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

picolo

hero member

Activity: 1022

Merit: 500

Quote from: opossum on January 15, 2015, 05:15:01 AM

Quote from: jbreher on January 14, 2015, 02:03:40 AM

Quote from: ChuckBuck on January 13, 2015, 05:21:50 PM

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.

opossum

hero member

Activity: 924

Merit: 1000

Quote from: jbreher on January 14, 2015, 02:03:40 AM

Quote from: ChuckBuck on January 13, 2015, 05:21:50 PM

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

hero member

Activity: 1022

Merit: 500

Quote from: jbreher on January 14, 2015, 02:03:40 AM

Quote from: ChuckBuck on January 13, 2015, 05:21:50 PM

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.

jbreher

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 1660

lose: unfind ... loose: untight

Quote from: ChuckBuck on January 13, 2015, 05:21:50 PM

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?

Sejuani

newbie

Activity: 55

Merit: 0

Quote from: redsn0w on January 13, 2015, 03:45:52 PM

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.

ChuckBuck

hero member

Activity: 1372

Merit: 783

better everyday ♥

Quote from: jbreher on January 13, 2015, 03:41:08 PM

Quote from: ChuckBuck on January 13, 2015, 03:31:51 PM

... 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.

picolo

hero member

Activity: 1022

Merit: 500

Quote from: AwesomeTRADER on January 11, 2015, 01:46:50 AM

Quote from: LiteCoinGuy on January 06, 2015, 07:36:30 AM

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.

redsn0w

legendary

Activity: 1778

Merit: 1043

#Free market

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

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

jbreher

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 1660

lose: unfind ... loose: untight

Quote from: ChuckBuck on January 13, 2015, 03:31:51 PM

... 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.

ChuckBuck

hero member

Activity: 1372

Merit: 783

better everyday ♥

Quote from: Ryze on January 13, 2015, 02:49:42 PM

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

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.

Ryze

member

Activity: 83

Merit: 10

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

forbesmining

full member

Activity: 297

Merit: 100

Bitstamp i̶s̶ was one of the best exchanges.

jackyrozario

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

Bitstamp is one of the best Exchange.

AwesomeTRADER

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 250

Quote from: LiteCoinGuy on January 06, 2015, 07:36:30 AM

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

fonenumba

full member

Activity: 411

Merit: 100

Quote from: izanagi narukami on January 07, 2015, 11:18:19 PM

This is the reason why bitcoin keep decreasing ? Huh

because the lack of security...

The price of bitcoin actually spiked when bitstamp opened back up.....to almost $300 (although it did subsequently fall to ~270)

izanagi narukami

legendary

Activity: 2030

Merit: 1028

This is the reason why bitcoin keep decreasing ? Huh

because the lack of security...

fonenumba

full member

Activity: 411

Merit: 100

Quote from: newIndia on January 07, 2015, 04:31:48 PM

Quote from: firewire2013 on January 07, 2015, 04:06:40 PM

I don’t understand why the coins can’t be traced to the hackers.

If Bitcoin address 1234 sells to 4321 and 4321 sells to 100 other wallets, when those 100 wallets dump to an exchange can't the police just trace it back to the source?

I think there should be a credentials checking system for creating wallets, for example when someone sign’s up for a wallet they provide ID, the crypto addresses that are created from the wallet are then legally binding to that person. This ID information is not publically available, but instead locked up within the Bitcoin network protocol. Ok, I understand there will be some level of administration and the whole process will need to be automated as much as possible to reduce cost overhead. In the same way Bitcoin transactions are processed using "Bitcoin Miners", maybe add on to the existing protocol, some sort of "Identification Miner" which has connections to credit reference agencies. In fact, let’s not have people and make this completely automated, isn’t the world heading that direction anyway? Although, I suppose someone would need “the key” to unlock ID information, which would mean a form of centralisation. I think.

It’s only an idea, what the heck do I know, I’m no programmer and certainly not an expert in BTC. Just some guy who really wants BTC to succeed and enjoys a bit of mining Grin

In bitcoin, there is a concept of mixing, for which tracing coins may become very very difficult or almost impossible. Services like bitmixer.io offers mixing. Mixing can also be done by trading in exchanges against alt coin.

It is generally more difficult to mix that large of an amount of bitcoin in a short period of time. For example the maximum that bitmixer can "mix" at one time is ~2,000 bitcoin but even mixing this much would mean that there is an increased chance of some adversary figuring out where your coins ended up

ChuckBuck

hero member

Activity: 1372

Merit: 783

better everyday ♥

Quote from: Nagle on January 07, 2015, 04:17:37 PM

Bitstamp booth at CES, yesterday.

Looks like they never made it to Vegas.

Where is their CEO right now?

Looks like they skipped it to work on the restoration:

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitstamp-testing-redeployment-san-francisco-relaunch-24-48-hours/

Not surprising, seems like an all hands on deck situation, so don't blame them for not making a CES appearance.

newIndia

legendary

Activity: 2226

Merit: 1052

Quote from: firewire2013 on January 07, 2015, 04:06:40 PM

I don’t understand why the coins can’t be traced to the hackers.

If Bitcoin address 1234 sells to 4321 and 4321 sells to 100 other wallets, when those 100 wallets dump to an exchange can't the police just trace it back to the source?

I think there should be a credentials checking system for creating wallets, for example when someone sign’s up for a wallet they provide ID, the crypto addresses that are created from the wallet are then legally binding to that person. This ID information is not publically available, but instead locked up within the Bitcoin network protocol. Ok, I understand there will be some level of administration and the whole process will need to be automated as much as possible to reduce cost overhead. In the same way Bitcoin transactions are processed using "Bitcoin Miners", maybe add on to the existing protocol, some sort of "Identification Miner" which has connections to credit reference agencies. In fact, let’s not have people and make this completely automated, isn’t the world heading that direction anyway? Although, I suppose someone would need “the key” to unlock ID information, which would mean a form of centralisation. I think.

It’s only an idea, what the heck do I know, I’m no programmer and certainly not an expert in BTC. Just some guy who really wants BTC to succeed and enjoys a bit of mining Grin

In bitcoin, there is a concept of mixing, for which tracing coins may become very very difficult or almost impossible. Services like bitmixer.io offers mixing. Mixing can also be done by trading in exchanges against alt coin.

Pustul

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Quote from: firewire2013 on January 07, 2015, 04:06:40 PM

I don’t understand why the coins can’t be traced to the hackers.

If Bitcoin address 1234 sells to 4321 and 4321 sells to 100 other wallets, when those 100 wallets dump to an exchange can't the police just trace it back to the source?

I think there should be a credentials checking system for creating wallets, for example when someone sign’s up for a wallet they provide ID, the crypto addresses that are created from the wallet are then legally binding to that person. This ID information is not publically available, but instead locked up within the Bitcoin network protocol. Ok, I understand there will be some level of administration and the whole process will need to be automated as much as possible to reduce cost overhead. In the same way Bitcoin transactions are processed using "Bitcoin Miners", maybe add on to the existing protocol, some sort of "Identification Miner" which has connections to credit reference agencies. In fact, let’s not have people and make this completely automated, isn’t the world heading that direction anyway? Although, I suppose someone would need “the key” to unlock ID information, which would mean a form of centralisation. I think.

It’s only an idea, what the heck do I know, I’m no programmer and certainly not an expert in BTC. Just some guy who really wants BTC to succeed and enjoys a bit of mining Grin

The whole point of bitcoins is to send currency to someone without 3rd party! What you propose is like using a bank wire...

Topic: Bitstamp: Less than 19,000 BTC lost !!! (Read 3939 times)