Topic: Blockchain.info/com question (MAIN) (Read 673 times)

Of course, I never asked them for any custodial services. At one time, there was no talk of this. And suddenly it turns out that they provide me with some kind of custodial services without my consent and at the same time I can’t get them to duplicate the Wallet.aes.json file to me in order to get the private key to the old account myself. The correspondence of about 15 requests and responses ended with this idiotic message, which clearly tells me that there is no point in having any dealings with their service and, moreover, it is worth recommending that all new cryptocurrency users under no circumstances get involved with this damned disgusting service.

Just another clause to drain people's funds lol.

You weren't asking for their custodial services, though lol, or was this sent to everyone with custodial accounts?


Blockchain.com doesn't support it, see: https://support.blockchain.com/hc/en-us/articles/360045140832-What-cryptocurrencies-and-networks-are-supported-for-transacting-in-the-Blockchain-com-Wallet

You can pick up monero wallets at: https://www.getmonero.org/downloads/

why can i not receive xmr(Monero) on Blockchain wallet?

In response to my specific question about whether it is possible to expect to receive the original wallet file Wallet.aes.json, opened in Blockchain.info 10 years ago, again to the same email address that was used when registering the wallet, I received another response from Blockchain.com support with the following content:

“” Hi,....

We recently contacted you on  #......... and sent you a follow up reminder asking for further identification information to help us verify your account.

We are now reaching out for a final time to inform you that your account is now accruing administration fee charges.

All customers using our custodial services must be fully verified and pass required checks under applicable laws and regulations. We have identified that your account is not currently fully verified. Please help us complete your verification process so we can ensure that you can continue to have access to your account and to our products and services.

Prevent further charges from accruing by submitting the requested information now.

Please note, Blockchain.com may charge an administration fee if you fail to submit these documents within the required timeframe, as outlined in our terms and conditions policy https://www.blockchain.com/legal/terms.

If you require any assistance then please respond to the original ticket http://support.blockchain.com/hc/requests/ and our team will help guide you through the process.

Thank you, “”
 

It will soon be a whole year since I have been unable to get a clear answer to the simplest question from this support.

I believe that this is simply mockery of the client and I suggest that you form your own opinion about the quality and friendliness of this service.

It seems to be true that all qualified employees have simply quit this service and there is simply no one to really answer questions that arise from owners of old wallets from the time when this service was Blockchain.info. Maybe that is why there is a constant flow of complaints from customers to the support of this service and the image of an extremely unreliable service. It seems it is better never to use it at all.

The table in the first post of this topic has been updated.

On the other hand, many support agents may have been replaced considering the years passed esp if they're outsourcing folks from an agency. You gotta wonder how many of them now actually know about legacy accounts. 🤔

Honestly, even on 2018 or so, support for legacy accounts was already crap. It appears, blockchain.com made some tools and called it a day. Wouldn't be surprised if more support agents are completely clueless about it these days.

As I understand it, the owner of this service has not changed in all these years.  Maybe that's why the support service is extremely disgusting. 
You are probably right that they simply do not have the required number of specialists and they provide services such as finding and sending an archived copy of Wallet.aes.json to the applicant client only at the request of the police or a request from authorized state law enforcement agencies.  Of course, I don’t know whether this is true or not, but I think it’s something like this. 
As for the answers from the support, they are, of course, generated by bots, and this will probably soon become permanent and it will be impossible to get a non-standard solution from them at all.  I noticed that in their answers they really group standard phrases, although usually in a polite manner, but the meaning of their answers is always the same, either go through KYC, or that they do not have access to customer accounts. 

In general, I, like many other forum users, do not recommend anyone to get involved with this wallet.

@delfastTions, that company has always had very bad customer support as far as I can tell, and some things simply change only if there is a change of owner who has a different vision of the business when it comes to customer support. My opinion is that companies with such a large number of users simply cannot efficiently solve all user requests, especially not ones like yours.

Such things still require expert people who have access to sensitive parts of the system, and the company certainly does not have many such people because they are much more expensive than agents in customer support. I assume that a good part of the work is now also done by chat bots, so in general we can expect that the quality of user support will get worse.

About half a year ago, I actually read about 300-400 topics in the web wallet section of our forum, and this list, given in the table, represents meaningful questions and, in part, answers to them on many problems that have constantly occurred since 2011  wallet users Blockchain.info/com. 

It must be said that in the period approximately 2011-2016 there were many newcomers interested in Bitcoin blockchain technology.  And many of them, simply typing the words bitcoin or blockchain into Google, immediately saw the site Blockchain.info/com in the first place.  And, even despite many problems with this service, these people created their own wallets.  I also have such old wallets, but fortunately, I withdrew all the few bitcoins I had from there in time and did not lose anything.  But now, in a sense, these are, although zero, still “historical” wallets. 

But based on the results of six months of correspondence with Blockchain.com support, I still did not get them to send me the archived backup file Wallet.aes.json of my old wallet from 2014.  Moreover, I know the password for it. 
They constantly write that they cannot help me and cannot send me this file. 
I suspect that they are simply lying and are simply too lazy to look for this file in the archive. 
I’ve already given up on this correspondence, because the account still has 0 BTC, but this correspondence clearly shows how crap their support is.

@delfastTions, you're welcome, I'm glad you found something interesting on those links

Although it should be said that everything described in the first link is apparently not connected exclusively to the blockchain wallet, it still seems that someone found a vulnerability in some old wallets/services, and according to the last post, we can see that someone has been using this vulnerability for at least 4 years after it was discovered.

True, I think there are more topics about blockchain.info/com in other parts of the forum, but regardless, you already have a very good collection

Thank you for providing two very interesting links to useful topics in your post.  I especially liked the review given in the first link. 
A very interesting study.  And although it was a long time ago, I still had not heard about it before and read it with great interest. 
Naturally, I added these topics to the general list. 
And of course, specific discussions of the history of using Blockchain.info/Blockchain.com may be in other sections of the forum that I have not yet reached.

My time using that wallet has long passed, so even though I had a really good experience at the beginning, over time I realized that I don't want to store even the smallest amounts on that wallet after information appeared that some people were allegedly hacked through various vulnerabilities in the platform.

One of the interesting cases that you can add to your list :

Thoughts on this private key stealing mystery

There is another case in which it was claimed that their clients were hacked using their iPhone application, and even a lawsuit was mentioned. In any case, I wouldn't use their services unless I had no other choice.

Blockchain.com scam - lost funds

Yeah, in an old letter from Blockchain.info there is a mention of Dropbox, but I can’t get to this file.  Well, of course, 10 years have passed, everyone has already been erased from memory and almost all the links do not work, so it looks like this is not a working option. 

As for correspondence with Blockchain.com, they simply stopped responding without explaining the reason.  They write that they cannot help, but I am sure that it can be done.  Simply because they probably have the ability to find and pull Wallet.aes.json of the old wallet from the archived databases.

Unless you deleted your emails, then they probably never sent you the file assuming you've searched using the search bar.

I wasn't a legacy wallet user but I've scoured some old blockchain.info articles from the wayback machine lol some time ago. IIRC, the json file was available for download both locally and in cloud providers like dropbox and gdrive. Perhaps they ring a bell to you.

My email address, which I used in 2014 to register my Blockchain.info wallet, has not changed for 10 years. 
It seems to me that during that period of time I did not receive the Wallet.aes.json file from Blockchain.info at all (¿ I don’t remember if this file was available for download, I don’t think so?).  It seems to me that no Wallet.aes.json from Blockchain.info was sent to me by email, although I don’t remember exactly?   
This is roughly how I remember these events. 

So, now, despite correspondence with Blockchain.com support, which has been going on for more than six months, support tells me that it cannot send me a backup archived copy of Wallet.aes.json to the same email address that I used during registration.  (?)
I still can’t understand how to get a clear answer from Blockchain.com support why they can’t do this. 

And I naturally had a question: did Blockchain.com support, at your request, ever re-send your Wallet.aes.json file (which can now be considered archived and backup) to any of you, dear colleagues? 
Or do they never do this due to the request of the old wallet user?

Update of the link table in the first post

In my opinion, if it is true that Blockchain.com occupies one of the leading positions among crypto wallets, then such a flow of tickets may well occur.

 In addition, we must remember that the name “Blockchain” itself is always in first place when searching on Google, including when searching for applications in GM for Android or IOS.
 Anyone who searches for the words “cryptocurrency”, or “blockchain”, or “Bitcoin wallet”... and so on, immediately sees this very wallet in the first place of the search.  As a result, the flow of new users is huge.  As a result, the flow of tickets is large.  I think the ticket flow is even greater than Binance and Coinbase.

 I think that the ordinal notes of tickets are strictly in ascending order precisely as they are registered, and now their number has already become more than 5M.

2 tickets per minute seems like a lot even for services like Binance and Coinbase, let alone a cryptocurrency wallet.

The support ticket number may not be sequential, but in some cases it contains basic information such as information during the setup. For example, the support ticket for identity verification is different from the support ticket for withdrawal problems, and so on.
Therefore, I do not think that we can use it as a measure to know the requests they receive during a certain time.

For the period from December 2023 to March 2024, I found out the serial numbers of two tickets to Blockchain.com support.
 Taking into account the fact that obviously tickets have serial numbers as they are received by support, it turned out that in 75 days the ticket number changed from #482xxxx to #502xxxxxx.  It will turn out to be ~ 208000.
 An approximate calculation shows what will happen: ~2800 tickets per day, and accordingly 2 tickets per minute.

 I also know the exact ticket number dated 07/23/2013 (80xx)
 During the period from 07/23/2013 to, for example, the date of ticket #502xxxxxxx ~3900 days have passed.
 Thus, for the entire specified period of ~10.8 years, the average number of tickets was approximately 1300 per day.
 But, obviously, the number of tickets has gradually increased from 2013 to the present and therefore I believe that the indicated number of tickets per day (2800) is now quite correct.

Somehow I couldn't find the stats in question... Can you please point me in the right direction?

This might look like I'm defending them ^{[I'm not]} but they did face a lot of obstacles in the past couple of years and IIRC, in the same period they had to lay off a lot of their staff on multiple occasions.
^{- Having said that, it appears that the situation has changed and they're planning to add a significant number to their backroom staff so hopefully, we'll see some improvements soon.}

• Quote from: delfastTions on April 13, 2024, 05:33:07 AM
  But according to my experience and the experience of a number of other clients, out of 10 answers from support, about ~8 are formal, standard, short and empty
  
  Back in the day, their Twitter bio had a link to a dedicated support account on Twitter ^[archived] and despite what's pinned at the moment ^{[@AskBlockchain]}, occasionally they were somewhat useful in ticket escalations ^{[not sure why they suddenly stopped using it]}.