The other thing is, who decides which coins are tainted and which not. How does someone make Coins tainted, has everyone the same right to declare bitcoin as tainted?
I think the authorities are the ones who flagged coins who are stolen or not and this could be a lot of problem if they implemented something like this. I have read news that authorities can go as far as holding your account or freezing them to literally just confiscating them until you have proven the origin of your tokens. This could be a very problematic thing to do for a lot of people since they don't think of documenting each transaction they have. Another thing to point out too is people who are sending you "tainted coins" might not even be aware that they are tainted in the first place so technically anyone could be a target here once this has been implemented. 
Topic: SegWit and tainted coins (Read 200 times)
Another exchange hack, and Binance of all.
Hence why I need to own my keys and hold my own coins/tokens. There is too many risks involving exchanges.
Get in - Get out.
Trade with amounts that wouldn't destroy you if you lose it all in a hack.
Hence why I need to own my keys and hold my own coins/tokens. There is too many risks involving exchanges.
Get in - Get out.
Trade with amounts that wouldn't destroy you if you lose it all in a hack.
Just go by the definition of tainted. No one here holds the authority to declare anything because it is almost impossoble to track the trail of a coin as soon as it goes through a commercial mixer service.
That's true but as far as I know there is only a couple real mixing services with big volume which works on the bitcoin network. If these services block any incoming transactions coming from the thief's address, those coins are practically useless.
Let's see what we got:
1) The hacker wants to use bestmixer or chipmixer because those are good mixing services. If both of these services block the hacker's address, he is toast.
2) The hacker goes to an exchange to dump, he is already being tracked by every secret service there is. He can't do that, toast.
3) The hacker decides to do a p2p transaction. Dumb. Toast.
4) The hacker uses a shitty mixing service with low volume. He'll get tracked easily. Toast.
I don't see that he is getting away so easily with that amount but I might be wrong.
This topic is kind of like black money and white money, but this is digital crypto instead. Hilarious. Firstly, its hard enough differentiating between black and white FIAT which is why differentiating Bitcoin in this aspect is simply not possible.
Also, I feel like Bittrex is next unless they ramp up their security measures.
Also, I feel like Bittrex is next unless they ramp up their security measures.
I am a bit curious about the recent Binance Hack, in my opinion it was the same guy or girl of July 2018. I looked into the binance Hack of last year, where the nearly equal amount of 7k like this time got all transfered into SegWit Adresses, like the recent one.
Perhaps the reason for this is because a lot of merchants' and people's clients are already SegWit-enabled? There's not much to analyze here if you're pointing out that those coins are transferred to SegWit addresses. It should be the standard anyway.
My question is, are there any differences between tainted Coins and SegWit tainted Coins.
There aren't; they are still both bitcoins at the end of the day and tainted or not, people will still accept it as long as they can use it to buy something or for it to hold value.
The other thing is, who decides which coins are tainted and which not. How does someone make Coins tainted, has everyone the same right to declare bitcoin as tainted?
Thanks for helping.
Thanks for helping.
No authority decides which coins are tainted and which aren't. Blockchain parsing services can have it enabled (taint analysis) on their explorers or they don't, and it's entirely their call.
Tainted Bitcoins don't matter, it's still Bitcoin after all.
I don't think they could still trace the hacker through its address because it sounds like they have planned to do it for a long time so they have done it smoothly.
They have used different attacks which made hacking faster for them.
I don't think they could still trace the hacker through its address because it sounds like they have planned to do it for a long time so they have done it smoothly.
They have used different attacks which made hacking faster for them.
My question is, are there any differences between tainted Coins and SegWit tainted Coins.
The other thing is, who decides which coins are tainted and which not. How does someone make Coins tainted, has everyone the same right to declare bitcoin as tainted?
The other thing is, who decides which coins are tainted and which not. How does someone make Coins tainted, has everyone the same right to declare bitcoin as tainted?
Where did this idea came from? Tainted or not, bitcoin is bitcoin. No one here in his right mind wouldn’t accept bitcoin wherever it may come from. No one can make a coin tainted and no one has the right to declare it.
Everyone is using Segwit address now just because the hacker transferred it into a segwit address, you are thinking that they are the same people. What if he transferred it to a legacy address, you will not have that kind of presumption that he/she is the same person?
CZ is conducting already an investigation and as much as possible tracing the leads of the addresses which is highly impossible to determine. Who knows and what will be the result of it.
CZ is conducting already an investigation and as much as possible tracing the leads of the addresses which is highly impossible to determine. Who knows and what will be the result of it.
I am a bit curious about the recent Binance Hack, in my opinion it was the same guy or girl of July 2018. I looked into the binance Hack of last year, where the nearly equal amount of 7k like this time got all transferred into SegWit Adresses, like the recent one.
So.. you think the same hacker from last year is the same hacker that did this recent one, just because both used a SegWit address? Uhh.. no.
I think that's unreasonable. We can't conclude that it was committed by the same hacker just because the amount being hacked is nearly the same. Using Segwit address isn't a reason enough to say that it has been done by the same person. I think more than one person is involved since there are varieties of strategies being used. Let's wait for the result of the investigation then.
Why this discrimination? 
Tainted or not Tainted it is Bitcoin. First clear this fact.
How do you know that the same Hacker is involved, having a SegWit address does not means that the same Hacker was involved.
Lastly Since Changpeng Zhao (CZ) confirmed that it is hack does not means that the exchange got hacked. Let's not come into that conclusion. Things need to be investigated..
P.S - I still have my doubts about the Hack.
Tainted or not Tainted it is Bitcoin. First clear this fact.
How do you know that the same Hacker is involved, having a SegWit address does not means that the same Hacker was involved.
Lastly Since Changpeng Zhao (CZ) confirmed that it is hack does not means that the exchange got hacked. Let's not come into that conclusion. Things need to be investigated..
P.S - I still have my doubts about the Hack.
I am a bit curious about the recent Binance Hack, in my opinion it was the same guy or girl of July 2018. I looked into the binance Hack of last year, where the nearly equal amount of 7k like this time got all transfered into SegWit Adresses, like the recent one.
So.. you think the same hacker from last year is the same hacker that did this recent one, just because both used a SegWit address? Uhh.. no.
I dunno where you get your tainted ideas about Bitcoin tokens. There are no single authority that decides if coins are tainted or not. Yes, some people track some coins on the Blockchain before it goes through Mixer services, but after that was done... all traces or links to these coins are gone. They "taint" those coins with 3rd party software and not the Bitcoin protocol code.
I have made 1000s of transactions with loads of Bitcoin merchants and none of them even looked at the coins that I used to pay them. Satoshi never developed any code in the protocol that enabled people to "taint" coins. Just imagine if some government had the power to "taint" all 21 000 000 bitcoins in existance.
I have made 1000s of transactions with loads of Bitcoin merchants and none of them even looked at the coins that I used to pay them. Satoshi never developed any code in the protocol that enabled people to "taint" coins. Just imagine if some government had the power to "taint" all 21 000 000 bitcoins in existance.
I am a bit curious about the recent Binance Hack, in my opinion it was the same guy or girl of July 2018. I looked into the binance Hack of last year, where the nearly equal amount of 7k like this time got all transfered into SegWit Adresses, like the recent one.
My question is, are there any differences between tainted Coins and SegWit tainted Coins.
The other thing is, who decides which coins are tainted and which not. How does someone make Coins tainted, has everyone the same right to declare bitcoin as tainted?
Thanks for helping.
My question is, are there any differences between tainted Coins and SegWit tainted Coins.
The other thing is, who decides which coins are tainted and which not. How does someone make Coins tainted, has everyone the same right to declare bitcoin as tainted?
Thanks for helping.
Just go by the definition of tainted. No one here holds the authority to declare anything because it is almost impossoble to track the trail of a coin as soon as it goes through a commercial mixer service. There is nothing called Segwit tainted coins for the same reason!
Also, the hack value is estimated to be almost 40 million USD and it is not finalized yet! It may be more than this amount. Binance needs to seriously rethink about their security measures now!
Tainted ones don't even matter, you think someone on this forum won't accept bitcoins that are "tainted"
They are just as good as any other bitcoin and people will gladly accept them.
They are just as good as any other bitcoin and people will gladly accept them.
I am a bit curious about the recent Binance Hack, in my opinion it was the same guy or girl of July 2018. I looked into the binance Hack of last year, where the nearly equal amount of 7k like this time got all transfered into SegWit Adresses, like the recent one.
My question is, are there any differences between tainted Coins and SegWit tainted Coins.
The other thing is, who decides which coins are tainted and which not. How does someone make Coins tainted, has everyone the same right to declare bitcoin as tainted?
Thanks for helping.
My question is, are there any differences between tainted Coins and SegWit tainted Coins.
The other thing is, who decides which coins are tainted and which not. How does someone make Coins tainted, has everyone the same right to declare bitcoin as tainted?
Thanks for helping.
Jump to: