Nubbins have been talking shit about ANACS for years, he say that they cannot be trusted.
Example:
http://bitcoinstats.com/irc/bitcoin-otc/logs/2013/12/31 (c) i don't trust ANACS enough
The chain is broken as soon as the coin is in custody of someone not able to sign and extend the chain.
Sorry for the thread hijack. A couple of things:
-Your "quote" is attributed to "Nubbins", which is neither my forum handle (no capitals), nor does it match the nickname (trailing `) in the provided link.
-Who says that's me on irc? That ` character looks scammy.
-Are you a stalker or did you happen to just have a quip from two years ago bookmarked?
-Why not ask me what I think about it? I'm right here.
FWIW the chain is not broken if the coin is handled by the mail service or couriers because they don't know it's a Casascius coin. If a shipped coin arrives undisturbed (and you didn't stupidly write "Casascius coin" on the package), I'd consider the custody chain intact.
Also FWIW -- and I still stand by my claim that ANACS sucks and only IDIOTS buy coins based on the grade and not the condition of the coin itself -- but since ANACS records video of all coins from the moment they arrive til the moment they leave, I'd still consider the custody chain unbroken. The owner who sent the coin for grading should include particulars in their custody docs: dates, ref numbers, etc.
ANACS sucks. They gave a damaged coin a PERFECT ms70 grade.
ANACS sucks.
I actually agree with nubbins on everything here. Not because of his excuse that mail carriers are ignorant to what they're carrying but because of how I interpret the word custody. It is a matter of responsibility not a level of physical possession.
I would say that in the case of both while the coin is in the mail, and while a coin is with ANACS, the owner would be in possession, through an agent of the coin. I don't think the fact that the mail carrier is ignorent to the contents of a package is going to change if someone is in possession of an item.
If one were to argue that you need to be in continuous physical possession of a coin in order to maintain the chain of custody, then technically you would lose possession anytime you left you house and the coin was stored in a safe, as it would be theoretically possible (although very unlikely) that someone could break into your home, crack your safe, replace your coin with a fake one, then close/lock your safe and leave. The same would apply with a safety deposit box.
I do think that trips to ANACS should be disclosed when extending PGP chains in the event that someone at ANACS turns out to be a fraudster/thief, then those relying on such PGP chains can act accordingly.