for infrequent traders.
March 04, 2012, 09:18:00 AM
How can you reimburse that much? Have you really made that much profit?
Yes, our historical profit is fairly sufficient to cover the loss from this incident, and we believe that it's the best interest for the community to keep running the business. We will take appropriate strategies and implement more security features to prevent this from happening ever again, even with the presence of dishonest partners or employees.
in fees (https://www.bitcoinica.com/ bottom page) and allows leveraged trading (buying/selling more bitcoins/dollars than you actually have). So when a guy like this short sells for $130,000 worth of bitcoins, Bitcoinica makes around $1500 in, quite literally, no time.
I just want to note that after MtGox got severely hacked, it became one of the most secure Bitcoin exchanges out there.
I was wondering about that, being one of the people whose account was hacked. How do you know this?I'm not saying Mt. Gox isn't secure though, please don't misunderstand me. I'm just saying we have no way of knowing - with absolute certainty - if they are. I think this is a relevant point.
Many people thought the Titanic was unable to sink. Until it sank.
March 04, 2012, 04:23:09 AM
I just want to note that after MtGox got severely hacked, it became one of the most secure Bitcoin exchanges out there.
I was wondering about that, being one of the people whose account was hacked. How do you know this? March 03, 2012, 03:55:35 PM
How can you reimburse that much? Have you really made that much profit?
Yes, our historical profit is fairly sufficient to cover the loss from this incident, and we believe that it's the best interest for the community to keep running the business. We will take appropriate strategies and implement more security features to prevent this from happening ever again, even with the presence of dishonest partners or employees.
I am wondering why somemany bitcoin people used that hoster. There are thousands of hoster.
Bitcoinica is leveraged as compared to MtGox. I have a lot of respect for you, ZT.
Jump to: