The OP is not accusing Caucasus of stealing, he says people shouldn't trust physical coins. Even if you buy a Caucasus coin from someone, the seller could have peeked behind the seal, using the right equipment, especially if BTC price is high.
That's true. I took issue with the idea that Cas should be shamed for not spending his time promoting alternatives when he's providing a legitimate good where the operator's never really done anything wrong. Taking issue with trying to make Cas a specific target, I didn't address the real message. Cas' model is terrible if you don't really trust the person issuing the coins. 
Topic: casascius and other physical bitcoins is a fraudulent idea - page 3. (Read 5851 times)
Worst first post ever.
Casascius has been around since just about the dawn of Bitcoin. AFAIK, there have been exactly 0 accusations of him keeping and using coin privkeys (keeping in mind Goat, one of the most temperamental Bitcoin users of significant public awareness, has had thousands of bitcoins in Cas coins). There have been no cases I'm aware of where the seal's been successfully bypassed and sold as legitimate. Unlike self-printed paper wallets, Cas coins can be traded in a relatively secure manner offline because Casascius is a trusted third-party.
Casascius has been around since just about the dawn of Bitcoin. AFAIK, there have been exactly 0 accusations of him keeping and using coin privkeys (keeping in mind Goat, one of the most temperamental Bitcoin users of significant public awareness, has had thousands of bitcoins in Cas coins). There have been no cases I'm aware of where the seal's been successfully bypassed and sold as legitimate. Unlike self-printed paper wallets, Cas coins can be traded in a relatively secure manner offline because Casascius is a trusted third-party.
Worst 798th post ever. The OP is not accusing Caucasus of stealing, he says people shouldn't trust physical coins. Even if you buy a Caucasus coin from someone, the seller could have peeked behind the seal, using the right equipment, especially if BTC price is high.
Following a good will Casascius apparently opened the pandora box. Now people are really believe that the sealing proves that the physical bitcoin is secure. But of course it is not. A producer of a physical note or a coin can copy and preserve the private key. This situation is so strange. I bet that if this hysteria wouldn't decline we will face a wave of fraud associated with a physical pseudosecured coins in a future.
It would be better if Casascius spend the same amount of effort populating the idea that only self printed paper wallets are secure. Every such cold storage obtained from a second party as a present, gift or a payment should be immediately transferred to the safer wallet because private key could be copied and preserved by a grantor. Tamper-evident seal in this case doesn't provide the needed level of security because the private key could be copied before the sealing was applied on a coin.
Shame on you Casascius
It would be better if Casascius spend the same amount of effort populating the idea that only self printed paper wallets are secure. Every such cold storage obtained from a second party as a present, gift or a payment should be immediately transferred to the safer wallet because private key could be copied and preserved by a grantor. Tamper-evident seal in this case doesn't provide the needed level of security because the private key could be copied before the sealing was applied on a coin.
Shame on you Casascius
Yeah, shame on you Casascius.
And shame on me for having this realism presented to me via a Newbie. I should've done my due diligence a long time ago on this shyster operation. Goes to show, never trust a Mormon, and don't deny that either, for we all know you live in Utah with probably ten wives. Speaking of, where the hell do you find time to produce these fraudulent coins of yours, seeing now that your hands are full with them ten wives and probably at least thirty children? Shame on you for conning the Bitcoin community for the sole purpose of providing for your ever extending family.
BTW, Mike, hope sales were swell during Black Friday.
And that, my friends, is another fine post by...
~TMIBTCITW
PS: Apologies if my sentiment was already expressed in this thread, for I didn't read past the OP because I was so livid.
I hear that some of his rarer coins now go for ridiculous prices.
I guess there are some "coin collectors" who value them being left in "mint" condition so I can *get* that although I've never been such a collector myself (I did have a stamp collection when I was a child but ended up swapping it for some toy cars).
What? Why would anyone buy a Casascius coin with a premium just to destroy it? Of course the vast majority of the coins are still intact.
Really? I have seen a few of his coins and every one I've seen was already *spent* (but that's only a few of course).Also I don't quite see how spending the BTC would *destroy* the physical coin - it is made of metal after all (and if that didn't matter then why bother with it at all?).
A Casascius physical Bitcoin is worth 1 BTC + $80. If you open it the physical Bitcoin is destroyed and instead you get 1 BTC and a piece of metal worth a few cents. No reason at all to do it except in a really rainy day.but I don't think that "physical" bitcoins (kept *intact*) are really that worthwhile a collectible (a reason I never purchased one nor am likely to ever want to).
Maybe, maybe not. I hear that some of his rarer coins now go for ridiculous prices. 
Casascius has more Bitcoins than he can cash out anyway.
I did mention I think he is satoshi.
I did mention I think he is satoshi.
Following a good will Casascius apparently opened the pandora box. Now people are really believe that the sealing proves that the physical bitcoin is secure. But of course it is not. A producer of a physical note or a coin can copy and preserve the private key. This situation is so strange. I bet that if this hysteria wouldn't decline we will face a wave of fraud associated with a physical pseudosecured coins in a future.
It would be better if Casascius spend the same amount of effort populating the idea that only self printed paper wallets are secure. Every such cold storage obtained from a second party as a present, gift or a payment should be immediately transferred to the safer wallet because private key could be copied and preserved by a grantor. Tamper-evident seal in this case doesn't provide the needed level of security because the private key could be copied before the sealing was applied on a coin.
Shame on you Casascius
It would be better if Casascius spend the same amount of effort populating the idea that only self printed paper wallets are secure. Every such cold storage obtained from a second party as a present, gift or a payment should be immediately transferred to the safer wallet because private key could be copied and preserved by a grantor. Tamper-evident seal in this case doesn't provide the needed level of security because the private key could be copied before the sealing was applied on a coin.
Shame on you Casascius
It is an open market. You do not need to purchase Casascius or any other physical Bitcoin. Purchasers put their trust in a supplier which could maintain that trust or violate it. Now Casascius coins are now more valued for the collectable value than the Bitcoin preloaded on them. If you think a supplier will steal the Bitcoin, do not purchase from them.
I personally trust Casascius.
What? Why would anyone buy a Casascius coin with a premium just to destroy it? Of course the vast majority of the coins are still intact.
Really? I have seen a few of his coins and every one I've seen was already *spent* (but that's only a few of course).
Also I don't quite see how spending the BTC would *destroy* the physical coin - it is made of metal after all (and if that didn't matter then why bother with it at all?).
I don't think for a second think that Mike Caldwell would try and steal BTC and I do think his heart was in the right place (and his coins have been pictured everywhere) but I don't think that "physical" bitcoins (kept *intact*) are really that worthwhile a collectible (a reason I never purchased one nor am likely to ever want to).
Surely people who bought the coins would have transferred the BTC value to a different address by now wouldn't they?
(so the idea that he could *now* go and steal huge amounts of BTC seems a bit unrealistic to me)
What? Why would anyone buy a Casascius coin with a premium just to destroy it? Of course the vast majority of the coins are still intact. (so the idea that he could *now* go and steal huge amounts of BTC seems a bit unrealistic to me)
This is just my opinion, and why I personally never bothered with the 2 factor coins when purchasing from him.
I heard this already... I have bought some physical coins so I do not believe that the producer could be a cheater, bad things shouldn't happen with me.
Look at nearly every news story, every Reddit post, they feature his coins. He has given the non-technical person something the wrap their head around in terms of bitcoin.
And that is a problem. He populated the idea that bitcoins could be physical! Its a vicious idea. Now people are searching for a physical coins or banknote to buy. Look at this random guy on a wikipedia talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bitcoin#Tokens. People are really seeking for a physical money they once saw on a picture. Thats what Casascius does. And thats why I am shaming him.
The physical Bitcoin generates a new private key using this data, and returns the associated public key along with a signed transaction to send those Bitcoins to the new address.
… and every crypto operation that uses any sort of randomness as input gives the device an opportunity to leak a few bits of your private key back out to the malicious manufacturer.
Especially if the output of said operation winds up in the public blockchain.
Following a good will Casascius apparently opened the pandora box. Now people are really believe that the sealing proves that the physical bitcoin is secure. But of course it is not. A producer of a physical note or a coin can copy and preserve the private key. This situation is so strange. I bet that if this hysteria wouldn't decline we will face a wave of fraud associated with a physical pseudosecured coins in a future.
It would be better if Casascius spend the same amount of effort populating the idea that only self printed paper wallets are secure. Every such cold storage obtained from a second party as a present, gift or a payment should be immediately transferred to the safer wallet because private key could be copied and preserved by a grantor. Tamper-evident seal in this case doesn't provide the needed level of security because the private key could be copied before the sealing was applied on a coin.
Shame on you Casascius
It would be better if Casascius spend the same amount of effort populating the idea that only self printed paper wallets are secure. Every such cold storage obtained from a second party as a present, gift or a payment should be immediately transferred to the safer wallet because private key could be copied and preserved by a grantor. Tamper-evident seal in this case doesn't provide the needed level of security because the private key could be copied before the sealing was applied on a coin.
Shame on you Casascius
Casascius has had options for a long time to purchase 2 factored coins, in which trust in not necessary on the customer's part. Casascius has ever been a stalwart supporter of this community and Bitcoin. He has done more to further Bitcoin and its advancement than few others. Look at nearly every news story, every Reddit post, they feature his coins. He has given the non-technical person something the wrap their head around in terms of bitcoin. As a prop, they have been invaluable to me when explaining it to others.
Money is not his main objective, never was.
This is just my opinion, and why I personally never bothered with the 2 factor coins when purchasing from him.
I think the most credible threat model is for Casascius to be blackmailed into storing private keys.
I believe that he'd want to close up shop before doing that, but I wouldn't rely on him doing that since people who are willing to blackmail might not be so easily deterred.
I believe that he'd want to close up shop before doing that, but I wouldn't rely on him doing that since people who are willing to blackmail might not be so easily deterred.
It is possible to make electronic physical coins that generate their own private keys, hide them from the end user, and self-destruct when tampered with.
It is? How? Not doubting what you say, just interested in the mechanism.
Presumably the destination address is public somehow, and the issuer provides proof (e.g. from the blockchain) that they have sent the requisite amount of coins to the destination address. What if the purchaser opens the physical token and finds that the private key inside does not match the destination address to which the funds have been deposited?
(Newbie here so apologies if this is a stupid question).
The physical token could easily be designed to sign arbitrary data sent to it in order to prove it has the private key. Counterfeits are possible, but would be easy to spot and not worth the effort. Something like this.
In order to ensure maximum protection against theft via backdoor, the private key could even be generated based on a user-supplied seed, which I believe is supported by the proposed hierarchical wallet schemes.
How that works from an end-user perspective is that, whenever you get a physical Bitcoin, in order to verify it you push a button on it and send it some small bit of data from a smartphone or computer. The physical Bitcoin generates a new private key using this data, and returns the associated public key along with a signed transaction to send those Bitcoins to the new address. Once you verify that the new public key was generated using the data you supplied, and publish the transaction to the Bitcoin network, you know that the only way for an attacker to get those Bitcoins is to have had physical access to the device after the new key was generated.
So what exactly do you propose? Building a time machine, going back to 2011 and asking Casacius not to make them? Because I don't see what your point is. What is done is done. Maybe they weren't the best idea at the time, but you, and everyone else, is just going to have to live with it, no?
What to do now? Populate the idea that only printed-by-the-owner paper wallets are secure. Fix the page http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Physical_bitcoin , remove this false statement from it "the private key remains hidden, which is likely achieved through the use of a tamper-evident seal". And... I don't know. Somehow stop the production of physical bitcoins.
Surely people who bought the coins would have transferred the BTC value to a different address by now wouldn't they?
(so the idea that he could *now* go and steal huge amounts of BTC seems a bit unrealistic to me)
(so the idea that he could *now* go and steal huge amounts of BTC seems a bit unrealistic to me)
Just wanted to add that he always claimed to destroy the private keys after he had put it on the coin. If he thought bitcoin would go this high, he would have bought 10-30k bitcoins then, instead of storing and saving a few 1000 bitcoins that anyone buying them could take from the coin at any time, just for a heist far off in the future if the price skyrocketed. This does not mean they are 100% safe thought, and I knew that risk when I bought some.
Worst first post ever.
Casascius has been around since just about the dawn of Bitcoin. AFAIK, there have been exactly 0 accusations of him keeping and using coin privkeys (keeping in mind Goat, one of the most temperamental Bitcoin users of significant public awareness, has had thousands of bitcoins in Cas coins).
I like Casascius and everything but I don't really agree with this assessment. He could have kept all the keys, waiting for the coins to be valuable enough to steal everything. Right now there are tens of millions of dollars worth of his coins; few people have the integrity to walk away from such amounts, and past performance (in this case, Casascius' good form so far) is not an indication of future results. If he kept the keys, he has much more to gain by stealing everything than to lose.Casascius has been around since just about the dawn of Bitcoin. AFAIK, there have been exactly 0 accusations of him keeping and using coin privkeys (keeping in mind Goat, one of the most temperamental Bitcoin users of significant public awareness, has had thousands of bitcoins in Cas coins).
Of course, this threat model is still much better than if he could make the decision to keep keys retroactively.
(in looking up info for response, it turns out Mike suspended operations a couple days ago. https://www.casascius.com/ )
I hope he'll resume soon, at least for aluminum coins, they're really popular here.
Wow, someone with activity of 3 shaming Casascius.
While your points are valid, they come from a time when most of us were not so concerned and felt happy to trust Casascius. Of course now everyone and their mother is in bitcoin and it's impossible to figure out who is who. If you don't trust it. Don't buy it. Simple as that.
While your points are valid, they come from a time when most of us were not so concerned and felt happy to trust Casascius. Of course now everyone and their mother is in bitcoin and it's impossible to figure out who is who. If you don't trust it. Don't buy it. Simple as that.
What is the value of physical bitcoins now? 10000BTC? 50000BTC? What will happens if all of them will be the subject for a massive fraud in nearest future? What will newspapers print about this? What will be the reaction of a public? Everyone said that physical bitcoins are secure but than it appears to be not, bitcoins are junk?... this will trigger the wide regret in bitcoins and the drop of its price. Even if you haven't any physical bitcoins you will suffer. How many bitcoins do you have? Would you like to lose some money because of this?
So what exactly do you propose? Building a time machine, going back to 2011 and asking Casacius not to make them? Because I don't see what your point is. What is done is done. Maybe they weren't the best idea at the time, but you, and everyone else, is just going to have to live with it, no?
FYI, it's fairly easy to produce physical bitcoins which only the owner can spend https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/elliptic-curve-calculator-ui-now-part-of-armory-66862
Jump to: