MemoryDealers.com founder Roger Ver abuses admin access at Blockchain.info - page 7.

CharlieContent

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Quote from: Rob E on December 19, 2012, 05:33:06 PM

Quote from: CharlieContent on December 19, 2012, 04:40:03 PM

Quote from: oblongmeteor on December 19, 2012, 04:20:08 PM

It is sad to see BlockChain.info - a superb service - dragged, without merit, into such an display of complete and utter incompetence on the part of the owner of Memory Dealers, Roger Ver. This https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/please-delete-131574 behavior; publicly displaying the details of a private individual and labeling them a criminal would at best seem morally dubious and at worst defamatory.

I completely agree. I think the best thing for Blockchain.info would be to force Roger Ver out.

Piuk if you wish to do that, and you need capital with which to accomplish it, feel free to PM me in confidence and we will see what we can do.

We? Who the fuck is We? You? lol.

"We will see what we can do" as in Piuk and I together, idiot.

ripper234

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1003

Ron Gross

Quote from: hahahafr on December 19, 2012, 08:04:21 PM

WWW.DRAMATALK.ORG

lol

hahahafr

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 501

HTTP://WWW.DRAMATALK.ORG/

ripper234

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1003

Ron Gross

Quote from: marnie on December 19, 2012, 08:01:06 PM

Quote from: jgarzik on December 19, 2012, 07:57:06 PM

tl;dr: Use a decentralized client, rather than a centralized web service.

What are some other options, besides the downlaodable one?

You mean downloadable ones, right?

http://bitcoin.org/clients.html

ripper234

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1003

Ron Gross

Quote from: jgarzik on December 19, 2012, 07:57:06 PM

tl;dr: Use a decentralized client, rather than a centralized web service.

That's not the correct tl;dr.

Blockchain.info is a vital part of Bitcoin as it stands today - it's such a great boost to introduce new users.

All other clients are nowhere near it on pure usability.
Yes, you compromise some security/anonymity ... but it's a tradeoff users need to make.

marnie

newbie

Activity: 40

Merit: 0

Quote from: jgarzik on December 19, 2012, 07:57:06 PM

tl;dr: Use a decentralized client, rather than a centralized web service.

What are some other options, besides the downlaodable one?

jgarzik

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1100

tl;dr: Use a decentralized client, rather than a centralized web service.

OpenYourEyes

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

IANAL, and I may have missed something, and I don't mean to put myself on the either parties site, but have blockchain.info not violated the UK's Data Protection Act?
blockchain.info is hosted in the UK (according to whois), and private information (phone number) has been disclosed from the blockchain.info database.

ripper234

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1003

Ron Gross

Quote from: DannyHamilton on December 19, 2012, 06:11:41 PM

Quote from: ripper234 on December 19, 2012, 06:06:02 PM

A technical questions:

So what if an address is a SHA 256? How does that remove any lookup ability? To lookup by address, just hash it and look up the hash. It removes the ability to lookup, per given wallet ID, what addresses it owns - not the other way around.

You'll find that Piuk has already answered this question. The address is hashed with a secret key. Without the secret key, you can't generate the right hash to look up:

Quote from: piuk on December 19, 2012, 12:11:27 PM

. . . Addresses are hashed with a secret. With access to the secret it would be possible to hash every bitcoin address with a none zero balance and use that to compare against subscribed hashes to determine addresses in a wallet. The sacrifice of some anonymity when notifications are enabled has always been stated https://blockchain.info/wallet/anonymity. However it is no longer possible for admins to lookup an arbitrary wallet by address . . .

Thanks, these were a long couple of threads, didn't follow them both till the end.

DannyM

sr. member

Activity: 276

Merit: 251

Waiting on an answer to this https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1409754

Rob E

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

Quote from: marnie on December 19, 2012, 06:23:29 PM

I'm kinda new here, but why on earth does blockchain.info give other individuals access to the admin cp?
Who else has access to this?
That is rather disturbing.
Can I get admin access? Cheesy

In fact i don't think it would be a bad idea if anyone could draw attention to a revolutionary new currency it would be through honesesty and openness..

marnie

newbie

Activity: 40

Merit: 0

Looks like the damage was already done.

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 4801

Quote from: marnie on December 19, 2012, 06:23:29 PM

I'm kinda new here, but why on earth does blockchain.info give other individuals access to the admin cp?
Who else has access to this?
That is rather disturbing.
Can I get admin access? Cheesy

This has already been answered and addressed:

Quote from: piuk on December 19, 2012, 11:34:06 AM

Why is even possible?
Wallet are stored fully encrypted, so they appear as random text to us. However when notifications are enabled the client extracts the public keys from a wallet and asks blockchain.info to subscribe to those addresses. The ability too lookup a wallet using this information was added so that when newbies come to us and say "I just created a bitcoin wallet, but forgot to record the wallet identifier how can get I get my money back?" we can ask for their bitcoin address or ip and and are normally able to recover the identifier.

Why does Roger have access to the blockchain admin panel
He owns a minority stake in the company and helps with support. His funding has been tremendously helpful in allowing me to work on the Site full time, buy new servers, security hardware and fund free features.

Who else has access to this information?
Me, Roger and a customer support agent.

What has been changed

Roger and the support agent's access to this information has been revoked.
Bitcoin addresses stored for notification purposes have been deleted. Addresses are now stored as a SHA 256 hash of the address, which removes the ability to lookup a wallet by bitcoin address.
The secret phrase is now no longer shown to any admins

Can blockchain.info access funds the funds in my blockchain wallet?
No, the information available gives only enough information to prove the user may own a wallet with that address. He could not have accesses the wallet, even if he had wanted to. No other individuals have access to the blockchain.info servers or code apart from me.

marnie

newbie

Activity: 40

Merit: 0

I'm kinda new here, but why on earth does blockchain.info give other individuals access to the admin cp?
Who else has access to this?
That is rather disturbing.
Can I get admin access? Cheesy

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 4801

Quote from: ripper234 on December 19, 2012, 06:06:02 PM

A technical questions:

So what if an address is a SHA 256? How does that remove any lookup ability? To lookup by address, just hash it and look up the hash. It removes the ability to lookup, per given wallet ID, what addresses it owns - not the other way around.

You'll find that Piuk has already answered this question. The address is hashed with a secret key. Without the secret key, you can't generate the right hash to look up:

Quote from: piuk on December 19, 2012, 12:11:27 PM

. . . Addresses are hashed with a secret. With access to the secret it would be possible to hash every bitcoin address with a none zero balance and use that to compare against subscribed hashes to determine addresses in a wallet. The sacrifice of some anonymity when notifications are enabled has always been stated https://blockchain.info/wallet/anonymity. However it is no longer possible for admins to lookup an arbitrary wallet by address . . .

Bitcoinin

newbie

Activity: 44

Merit: 0

Quote from: Rassah on December 19, 2012, 05:24:27 PM

Quote from: Bitcoinin on December 19, 2012, 04:58:52 PM

What was achieved today?

Quite a few things:

My question was in relation to posting of customer information - most of your points weren't achieved specifically due to customer information being posted or could have been achieved in a variety of other, less damaging ways. The remaining achievements don't seem - to me at least - to be worth the probable damage done. ...and this is without even discussing the possible impact on innocent people when posting information that you don't know for sure is the scammer, legal implications of releasing info, etc.

Scamming isn't new - it is just different with Bitcoin. There are a million ecommerce stores on the internet who get scammed on a regular basis and have the same kinds of problems getting any kind of authority involved - even when the scammer might only be 10 miles away. They aren't posting customer info publicly everywhere, so why should a Bitcoin business trying to project a positive, professional image of Bitcoin resort to public shaming as the solution to their scamming?

ripper234

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1003

Ron Gross

Quote from: piuk on December 19, 2012, 11:34:06 AM

What has been changed

Roger and the support agent's access to this information has been revoked.
Bitcoin addresses stored for notification purposes have been deleted. Addresses are now stored as a SHA 256 hash of the address, which removes the ability to lookup a wallet by bitcoin address.
The secret phrase is now no longer shown to any admins

piuk, +10 for swiftly dealing with this.

A technical questions:

So what if an address is a SHA 256? How does that remove any lookup ability? To lookup by address, just hash it and look up the hash. It removes the ability to lookup, per given wallet ID, what addresses it owns - not the other way around.

Rassah

legendary

Activity: 1680

Merit: 1035

Quote from: DannyHamilton on December 19, 2012, 05:33:27 PM

Quote from: thebaron on December 19, 2012, 05:28:53 PM

So much bullshit over a guy doing private detective work to get his company's money back.

And violating the terms of a privacy statement in the process.

Luckily, one of those things has now been fixed.

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 4801

Quote from: wtfvanity on December 19, 2012, 05:26:25 PM

Quote from: DannyHamilton on December 19, 2012, 04:55:22 PM

Quote from: wtfvanity on December 19, 2012, 04:52:13 PM

Quote from: DannyHamilton on December 19, 2012, 04:50:10 PM

. . . Not a shock to anyone who took the time to read their privacy statement and anonymity information publicly available on their website . . .

Hashing it would not prevent looking it up . . .

I don't believe I requested hashing of anything.

Shut the fuck up . . .

You quoted me saying nothing about hashing, and responded to my quote by stating that hashing wouldn't prevent looking up information.

Where is this hostility coming from?

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 4801

Quote from: thebaron on December 19, 2012, 05:28:53 PM

So much bullshit over a guy doing private detective work to get his company's money back.

And violating the terms of a privacy statement in the process.

Topic: MemoryDealers.com founder Roger Ver abuses admin access at Blockchain.info - page 7. (Read 28778 times)