Topic: Bitcointalk Escrows - Trade Safely! - page 15. (Read 108383 times)

Ok, but why should the buyer take the risk to lose twice the amount of coins, not receiving goods AND being extorted by the seller afterwards? As buyer I would not take that risk since we would not at the same risk levels then.

I now read DannyHamilton mentioned the seller has to deposit the price of the item to the escrow address too? So seller sends amount x and buyer amount 2x?

You say your reputation is tarnished... well that doesn't matter for new accounts. And many trades happen with fresh accounts to stay anonymous.


Well, the normal traders would always find a less risky option than trading with that plan. Which I think is the general problem with your plan. It's risky for both sides. No one observing and no one to fear by the scammer. Even reputated members would be at risk. Scams in that might happen a couple of times and if the scammer is a good actor, or prepared himself, then there are chances the forum believes the scammer and the reputation is gone.

All escrow agents were from this list and they were more reputable (according to the trust rating) than You:

  1. redsn0w https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10010518.
  2. (or 4, and finally 5) master-P https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/master-p-scammer-i-lost-complete-faith-in-this-forum-now-1306301.
~3. escrow.ms, possible as a consequence https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/removal-of-escrowms-update-recommend-users-for-dt-2-as-escrowms-is-removed-1359877.
  4. Maidak https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/maidak-scammed-me-400-btcthis-time-is-for-sure-1077982.
  5. Same as 2.

P.S. Maybe I forgot somebody.
P.P.S. So, this "escrows list" is a bullshit, like as the forum "trust rating system".

Just my comments:
1. Unlikely to happen. Yes, possible, but unlikely, at least for the more reputable escrows here.
2. Unlikely to happen. Most decent escrows, while not immune to being hacked, have taken precautions to prevent being hacked.
3. Same as 2.
4. I've only known of a small handful, but they were not trusted to begin with, so I don't know why other people went with them.
5. One very reputable escrow did disappear, but he did come back and fix things. Some of us have lives outside this forum.


All the other topics I've read so far up to this point, in this thread, have been interesting reading. Go on, continue your discussions.

Not necessary. All you need is just to proclaim in advance, that you will always punish the scammer, and be tough. I do not think that after that, you will find someone who will check you out... The scammers will always try to find a less risky options.

This is how psychology works.

But only by punishing yourself.

This is how extortion works.

In this case your punishment is twice as bad as the scammers.  If you want to reduce the punishment that you feel, you can only do it by giving in to the scammer and allowing him to win.  If the scammer gets punished for doing wrong, then the honest person gets punished twice as much.

DannyHamilton

Thank you for your post, it actually shows how much freedom gives this scheme to the escrow parties.

I:
Before to claim something we need to have irrefutable proof or to have a good reputation, otherwise our words will be empty.

You get to keep the product but lose twice as much as it costs.

II:
You will lose not only 1 BTC, but also your reputation (that was claimed above) which is usually worth more than a single purchase.


What is important:

1) no matter what I choose, it will be my decision (based on the truth), and only I will responsible for it;
2) in any possible scenario I will have a chance to punish the scammer.

Serge V.


Lets imagine a scenario here...

Lets say you have a product that I want to buy.  You are willing to sell it for 1 BTC.

I send 2 BTC to the 2-of-2 bitcoin address, and you send 1 BTC to the 2-of-2 bitcoin address.

Then you send me the product.

When the product arrives, I claim that the box is empty (I'm lying, but nobody other than you knows that) and I demand that you release my 2 BTC back to me.  I accuse you as a scammer in the forum.

Do you:

• Release the full 2 BTC back to me, so that your reputation isn't damaged and you can continue to sell other things in the forum?
• Negotiate with me and attempt to release less than 2 BTC (but more than 1 BTC) back to me
• Refuse to release anything to me and lose both your product AND your 1 BTC?

No matter which you choose, I get to keep the product and you lose both your product and your money.

Now, lets look at a similar situation from the other side...

Lets say I have a product that you want to buy.  You are willing to pay 1 BTC for it.

I send 1 BTC to the 2-of-2 bitcoin address, and you send 2 BTC to the 2-of-2 bitcoin address.

Then I send an empty box to you.

When the box arrives, you claim that the box is empty.  I state that I carefully sealed the product in the box before shipping it and that you must be lying (I'm lying, but nobody other than you knows that).  I accuse you of attempting to scam me and I demand that you release 2 BTC to me (my 1 BTC collateral and 1 BTC for the product that I claim I shipped).

Do you:

• Release the full 2 BTC to me, so that your reputation isn't damaged and you can continue to buy other things in the forum?
• Negotiate with me and attempt to release less than 2 BTC (but more than 1 BTC) back to me
• Refuse to release anything to me and lose 2 BTC?

No matter which you choose, you lose some of your money.  I *might* lose 1 BTC, but if I can get more than 50% of my victims to just release to me then I come out ahead.

Yes, but as you can see, the buyer is not interested do not release the funds, but the opposite, he is financially motivated to unlock them.

In a normal escrow scenario the escrow agent can: 1) make a mistake (a human factor), 2) be hacked, 3) be physically compromised, 4) scam the buyer and the seller (as it usually happens here) or 5) just simply disappear (for any reason)... So, what will you choose?

So if the buyer refuses to release the funds, then will the funds be stuck for ever?

In a normal escrow scenario then will the escrow arbitrate between the buyer and the seller, if a settlement is not possible then will the funds be released to the part with the most convincing prof.

I mean the coins on the MultiSig address, where the buyer locks up twice as much as the seller. In case when the buyer refuses to release the funds, he gets the goods (1x) but loses twice more coins than this goods worth (2x), his profit is x-2x=-x - not the best situation to lay down the conditions... Yes, for the seller the situation is not better, but at least he will have the chance to punish the scammer and leave him without his money, and I am sure, after that, the buyer will never try to repeat this scenario.

Serge V.



I thought your scenario contains an escrow. Which would make it a 2 of 3 multisig. Though 2 of 2 holds the risk of getting extortet.


I don't know what you mean. It surely won't help if someone tells the buyer that he has a small brain. He would have your coins hostage. And why can he lose twice more coins than the seller? He received his goods already from the seller but he decided to get half of his coins in escrow back. Nothing the seller can do except giving in when the buyer created the deal with a newbie account. He would not care about red trust on that account.

---

Ralobot.com


Yes you are right. I try to hold both items when it is possible. Though that is not possible with some accounts because they might get banned because of different ip logins and password changes and such.

And for physical goods it is hard because additional shipping costs, time delay and such. So the trading partners would decide to lower cost and time. Though maybe I should stress the risk more in these cases.

Well and receiving digital money, you are right there too, fiat and so on is something an escrow can not receive because of risks of receiving carded or phished amounts.

Though when I already started to point out risks and claim that I can't back them, I might do it correctly on all trades in the future. Not only certain types.

I think the the buyer can refuse to release the funds only in one situation, if he is oligophrenic person with defective brain (like some subjects here) has a problem with logic, because in this situation he can lose twice more coins than the seller.

So how does the seller get his funds if the buyer refuses to release in this situation? That's what breaks your logic. And yes it would be nice to have people that are honest and all. But a scammer in this situation would talk you into that logic.

Serge V. The Stupid, i wonder how your little brain works (Are you a cartoon character?) f****k u anyways:   You dont know shit about shit so shuuuuu plz... tits brain

Seb look : If you want to offer a 99.99% safe escrow service than the ONLY way is to be a point of verification witch means all trades (Goods or digital goods) must be sent to YOU from both seller & the buyer (To your home or to your wallets) , than after you check , release to both dealers at the same time.  (+ a signed message).

My last words : escrow cant offer a 100% safe deal and i think u already know .... but 99.99% is good, just becarefull from receiving things to ur home or wallets ....

According to my scheme/scenario there is no third party, the address is created only from the buyer and the seller public keys, so it is 2-of-2 MultiSig. The buyer can not scam the seller because he locks up twice as much as the seller, so he is motivated to be honest.

Serge, it's a little bit funny that you quoted a sentence that he did not wrote against third party escrows but against multisignature escrowing. Though that is the solution you come up with.


Yes, an escrow is a point of failure but the same is true for your scenario. You only need one of these scammy escrows or a hacked escrow account and you already have zero security from that 2of3 multisig that you described. The scammer would initiate a trade with an altaccount, deal as the escrow and screw the other trading partner because the scammer already holds 2 of the keys to release the coins to himself.

I did not have seen yet a fully safe scenario there too. You could involve more than one escrows though that would mean more time it takes, more work and maybe higher fees. For more security though.

Still an escrow is needed for negotiating while problems. With 2 of 2 you run into the risk that one of your trading partners claim you did send something wrong or that he threatens you to not release the coins until you agree to pay half of the price back.

It's often suggested but it is only a partly solution for some problems and many remain unsolved or other attack vectors are there.

I am not miswrote. There are a lot of examples here proved that a third party always will be the weak link in any deal. And some of you already can agree with it.


I'm always wonder how somebody still use the third party escrow in our community when the bitcoin protocol already gives more higher level of security than can give any trusted escrow. Very sad, that people can not understand, that more mature escrow service and longer history can not protect them from human error, hacking/physical compromising, from disappearing of the agent or the scam from his side...

Here is an example of the escrow scheme that motivates scammer to be honest to his trading partner:
1. The escrow agent creates a transaction, according to which the buyer collateral & the buyer payment for goods (2x) + the seller collateral (1x) will be sent to the created from their public keys MultiSig address.
2. The buyer and the seller checks and sign the transaction, the transaction is broadcasted to the network.
3. After the transaction is confirmed, the seller sends the goods to the buyer.
4. The buyer receives the goods and informs the escrow agent.
5. The escrow agent creates the transaction, according to which the seller will receive the seller collateral & the buyer payment for goods (2x) and the buyer will receive the buyer collateral (1x).
6. The seller and the buyer checks and sign the transaction, the transaction is broadcasted to the network.

Actually, this scheme will encourage both sides to be honest, and if something happens with the parcel to conduct a thorough investigation and find the consensus.

ezeminer



Believe me, I often enough think of giving up. The time involved is high, the reward miniscule and not seldom you get a promise for a tip but no tip at all at the end.

And yes, many escrows gave up already... I'm sure they enjoy the free time they have now... haven't really lost much from that.

Though without escrows the scamsituation on here would be way way worse.

---

Serge V.



I wonder if you are new on here or if your english is only that bad that you miswrote what you meant. I doubt that you really believe that a scammer can be motivated to be honest to his trading partner.

Without escrows the situation on bitcointalk would be way way worse. You never notice it because so many scams are stopped in the beginning only because an escrow is mentioned, then another big bunch when the escrow gets involved and alot of deals end before the escrow got released because before that doubts appear or a clear accusation comes into.

Well, I think you miswrote... or you somehow managed to never get scammed.

The best way to make the deal safe is to motivate both parties to be honest each with other and eliminate the third side that can make responsible decisions (such as escrow agent).

That's pretty much the reason I wouldn't escrow, and probably other members as well. There are just too many frauds that go on in the forum, and people that want to rip off someone else.