Decentralized Security | Bitcointalksearch.org

jbreher

legendary

Activity: 3024

Merit: 1640

lose: unfind ... loose: untight

Quote from: ScreamnShout on November 12, 2014, 03:19:29 AM

Regardless of if multi sig (or other similar security measures) are taken, a business claiming to be hacked is never going to be reputable enough to be able to ever be in business again.

18 or 30 months ago, there was a proposal somebody floated to have interested exchanges cooperate to multisig each others' cold wallets. A side benefit was that they would each serve to audit the others in the process. Good scheme. Never went anywhere. If we, the general hoi polloi of Bitcoin, would insist on our exchanges doing such, and refuse to deal with any that don't, we might get somewhere.

ScreamnShout

full member

Activity: 206

Merit: 100

Quote from: phillipsjk on November 11, 2014, 03:21:06 AM

I think there is a question about Andreas Antonopoulos's remarks hidden somewhere in the OP.

Andreas was talking about the potential institutional use of Bitcoin. 'I was "hacked"' is not going to cut it: even if you really were "hacked". Multisignature transactions should allow businesses, banks, political parties and governments to handle Bitcoin in a transparent, secure manner.

The main concern I have is that the need for privacy conflicts with the goal of good transparency. Encouraging the use of tools such as Darkwallet may allow users to safely send funds to such transparent organizations.

Regardless of if multi sig (or other similar security measures) are taken, a business claiming to be hacked is never going to be reputable enough to be able to ever be in business again.

I would say that for multisig to be effective for a business the various private keys would need to be spread out among enough people who report to different people

tzortz

hero member

Activity: 728

Merit: 500

So is this about transparency and decentralization at the same time?

pitham1

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1000

Bitcoin - Be your own bank!
That tells a lot about whom you can trust for security.

deluxeCITY

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

Quote from: phillipsjk on November 11, 2014, 03:21:06 AM

I think there is a question about Andreas Antonopoulos's remarks hidden somewhere in the OP.

Andreas was talking about the potential institutional use of Bitcoin. 'I was "hacked"' is not going to cut it: even if you really were "hacked". Multisignature transactions should allow businesses, banks, political parties and governments to handle Bitcoin in a transparent, secure manner.

The main concern I have is that the need for privacy conflicts with the goal of good transparency. Encouraging the use of tools such as Darkwallet may allow users to safely send funds to such transparent organizations.

Even if an institution were to use multisig addresses/transactions, they could still get hacked and/or "hacked" as an attacker could still potentially gain access to the number of private keys necessary to sign and push a transaction to the network. Not only this but it may be more difficult to detect an attacker because the institution would not see that a portion of their funds are now 'missing'.

Coogan

newbie

Activity: 54

Merit: 0

People just need to learn to secure their money properly and not rely on third parties all the time.

TinaK

hero member

Activity: 1106

Merit: 527

agree with you, as a proverb says that "Do not put eggs in one basket"

phillipsjk

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1001

Let the chips fall where they may.

I think there is a question about Andreas Antonopoulos's remarks hidden somewhere in the OP.

Andreas was talking about the potential institutional use of Bitcoin. 'I was "hacked"' is not going to cut it: even if you really were "hacked". Multisignature transactions should allow businesses, banks, political parties and governments to handle Bitcoin in a transparent, secure manner.

The main concern I have is that the need for privacy conflicts with the goal of good transparency. Encouraging the use of tools such as Darkwallet may allow users to safely send funds to such transparent organizations.

Honeypot

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

Decentralization and security go together like a virgin and a brothel. Or water and oil.

bluemountain

full member

Activity: 197

Merit: 100

It would be a lot simpler and a better idea to simply keep control of your private keys (aka money that is in bitcoin) yourself, especially once you have larger amounts of money/bitcoin

BIT-Sharon

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Bitcoin as a decentralized system containing value also requires the ability to monitor and assure owners that their assets are indeed safe and accessible. Traditional centralized audit capabilities and services don’t really work well, or if implemented, break the bitcoin model and impede its novel functionality. Andreas Antonopoulos, a noted bitcoin advocate, testified before the Canadian Senate and closed his opening remarks with:

“In the new decentralized financial network, we have the opportunity to invent new decentralized security mechanisms based upon innovations such as multi-signature escrow, smart contracts, hardware wallets, decentralized audit and algorithm mechanic proof of reserves. These are the new decentralized regulatory and security tools that are most appropriate for a decentralized digital currency. ”

Topic: Decentralized Security (Read 1283 times)