The part that concerns me is the rollbacks and the adjustment of the Bitcoin value. This was purely to regain trust in their system and make them look good. This is no different from Government meddling in my book. Adjusting the price of Bitcoins, This means they could drop the price, buy Bitcoins then make it artificially high and sell them. This sound like control to me and I don't remember reading about this feature in the specifications. In addition did this rollback rollback other transactions not related to the theft?
I though Bitcoin was a way to avoid control and meddling. I'm not convinced it can work now which is a pity.
Or do I have the wrong take on the handling of this 'bank job'?
I think you do, yes.
1) The rollback was a rollback of trades that had been performed using a hacked account. Imagine you had $500,000 in your current account; someone hacks it and spends it all. It wouldn't be unreasonable for the bank to rollback those transactions.
2) Mt.Gox the exchange is not Bitcoin. It is merely one service that uses bitcoins. An exchange. In fact, Mt.Gox makes very little use of Bitcoins other than to transfer them in and out of its own centralised, authority-bound world. Just like putting money in a bank; the bank can do what they like.
3) If the hacker had been able to transfer the huge number of coins straight out using the Bitcoin system itself rather than just Mt.Gox; those coins would be gone. There are no rollbacks with bitcoin. There was another theft a few days before, were some poor soul lost $250,000 thanks to a break in on their desktop computer (and some bad choices). That money is gone and won't be coming back. No rollbacks.
4) The price crash was caused by the hacker selling off massive quantities of bitcoins, utterly flooding the market. Every outstanding offer to buy bitcoins was met, even the crazy, opportunistic ones offering $0.01 for a bitcoin. Here's what's interesting though: even in those extraordinary circumstances, with a massive sell off, the price of bitcoins was rebounding even as Mt.Gox was shut down. It had reached around $13 before they pulled the plug. That tells us that the market had decided on a price, and even with huge (stolen) resources, that price can't be manipulated.
5) The rollback, as you can imagine, annoyed those people who thought they had just made the deal of the century and bought hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of Bitcoins for pennies. They were, in essence, complaining that they didn't get to keep stolen goods. You can take your own view on whether they or Mt.Gox were right. It's still nothing to do with the Bitcoin system itself.
6) Don't confuse Mt.Gox with the Bitcoin system. If anything, the Mt.Gox hack is a textbook example of the danger of centralised systems.
Bitcoin is not centralised. Compare the hack with the recent Citibank theft -- it told us something about Mt.Gox; not about Bitcoins; just as the Citibank told us something about Citibank, not about dollars.