Topic: MemoryDealers.com founder Roger Ver abuses admin access at Blockchain.info - page 11. (Read 28778 times)

We're not discussing the "change the thread title" part of your statement. We're discussing the "better yet,  lock the thread and ask the mods to delete it" part of your statement.

It is not this thread that is causing undue alarm. The alarm is very much due, this BS of divulging customer details is widespread to the point of universality. Aurum did it, MtGox did it, the list is pretty much "everyone except MPEx". This has to cease, universally, as it has no place in BTC.

The other thing that has to cease is the unwarranted delusions of self importance. You personally are not great enough to request moderators to delete the signs of your stupidity "so as not to harm bitcoin". Should you want to request it, do it in the adequate terms, which are "I've been really stupid, please delete this before it ruins my reputation".

That aside, you personally are not big enough to harm Bitcoin, for one, and moreover this "too big to fail" mentality and the corresponding expectation of throwing everything to the wind for the sake of propping up random doods with self-awarded VIP status is completely irrational.

Until Bit-Pay proves the above. You have no case. Not your money.

Note that blockchain.info has gone a long way toward restoring trust in them.  They couldn't know ahead of time that this minority stakeholder would violate their trust when they gave them access to assist in daily operations.  They claim since to have removed this person's access to the admin panel, which is what I would expect a responsible business to do.  If they will confirm that all access to the database has been permanently removed, I will consider them to be a trustworthy business who happened to unknowingly hire an untrustworthy employee and dealt with the situation appropriately.

EDIT: blockchain.info has acted in a responsible way and removed from MemoryDealers all future access to personal information.  They could not know in advance that MemoryDealers would abuse the access allowed them as an employee.  As such this post has been edited to make it clear that blockchain.info is not responsible for the actions of this particular ex-employee.

As per what piuk said before, I'd think all access is severed:

I'm sure you would love to make this mistake go away but hopefully the mods recognize that this thread contains invaluable information for those considering placing trust in MemoryDealers and/or Blockchain.info.

Instead of CYA why don't you simply admit to your mistake?

EDIT: I'm specifically referring to MemoryDealers here. Blockchain has done a great job dealing with the public and responding to this horrific turn of events.

I am still waiting for confirmation from Piuk that ALL your access to the personal information of blockchain.info's users has been removed and not just the "admin panel".  Do you have direct access to the database?  Are that other panels that you have access to that provide any personal information at all?  Do you have access to backups of the database?

If Piuk will publicly confirm that ALL ACCESS to personal information has been removed from you, then I'll agree that the issue expressed in this thread is closed.

EDIT: blockchain.info has acted in a responsible way and removed from MemoryDealers all future access to personal information.  They could not know in advance that MemoryDealers would abuse the access allowed them as an employee.  As such this post has been edited to make it clear that blockchain.info is not responsible for the actions of this particular ex-employee.

At this point as far as I am concerned, blockchain.info has taken the necessary actions to make sure that your personal information stored with them IS SAFE.

This issue should be considered resolved and the discussion thread locked.  If anyone has issue specifically with Roger/MemoryDealers/bitcoinstore.com, it should be discussed in a separate thread so as not to confuse the issue and soil blockchain.info's good reputation.

Agreed. It's morally and technically wrong after all to keep extra funds without permission.

Seems to be a better all in one solution for bitcoin. Sounds good!

If you want to start a separate thread about me covering something up,  feel free, but every single issue that was brought up in the initial post of this thread has been solved.  Therefore the thread title is not true, and should be changed so as not to cause undue alarm.

This address is actually owned by another customer of Bitcoinstore.com

An employee of Bitcoinstore mistakenly asked the customer to send money to this Bitcoin address.

Certainly not.

This insistence on covering up is even more concerning than the initial abuse, for that matter.

Actually Roger needs to prove that was HIS money. He needs to prove that he owns

1FZFQzDkoSFvPgiLouMfoSQSFaqNDfegJz


Would be hard to do since his agent said that they don't. So someone who owns that address should file a scammer report.

You mean like http://brainwallet.org/ (Github)

Plus web-based access to it in a pinch, as well as mobile phone access.

bulanula got it, so should this dude.

To be clear, I agree with Roger that the dude deserves the scammer tag.  It's not his money...

This would be like Electrum plus the storage of encrypted wallet in the cloud to me.

With such a client, blockchain's purpose would be relegated to calculating account/address balances, broadcasting transactions, and storing encrypted backups?

Makes sense to me.  Only issue might be the lack of revenue that blockchain brings in from a downloadable client, vs they at least bring in some revenue via an ad on most pages right now.

While everyone's mind is focused on Blockchain, there is one thing that I think would be a +1000: an open-source (or at least source visible) downloadable executable client for all its services.  So, someone who has assured themselves they have downloaded good client code doesn't have to worry that they'll be served some malicious script on a future visit, and it can be put in an independent repository where third parties have signed off on it.

While an executable client would be great, even just a folder full of .html and .js files would be more than satisfactory, and would have the benefit of being cross-platform.  You could also see others willing to fork it and share improvements to it.

In my mind, if blockchain being a "web wallet" is the only hesitation to recommending it, doing this would definitely push it over the threshold.

do we got our first watergate bitcoin event ?

 

Solid response. Extremely impressive response time.


Does this still apply when third parties show up at your door with guns and a warrant? (I don't have a blockchain.info wallet yet btw.)