Topic: Would it be possible to develop crypto address validation technology? (Read 277 times)

The distribution list has been structure to start transmitting the rewards. However, recent inflation in the gas fee has made it very costly. It requires 4 to 5 ETH to transfer all the rewards, while we are keeping it under 2 ETH. The gas fee has been set to 12 Gwei. The transaction will trigger itself when the gas price hits the set spot.

We will keep you posted.
Thanks

The address problems you had are purely a result of *extraordinary* incompetence (and sometimes malice) by the developers of altcoins and tokens. -- Malice in the case of coins which have fraudulently claimed to be bitcoin.

Bitcoin addresses already have extremely strong built in validation (even stronger in BC1 addresses), unfortunately various shitty clones and tokens did such a small amount of development that they just literally copy and pasted Bitcoin's addresses.

Because they copy and pasted from Bitcoin their addresses will obviously count as valid in Bitcoin and vice versa.  The only technology that can cure gross incompetence is the one we're using now:  A web forum where well informed people can urge you to steer clear of garbage so ineptly constructed that it can't even bother to get not shoot itself in the foot trough copy and paste.

You can improve your situation somewhat if you always use BC1 addresses for Bitcoin: So far I'm not aware of anyone dangerously copy and pasting it, and we particularly stuck the human visible "BC" at the beginning-- at a cost of a bit more typing-- to try to make it less likely that things will just copy it unmodified. But this is no guarantee and there is essentially no floor on how incompetent or unethical token pumpers can be, so you can expect eventually they'll copy the BC prefix too.

This makes sense. Like one of the pros of having such good cryptography brings the con of it being hard to develop coin ID technology based on an address. I hope in time something can be developed though. Not only is it prone to human error, but it's also time consuming to be manually checking addresses if you're frequently sending crypto.

People are just too much careless when sending any bitcoin to any address. Yes, they carefully look at the sending amount so that they don't mistakenly place an less or extro zero while writing the amount in satoshi, but don't give a look at the address which is being copy pasted in the to field. Sometimes the malware in the PC can change the destination address to the one which belongs to the scammer and we never know about it. It is always recommended to check letter by letter the destination address.

There has been a lot of issues like this; people do report that they mistakenly sent crypto to the wrong address. I understand how it feels, even when I’m sending cryptocurrency to people I do have that same fear of sending to the wrong address, and I’m always very careful and I double-check the address I have copied to make sure that it is right.

Even when I’m the one receiving cryptocurrency, when I am about to copy my address from my wallet, I check to be very sure that the cryptocurrency address I’m about to copy is accurate; if it’s Bitcoin I am about to receive, I check to see whether I am copying from the Bitcoin wallet. And this can be worst when you’re completely tired lol. But I have never had the experience of sending to the wrong address.

Of course, crypto address validation technology can be developed, so our mistakes in entering address coins can be avoided.
But until now I haven't found any exchanges or wallets that use crypto address validation technology. So I still do it manually,
before I process I will check again, usually 2x-3x the address coins are correct or not. That way I have been using cryptocurrency
for 3 years, never entering the wrong address for the coins to be sent or received.

this is exactly what the new bitcoin address encoding known as bech32 introduced. there is a human readable part at the beginning of each address (yo see it as "bc" for bitcoin mainnet addresses followed by '1' or the separator) where any shitcoin that copies bitcoin can also use with its own name.
currently a couple of these copy shitcoins are using this encoding. for example bcash is using the "bitcoincash" hrp for its addresses.

yes, even my self its happen like 2-3 times  because the address of coin hard to remember

---

and i think is possible in near future and maybe right now the coin need to be implemented new unique alias to make people easy remember it.

and yes there bunch coin out there that using same address like ERC 20 and other coin start with 0x

maybe add "Thenameofcoin" at the first of address can be the option right now for developer of the coin but its really hard right now with bunch of altcoin right there

Well Cryptocurrency is still a Beta Technology and lots of features are still missing because some of it are pretty hard to do, especially if those Crypto Tokens use different ecosystem and doesn't have static prefix at the end of their characters. I believe this is purposely structured that way, so trackers could have a very hard time locating what your doing with your Cryptocurrency.

Yes, this is good as a first layer of security, but if the user didn't check the address he is sending, then it will defeat the purpose. I would agree that this is really essential thing, but it seems very difficult to implement as well.

I would say that each and everyone of us really need to do due diligence and be very careful as this kind of mistakes is irreversible and very costly.

I have seen that in Binance DEX to send a coin, it allows you to verify your shipment by asking the question if you are sure to send the coin to the address you placed. MetaMask can also detect if an address is correct. But in the error that you mention only the most advisable thing is double check. With so many experiences lived and shared in crypto we must be very careful as a rule of thumb.

Manual validation is more relaxing. because if indeed a validation program was developed, manual validation would also be needed just to be sure. The last preview is an attempt to address the correct address, because as you said if the address is wrong BTC will not be able to come back again.

it's more like user mistake and most of the time they're doing it on exchange. if anything needs t be changed then exchange should be able to do it, like adding 5 confirmation before you make a token transactions.

seriously though, it's quite easy to double check whether you're sending to the right address or not, even though it's using the same address format. just open 2 window, one for your withdrawal, one for your deposit address and the token name.

i don't think the numbers are that high because even though mistakes like these happen but they are not common and whenever they happen there is always a simple way to recover the coins specially if the user has access to the private key. and if not the exchanges do recover these coins if the total value of it is high enough.

Thousands of coins worth $$$$ had been lost due this kind of user's mistake at least software/wallet developers build for somewhat user friendly that will help to avoid this if possible.

In order to develop such mechanisms of validation, the blockchain technology itself should evolve to such extent where user interfaces and convenience are more important than ensuring the functionality(robustness) of the system. The blockchain must first reach its maturity in technological terms. When technology is mature enough to only care about user experience, it will be a good sign for starting implementing checking and validation. First of all, for validation system to exist and work properly, the number of blockchains should drop significantly. Moreover, they must be easily distinguishable. Only then will it be possible to talk about the introduction of validation mechanisms, that is, recognition mechanisms. But like I said, it is to early to solve that particular problem, because we have many other that need to be solved before go further.

Probably there are some algorithms that could be used in design of such tool. Many people have this caution and fear every time they sent Bitcoin so I guess something that could verify the address might be of great help. I'm not the expert for this but I guess that there are multiple solutions to solve this, it's only the question if there is such interest.

I think there will soon be a project to do this. Sending wrong wallet addresses is very common and needs to be resolved. But there will need to be cooperation in the provision of crypto wallet data between projects. Every day, thousands of addresses are created. If all users are using wallet address recognition protocol then sending the wrong address will be handled easily.

I agree! Sending crypto to another wallet address is just like sending funds to a bank account number and its the senders obligation to check surely the intended recipient's address to avoid any issues.

At the same time, I also think that most wallet developers could implement some kind of bullet proof mechanism to check the validity of any address that will be used with its corresponding network.

Looks like something a united and organized crypto communities can solve. Projects could be made to have distinct addresses to make identifying them by both humans and softwares easy. Atleast this could be part of good standards that can be demanded from crypto developers. When you are rating a cryptocurrency, you also rate it based on how distinct its address is.  You rate cryptos without distinct addresses poorly in that regard.