Topic: Is Bitcoin as safe as its believers say? - page 3. (Read 589 times)
Definitely, the only reason it gets compromised is because the people that are hodling them are really lousy with their security and they are not cautious when clicking links online that could lead to malwares.
hero member
Activity: 2912
Merit: 541
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
Bitcoin is safe for me because I know what I am going to do with my bitcoin. I can keep my bitcoin in a safe place that only I will know. I can convert bitcoin to fiat money and transfer it into my bank account.
I do not know what the other government will do with bitcoin, but so far, I can use bitcoin without a problem. Maybe each country will have different regulations about bitcoin.
I do not know what the other government will do with bitcoin, but so far, I can use bitcoin without a problem. Maybe each country will have different regulations about bitcoin.
How do you define "safe" in this case? Bitcoin protocol and cryptography used are secure. If someone managed to get someone's else private key, most likely it's because the owner doesn't secure their device properly.
If you don't have any idea about how bitcoin works then you will say that bitcoin is really easy to access by other people.
Like what most of the people said, that will not happen if they don't have the private key of the owner in the transaction.
Maybe they got its private key that's why they have an access in its coins. Sometimes it is easy to conclude without even knowing the real story.
Does the U.S. Department of Justice's recovery of the Bitcoin ransom mean that Bitcoin and even blockchain security have fallen off the altar?
Nope. The US Department of Justice successfully recovering the Bitcoin ransom means centralized exchanges are under the power of government authorities. Or perhaps you might want to take it a notch higher and say that centralized exchanges cannot be trusted, because anytime the government could say, "Hey, that's exactly the Bitcoin we're looking for. Give it us!" And they would fully comply. Remember there's a license to be revoked, CEO to be arrested and even imprisoned, books to be audited, and so on. They simply cannot say no.
bitcoin will be safe if you store it safely, and do not take illegal methods, because bitcoin will be safe depending on the owner how to store it, because if you are good at storing it you can say it is safe.
The DOJ is intentionally being misleading and vague. We don't know how they recovered this BTC. Some speculate that they only got the password to a Coinbase account for one of their associates. If they had actually broken Bitcoin's cryptography then obviously they would've taken the hackers' entire Bitcoin stash but they only recovered a partial amount.
I absolutely believe bitcoin is safe depending on the user. The level of security a bitcoin wallet has is dependent on how security conscious the user is.
If a user becomes so careless as to lose his private keys to scammers, it isn't bitcoin's fault, neither is it anybody's.
This is exactly why private keys and seed phrases are absolutely important and are meant to be kept safe. Once they are lost, a user runs the risk of losing all his funds to a scanner who are so many these looking for ignorant victims to scam.
If a user becomes so careless as to lose his private keys to scammers, it isn't bitcoin's fault, neither is it anybody's.
This is exactly why private keys and seed phrases are absolutely important and are meant to be kept safe. Once they are lost, a user runs the risk of losing all his funds to a scanner who are so many these looking for ignorant victims to scam.
"The FBI Secretly Ran the Anom Messaging Platform, Yielding Hundreds of Arrests in Global Sting
Monitoring of encrypted communications yielded over 800 arrests in 16 countries of suspected members of crime networks" - WSJ
Maybe related?
Monitoring of encrypted communications yielded over 800 arrests in 16 countries of suspected members of crime networks" - WSJ
Maybe related?
If there is one thing your thread pointed out is about its believers. If you don't believe, you still won't until you've found a way to convince yourself otherwise. Of course bitcoin is enjoying the dividends that comes with being a pioneer cryptocurrency and not just a pioneer, it's a perfected coin and has a genus strategy about it. So, every crypto enthusiast has got yo recognise it. The only reason why some persons may not invest in BTC is because, they feel its too late with the price way up to thousands of dollars. So, many seek opportunities with the altcoins but I still think, bitcoin is the best and safest of all.
Does the U.S. Department of Justice's recovery of the Bitcoin ransom mean that Bitcoin and even blockchain security have fallen off the altar?
How did they recover it?How about the wallet maybe it isn't the blockchain that have a problem but the wallet where it was been sent?
And maybe it could just be FUD or another publicity for them to gain people's trust.
Maybe we could say it was just a FUD but we can't deny that this has already happened several times. We are prone to hacking incidents and the DoJ or the government are also using their people to do this. But it doesn't mean that this was a sign of an end, we're not.
The security of Bitcoin is relatively dependent on the holder of the private key, because the negligence of the user itself makes it insecure. This returns to the user, because then the ownership is already in the hands of the user without any intervention from any party.
about loss and so on, regardless of how the user saves it.
not saying that blockchain has failed and such. what needs to be tracked is the holder of the private key itself.
Bitcoin is safe if the user knows how to secure his private keys so that no one can have the chances to steal or hack it. Blockchain has nothing to do with it since its a great innovation itself.about loss and so on, regardless of how the user saves it.
not saying that blockchain has failed and such. what needs to be tracked is the holder of the private key itself.
The only time where bitcoin becomes unsafe is the user itself is not responsible to secure his private keys due to his carelessness and irresponsible user.
Does the U.S. Department of Justice's recovery of the Bitcoin ransom mean that Bitcoin and even blockchain security have fallen off the altar?
How did they recover it?How about the wallet maybe it isn't the blockchain that have a problem but the wallet where it was been sent?
And maybe it could just be FUD or another publicity for them to gain people's trust.
Does the U.S. Department of Justice's recovery of the Bitcoin ransom mean that Bitcoin and even blockchain security have fallen off the altar?
They didn't edit the blockchain. They didn't crack the public key cryptography. They just hacked their servers and found private keys there, which means that Bitcoin security as strong as ever. This is why people oppose altcoins, a lot of altcoins are centralized and would allow government to seize funds without private keys. Tether is known to freeze balances on demand from law enforcement, because it's not a decentralized cryptocurrency, it's a company.
People should learn on to read up headlines on whats the real story. There's no bypass that do happen on here in talks about recovery and as stated
it was just basically the retrieval of those keys via bypassing those common databases and stuffs.
Actually if you are right, it means bitcoin password security is not as strong as ever.
IF FBI , got access to the actual wallet on a VPS, only a moron does not encrypt their wallet password,
meaning the FBI broke the encryption to get the password, meaning any wallet, they get physical access to becomes accessible, and that is not supposed to happen.
What should have happen is they find the encrypted wallet and should be unable to hack the password within our lifetimes, but that is not the story they are putting out there, so somebody is lying.
Does the U.S. Department of Justice's recovery of the Bitcoin ransom mean that Bitcoin and even blockchain security have fallen off the altar?
They didn't edit the blockchain. They didn't crack the public key cryptography. They just hacked their servers and found private keys there, which means that Bitcoin security as strong as ever. This is why people oppose altcoins, a lot of altcoins are centralized and would allow government to seize funds without private keys. Tether is known to freeze balances on demand from law enforcement, because it's not a decentralized cryptocurrency, it's a company.
People should learn on to read up headlines on whats the real story. There's no bypass that do happen on here in talks about recovery and as stated
it was just basically the retrieval of those keys via bypassing those common databases and stuffs.
I don't understand why is everyone is panicking over this. From what I read,
no information was given on how the authorities got access to the funds
so are many possibilities, centralized services, weak passwords, etc.
And if you think that the code is not that safe, don't you think that someone would've found that out by now?
no information was given on how the authorities got access to the funds
so are many possibilities, centralized services, weak passwords, etc.
And if you think that the code is not that safe, don't you think that someone would've found that out by now?
No definite answer is why they are panicking.
Fear is a powerful catalyst and so called diamond hands are very very few out of the total.
Everyone worrying about this FBI private key FUD needs to read this topic: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/i-idd-the-darkside-address-ransom-transaction-and-custodial-exchange-5342645
It's ridiculous that investors are selling on news like this. This just proves how clueless they are about Bitcoin's fundamentals.
It's ridiculous that investors are selling on news like this. This just proves how clueless they are about Bitcoin's fundamentals.
The security of Bitcoin is relatively dependent on the holder of the private key, because the negligence of the user itself makes it insecure. This returns to the user, because then the ownership is already in the hands of the user without any intervention from any party.
about loss and so on, regardless of how the user saves it.
not saying that blockchain has failed and such. what needs to be tracked is the holder of the private key itself.
about loss and so on, regardless of how the user saves it.
not saying that blockchain has failed and such. what needs to be tracked is the holder of the private key itself.
There is no safer alternative, in terms of technical ability or pure brute force attacking power, which really now is the only way to crack any kind of network like this. There is no safer alternative in terms of having the financial might to 51% attack the network either (which, even if somehow achieved, would be ignored as the good actors reorg).
Seizing private keys is really not overcoming the security.
Seizing private keys is really not overcoming the security.
Does the U.S. Department of Justice's recovery of the Bitcoin ransom mean that Bitcoin and even blockchain security have fallen off the altar?
Bitcoin and its blockchain technology is a way far from what you've been expected meaning, the security and safety of the bitcoin is very high in which a normal person cannot walk in to this kind of security. The thing is that we need to be more careful on our private keys and assets so that our funds on our wallet or in our ledger will be more safe, aside from the security that we have we must also double or even triple our own security by not given to anyone our private keys and etc. Does the U.S. Department of Justice's recovery of the Bitcoin ransom mean that Bitcoin and even blockchain security have fallen off the altar?
They didn't edit the blockchain. They didn't crack the public key cryptography. They just hacked their servers and found private keys there, which means that Bitcoin security as strong as ever. This is why people oppose altcoins, a lot of altcoins are centralized and would allow government to seize funds without private keys. Tether is known to freeze balances on demand from law enforcement, because it's not a decentralized cryptocurrency, it's a company.
Jump to: