Mastodon

Swarm City Is Now on Blockchain

After a recent hack where over 30 million in ETH were stolen from multiple blockchain projects, one project called Swarm City has started to get some recognition for having its wallet drained of 44k ETH. Mainstream media and lots of other press outlets have now shared the project’s name all over the place. I’d like … Continue reading Swarm City Is Now on Blockchain

The post Swarm City Is Now on Blockchain appeared first on NEWSBTC.

After a recent hack where over 30 million in ETH were stolen from multiple blockchain projects, one project called Swarm City has started to get some recognition for having its wallet drained of 44k ETH. Mainstream media and lots of other press outlets have now shared the project’s name all over the place. I’d like … Continue reading Swarm City Is Now on Blockchain

The post Swarm City Is Now on Blockchain appeared first on NEWSBTC.

Gemini Exchange Outage was Caused by Exceeding the AWS IOPS Quota

Users of the Gemini exchange may have noticed the company had some issues these past few days. Their primary production environment was dealing with some setbacks, which results in a paused trading engine. All systems are coming back online, but the team took the time to explain the situation. Hosting a primary production environment on … Continue reading Gemini Exchange Outage was Caused by Exceeding the AWS IOPS Quota

The post Gemini Exchange Outage was Caused by Exceeding the AWS IOPS Quota appeared first on NEWSBTC.

Users of the Gemini exchange may have noticed the company had some issues these past few days. Their primary production environment was dealing with some setbacks, which results in a paused trading engine. All systems are coming back online, but the team took the time to explain the situation. Hosting a primary production environment on … Continue reading Gemini Exchange Outage was Caused by Exceeding the AWS IOPS Quota

The post Gemini Exchange Outage was Caused by Exceeding the AWS IOPS Quota appeared first on NEWSBTC.

Hardware Wallets Are Not Immune to Attacks

TheMerkle_TREZORSecurely storing digital assets is a major concern for most cryptocurrency users. Wallets can be vulnerable to attack and while there are ways to protect yourself, not all users are as vigilant as others. For this reason, many people — including myself — have suggested using hardware wallets for storage because of their offline nature and robust security features. However, a recent post on Medium suggests that even these devices are not immune to attack. One of the most popular hardware wallets, Trezor, apparently was vulnerable. But how much do Trezor users need to worry? Worrying, but not Damning The original

TheMerkle_TREZOR

Securely storing digital assets is a major concern for most cryptocurrency users. Wallets can be vulnerable to attack and while there are ways to protect yourself, not all users are as vigilant as others. For this reason, many people — including myself — have suggested using hardware wallets for storage because of their offline nature and robust security features. However, a recent post on Medium suggests that even these devices are not immune to attack. One of the most popular hardware wallets, Trezor, apparently was vulnerable. But how much do Trezor users need to worry?

Worrying, but not Damning

The original post claimed that all Trezor devices were vulnerable to a fairly simple hack that allowed private keys to be stolen from the device. As we all know, private keys control coins, so you need to be in control of your keys if you want to ensure you own coins. If this vulnerability were exploited, then all the coins kept on the Trezor would be stolen from the device’s owner. The largest limitation to this attack is that it requires physical access to the hardware wallet itself. This means that there may have been relatively few potential victims, since many people who have hardware wallets keep them inside a safe or vault.

Trezor’s official blog addressed the issue and described how the attack worked. The seed for the private key is saved in flash memory and is moved to RAM during use. Someone with access to the device and the firmware would have been able to extract the seed from the device’s RAM. Trezor has released a firmware security update (1.5.2) to address these issues and to close all known vulnerabilities. The company has urged all users to update their firmware to protect themselves fully, even though the chance of an attacker gaining physical access to one’s device is pretty low already.

A Bit of Controversy

Both Trezor and the author of the original Medium post have accused each other of misrepresenting the situation and spreading misinformation to the public. The original post claimed that all current devices would need to be replaced to fully address the problem and that a firmware update would not sufficiently address the issue. Trezor maintains that this was not true and that its update renders all Trezor devices safe. The original poster has promised to release more information soon, so we will need to wait for their rebuttal to Trezor’s most recent response.

What Does This Mean for Users?

If you are a Trezor user, it means you need to update your firmware as soon as possible. The vulnerability appears to be unique to Trezor devices, so this does not affect you if you have a Ledger or other device. However, it does dispel the myth that hardware wallets are immune to attack. While Trezor responded and fixed the problem quickly, it shows that users of hardware wallets do need to be vigilant and stay up to date on firmware and potential threats. This was not a remotely executed attack as it required the actual device, so things could have been a lot worse.

Remember, you alone are responsible for your private keys and the safety of your cryptocurrency assets. Take the necessary precautions, do your research, and keep yourself safe.

Beware the Latest Bittrex Email Phishing Scam

TheMerkle Bittrex phishingCryptocurrency users are often exposed to various scams. Most of these come in the form of Ponzi schemes, phishing sites, and malware attacks. It appears a new Bittrex phishing site is making inroads these days, which tries to attract users through a phishing email campaign. It is not hard to spot the fake site, but quite a few people may fall for this scam regardless. Always be wary when receiving emails allegedly from exchanges that ask you to visit a site and confirm your identity. Bittrex Phishing Scam is Quite Problematic It is not the first nor the last time cryptocurrency exchange users

TheMerkle Bittrex phishing

Cryptocurrency users are often exposed to various scams. Most of these come in the form of Ponzi schemes, phishing sites, and malware attacks. It appears a new Bittrex phishing site is making inroads these days, which tries to attract users through a phishing email campaign. It is not hard to spot the fake site, but quite a few people may fall for this scam regardless. Always be wary when receiving emails allegedly from exchanges that ask you to visit a site and confirm your identity.

Bittrex Phishing Scam is Quite Problematic

It is not the first nor the last time cryptocurrency exchange users are targeted by phishing emails and cloned websites. The most-often targeted platform in this regard is Blockchain.info, as the company provides a very popular online wallet service for holders of Bitcoin and Ethereum. Users often receive fake emails from people impersonating the company as a way to guide them to a fake website and steal their login credentials. Other exchanges and wallet services have suffered from similar attacks, including the current Bittrex phishing scam.

This new scam is quite interesting, although it is unlikely to be overly successful. Its success hinges on how aware cryptocurrency users are. First of all, Bittrex never sends emails to customers asking them to prevent their accounts from being labeled inactive. Even if one does not visit the exchange for a full year, such emails will never be sent by the company. Whoever is behind this scam thinks people will fall for such a phishing attempt, yet the average cryptocurrency enthusiast should know much better than that.

In the email sent out to Bitrex users — and possibly non-Bittrex users too — the sender asks the recipient to click on a website link. This site redirects to a lookalike of the official Bittrex website, but it is hosted on an entirely different domain. In this case, the website leads to Bittrex.cam rather than Bittrex.com. It is only a minor detail, but not noticing the fake URL could result in people losing a significant part of their cryptocurrency portfolio.

Fortunately, people who use a password manager to generate strong and unique passwords for every platform will immediately notice something does not add up. After all, the password manager only works with the legitimate Bittrex domain. Since this phishing site is a fake website, they will not be able to insert their passwords automatically. That alone is always a solid indication to distinguish between legitimate and phishing platforms. It also shows why more people need to take password security far more seriously than they have done up until now.

The email sent out to users looks pretty fake as well. There are multiple spelling and grammatical errors in the message, indicating this email is not necessarily composed by a native English speaker. The copyright message at the bottom looks incomplete as well, and the header images will not load automatically as the email sender is not trusted nor verified. Indeed, everything about the email looks and feels fake, even though the website to which users are redirected looks genuine enough. That is, until you pay close attention to the address bar in your browser.

Given the recent popularity surge Bittrex has seen, it is not entirely surprising that this exchange would be targeted by phishing attempts. Criminals will always look for new ways to make money, and stealing login credentials from exchange users can be a very lucrative venture. Anyone who uses the Bittrex exchange and receives an email claiming their account is inactive should ignore the message. This is not the last time we will see scam attempts like these.

Cybercrime Is on the Rise in the Ethereum Ecosystem

TheMerkle Ethereum CybercrimeMost cryptocurrency enthusiasts see Ethereum as a project that has a lot of potential. Its technology — most notably smart contracts — is certainly worth exploring. Unfortunately, any new form of technology will also attract people with less-than-honest intentions. The Ethereum ecosystem has become a home to cybercrime in a disturbing way. Millions of dollars have been stolen over the past few years, and it looks like things will not be improving anytime soon. Cybercrime in the Ethereum World is Very Real Most Ethereum enthusiasts will agree that the technology used by project developers leaves much to be desired. This is especially

TheMerkle Ethereum Cybercrime

Most cryptocurrency enthusiasts see Ethereum as a project that has a lot of potential. Its technology — most notably smart contracts — is certainly worth exploring. Unfortunately, any new form of technology will also attract people with less-than-honest intentions. The Ethereum ecosystem has become a home to cybercrime in a disturbing way. Millions of dollars have been stolen over the past few years, and it looks like things will not be improving anytime soon.

Cybercrime in the Ethereum World is Very Real

Most Ethereum enthusiasts will agree that the technology used by project developers leaves much to be desired. This is especially true on the security front. Some very disturbing exploits have been discovered and taken advantage of in recent years. A new post on the Chainalysis blog explains how cybercrime related to Ethereum is on the rise, as it has proven to be a very profitable undertaking. Whether a DAO or cryptocurrency ICO, hackers will exploit any weakness they can find.

Cryptocurrency users will remember how Ethereum started gaining a lot of momentum when The Dao was announced. This massive project had a lot of promise, and its business model is still considered to be solid to this very day. Unfortunately for The DAO and the team behind this project, their dream concept quickly turned into a nightmare.  Raising around US$177 million in funding was a big milestone, but was also bound to attract criminals. It did not take all that long for smart contract flaws to be discovered, eventually leading to 40% of all ICO funds being stolen. Some of this money was eventually recovered, but it showed how immature the technology was at that time.

Unfortunately for Ethereum, things have not improved all that much in the past year. Cryptocurrency ICOs have become more popular than ever. Not only do these crowdsales cripple the blockchain on a regular basis, there is also a significant security risk associated with such projects. There are dozens of scam sites and phishing attempts to steal investors’ funds in one way or another. According to Chainalysis, around 10% of Ethereum holdings in ICO investments are in the hands of criminals. This means nearly US$150 million worth of Ether has fallen into the wrong hands. That is a substantial amount that will most likely never be recovered.

As more cryptocurrency ICOs take place, there will naturally be more ERC20 tokens. That in itself is not a big deal, for the time being. With over US$1.6 billion raised by most recent projects, there is a lot of money moving around in the cryptocurrency world. This will always attract people with both honest and malicious intentions alike. In a recent incident, one cryptocurrency ICO saw the smart contract address on its website changed by a hacker. This situation was resolved quickly, but not before some customers had sent a lot of money to the wrong address as a result.

Bugs found in the code used by Ethereum-based projects are just one of the potential threats. Phishing attacks are the main concern, with the number of victims well above the 16,000 mark. Exploits are the second-most common threat, followed by effective hacks and Ponzi Schemes. All of this goes to show that most projects themselves have nothing but honest intentions. Whether or not that will remain to be the case is anybody’s guess.

Having entities such as Chainalysis keep tabs on these trends and highlight bad elements is quite beneficial to the Ethereum community as a whole. Clearly there is work to be done in this regard. The technology itself is improving, which is a positive trend. Protecting users from phishing attacks is a different matter altogether. If a user cannot tell the difference between a fake and genuine email or website, there is very little project operators can do to make it more obvious.

Bitcoin Price Rocketed From $3,000 to $4,000 in Merely 62 Days

Since 2012, Bitcoin’s price has demonstrated an exponential increase in value amidst a rapid rise in global adoption, growing demand from institutional investors, and significant maturation of international markets. Bitcoin is a Well Performing Asset A well-known cryptocurrency researcher with the online alias “Jack Sparrow” released their findings on how long it took Bitcoin to reach certain price benchmarks (all values in USD): $0 to $1,000: 1,789 days $1,000 to $2,000: 1,271 days $2,000 to $3,000: 23 days $3,000 to $4,000: 62 days Extrapolating from the information above, it took seven years for Bitcoin’s price to increase from US$0 to US$2,000. However,

Since 2012, Bitcoin’s price has demonstrated an exponential increase in value amidst a rapid rise in global adoption, growing demand from institutional investors, and significant maturation of international markets.

Bitcoin is a Well Performing Asset

A well-known cryptocurrency researcher with the online alias “Jack Sparrow” released their findings on how long it took Bitcoin to reach certain price benchmarks (all values in USD):

  • $0 to $1,000: 1,789 days
  • $1,000 to $2,000: 1,271 days
  • $2,000 to $3,000: 23 days
  • $3,000 to $4,000: 62 days

Extrapolating from the information above, it took seven years for Bitcoin’s price to increase from US$0 to US$2,000. However, for the price to increase an additional US$2,000 from the US$2,000 mark took only 85 days, less than three months in total.

Many of the largest multi-billion dollar financial institutions including Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan and Fidelity Investments have expressed their optimism toward Bitcoin. Fidelity has been operating both Bitcoin and Ethereum mining equipment in order to better understand the two cryptocurrencies, while Goldman Sachs has encouraged its clients and portfolio managers to invest in Bitcoin because the US$140 billion cryptocurrency market can simply no longer be ignored.

Still, conventional economists and traditional investors such as Peter Schiff continue to call Bitcoin a bubble, regardless of the market and the confidence of investors in Bitcoin. Schiff’s negativity towards Bitcoin is understandable, since his businesses and clients almost entirely rely on the performance of gold. However, considering Bitcoin’s rapid growth and the sheer magnitude of the cryptocurrency market, it may be a bit naive to describe either as a bubble.

By definition, a bubble is an abrupt increase in the value of an economy or asset that strongly exceeds the asset’s intrinsic value. It can be argued that almost every asset or currency in the world lacks intrinsic value, because value is subjective and depends on the demand of the market.

Bitcoin has been able to demonstrate such exponential growth and increase in value due to global acceptance of the cryptocurrency as digital gold, a safe haven asset, a long-term investment, and a digital currency. Multi-billion dollar institutional investors have begun pouring money into Bitcoin due to its high liquidity and established networks. Additionally, mainstream media including CNBC, The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg have started to provide extensive coverage of Bitcoin alongside reserve currencies and gold.

During its rise from US$0 to US$4,000, Bitcoin has established an international user base and experienced significant global adoption. In the upcoming years, some analysts expect the Bitcoin price to surpass the US$10,000 mark and eventually enter the US$100,000 region. One way for the Bitcoin price to enjoy a meteoric rise in value would be by facilitating and addressing the rising demand from institutional investors.

Previously, Saxo Bank and its analyst Kay Van-Petersen revealed their US$100,000 prediction for the price of Bitcoin.

This is not a fad, cryptocurrencies are here to stay. There will emerge two to three main ones. Bitcoin will be one of those. And the reason is the first-mover advantage, the scale and the pioneering,” Peterson told CNBC.

Already, leading Bitcoin exchanges and major markets including Coinbase, Gemini and the Chicago Board Options Exchange are actively working on developing infrastructures for institutional and retail investors.

“Gemini’s key concerns in the cryptocurrency ecosystem have always been security, compliance, and regulatory oversight. By working with the team at CBOE, we are helping to make bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies increasingly accessible to both retail and institutional investors,” Gemini founder and CEO Tyler Winklevoss stated.

Bitcoin may only just be beginning its greatest increase yet.

‘Bitcoin cash’ soars to record high above $900 as ‘mining’ profits jump – CNBC


CNBC

Bitcoin cash’ soars to record high above $900 as ‘mining’ profits jump
CNBC
The bitcoin cash offshoot, bitcoin cash, jumped to a record high near $1,000 Saturday in high trade volume, primarily from South Korea. After bitcoin cash this week showed its potential for significantly increasing transaction speeds, digital currency
Congress Considering Validating BitcoinThe Daily Caller

all 4 news articles »


CNBC

'Bitcoin cash' soars to record high above $900 as 'mining' profits jump
CNBC
The bitcoin cash offshoot, bitcoin cash, jumped to a record high near $1,000 Saturday in high trade volume, primarily from South Korea. After bitcoin cash this week showed its potential for significantly increasing transaction speeds, digital currency ...
Congress Considering Validating BitcoinThe Daily Caller

all 4 news articles »

A Bitcoin Social Media Storm Hit BitPay This Week: Here’s Why

Everyone’s Mad at BitPay. Here’s Why.

The Bitcoin community is not taking kindly to BitPay this week. Influential developers are accusing the major payment processor of fraud, Bitcoin users on social media are calling for boycots, bitcoin.org is removing recommendations of the company’s products, and NBitcoin developer Nicolas Dorier has launched an initiative to fork some of BitPay’s projects altogether.

Here’s why.

Bitcore

The controversial issue has to do with Bitcore.

Bitcore is a type of Bitcoin node developed by BitPay. It is specifically designed to offer a development platform, on top of which it is easy to build all kinds of Bitcoin applications. Anyone can use this open-source tool; some of the better-known applications that utilize it include video-streaming service Streamium, Trezor’s web interface and BitPay’s own Copay wallet.

Within the next a couple of days, most likely on August 23, the long-awaited Bitcoin protocol upgrade Segregated Witness (SegWit) will activate. Seemingly in response to this upgrade, BitPay published a blog post titled What Bitcore Users Need to Know to Be Ready for SegWit Activation

But not everyone is happy with the contents of this blog post…

The “Major Risk” That Is (or Isn’t) SegWit

The first problem is not the most important problem, but it is worth mentioning, regardless. It concerns the topic of the blog post itself: Segregated Witness.

In the blog post, BitPay states:

Nodes which fail to upgrade to support SegWit will face major security risks, including the risk of double-spend transaction fraud.

This appears to be a bit of an exaggeration.

Segregated Witness is specifically designed to be backwards compatible. Regular nodes that do not upgrade remain part of the Bitcoin network. And importantly, since SegWit was activated by a unanimous hash-power majority, all miners should be enforcing the new rules. As such, transactions that are invalid according the new rules should never be accepted in any Bitcoin blocks at all. Even non-upgraded nodes should never see these invalid transactions confirm.

It is true that — like every other soft fork before SegWit — there are some increased risks for non-upgraded nodes. And in an additional blog post, BitPay does provide more details and nuance regarding the situation.

But the somewhat alarmist tone of the first blog post seems a bit unnecessary. Therefore, to many it appears to have had the specific goal of pushing users toward a software upgrade for very different reasons.

Which brings us to the next point…

The “Upgrade” That Is (or Isn’t) Bitcoin

While BitPay’s alarmist tone seemed like an unnecessary means, it’s the end that really ticked so many people off.

As per the “New York Agreement,” a significant group of Bitcoin companies, mining pools and individuals plans to adopt an incompatible set of protocol rules by November. Dubbed “SegWit2x,” and implemented in the BTC1 software developed by former Bitcoin Core contributor Jeff Garzik, this project would “hard fork” an increase of Bitcoin’s block weight limit, allowing for blocks of up to eight megabytes. (Whether this should technically be called a hard fork or an altcoin is debatable, but never mind that for now.)

The problem is that, while a significant group of Bitcoin companies — including, indeed, BitPay — signed on to the New York Agreement, this agreement currently does not have industry-wide consensus. Most notably, Bitcoin’s development community has almost unanimously rejected the proposal. There is also a long list of companies that never signed onto the initiative in the first place; in fact, some of them are actively opposed to it. And more informal metrics, like social media sentiment, opinion polls and network node count generally also show limited support for SegWit2x.

As such, it is likely that SegWit2x would split off to create a new blockchain and currency, not unlike what Bitcoin Cash (Bcash) did. Unlike Bcash, however, SegWit2x currently has no intention of picking a new name, nor does it plan to implement safety precautions like replay protection. (Replay protection would prevent the “same” coin from accidentally being spent on both chains.) For all intents and purposes, the companies behind SegWit2x appear to be set to claim this coin is the “real” Bitcoin, while the coin that follows the current Bitcoin protocol won’t be.

This approach is controversial. Many Bitcoin users that do not support the hard fork may prefer to keep using Bitcoin as is, without worrying about added (replay) risks or other inconveniences caused by SegWit2x. And if two different coins claim the name “Bitcoin,” it could lead to much confusion, for obvious reasons.

Regardless, in BitPay’s blog post, which speaks of an “upgrade” for Bitcore users in preparation for SegWit, the payment processor actually directs readers to download the BTC1 software; that is, the software that embeds the SegWit2x protocol, rather than the current Bitcoin protocol. It therefore appeared that the company was really trying to get Bitcore users to switch to a whole new coin, which BitPay will consider “Bitcoin.” And the payment processor initially did so without so much as warning Bitcore users that following these instructions would make them incompatible with the current Bitcoin protocol by November.

Herein lies the concern: BitPay must have known that this advice is controversial. Failing to mention the risks or consequences made the blog post seem deceptive.

The Hash Power That Supports (or Doesn’t Support) SegWit2x

Finally, after BitPay faced initial blowback for its blog post for reasons described, it included an addendum. In it, the payment processor writes:

[O]ur instructions follow this version of Bitcoin because over 95% of Bitcoin miners have adopted Segwit2x.

While this addendum provides a little bit more clarity, it is once again a bit of a questionable statement.

Perhaps most importantly: If BTC1 indeed hard forks in November, BitPay right now has no way of knowing how much hash power will really be mining on the SegWit2x chain.

While it is true that mining pools currently representing a supermajority of hash power signed on to the New York Agreement, mining pools usually don’t have full control over the hash power that is pointed toward their pools. Much of this hash power actually belongs to individual miners (“hashers”), who could switch to a new pool with the click of a few buttons. (For example, when another mining pool, Ghash.io, reached over 50 percent of total hash power on the network a couple of years ago, hashers were also urged to move to different pools.)

Furthermore, even if a specific mining pool does control its hash power, nothing in the New York Agreement says these pools should mine on the SegWit2x chain exclusively. Since miners typically dedicate their hash power to maximize profit, it is very possible that this hash power will be attributed to different chains according to the value of the coins on these chains. (This is what usually happens between altcoins. Similarly, just over the past couple of weeks, some signatories to the New York Agreement have already begun directing some hash power to the Bcash chain.)

In its addendum, BitPay appears to be ignoring these dynamics. Once again, this has an air of deceptiveness.

In BitPay’s Defense…

All that said, it should be noted that the risks are still limited, even if users follow BitPay’s instructions.

This is because BitPay is not (currently) suggesting that users run BTC1 software to send and receive transactions. Rather, BitPay is advising users to connect their Bitcore nodes to a BTC1 node as a “border node.” This means that the BTC1 node will essentially act as a network filter to reject all transactions invalid under the new SegWit rules.

Until the hard fork in November, using BTC1 as a border node shouldn’t do any harm whatsoever. BTC1 is compatible with the Bitcoin network until that point in time, and indeed enforces the new SegWit rules.

If no further action is taken, the BTC1 border node would switch to the SegWit2x blockchain by November. But even then, the current Bitcore nodes that are used to send and receive transactions will not make that switch. As such, BTC1 nodes would only let SegWit2x transactions through, which would then, in turn, be rejected by Bitcore nodes. This incompatibility between the two nodes actually means that no blocks would come through at all.

As such, no one would send or accept (confirmed) payments in a different coin than they mean to. In a worst case scenario, the whole setup essentially shuts down.

While the blog post appears deceptive in some ways, BitPay’s advice shouldn’t, in itself, cause a of loss funds.

Shortly before publication of this article, BitPay CEO Stephen Pair said in statement to Bitcoin Magazine:

This was unfortunately not the way I had intended this conversation to begin. I will have more to say on this topic in the near future, and feel I owe it to the community to say something. Unfortunately, it may take a little while for that communication to happen as I have other matters demanding my attention at the moment.

The post A Bitcoin Social Media Storm Hit BitPay This Week: Here’s Why appeared first on Bitcoin Magazine.

Everyone’s Mad at BitPay. Here’s Why.

The Bitcoin community is not taking kindly to BitPay this week. Influential developers are accusing the major payment processor of fraud, Bitcoin users on social media are calling for boycots, bitcoin.org is removing recommendations of the company’s products, and NBitcoin developer Nicolas Dorier has launched an initiative to fork some of BitPay’s projects altogether.

Here’s why.

Bitcore

The controversial issue has to do with Bitcore.

Bitcore is a type of Bitcoin node developed by BitPay. It is specifically designed to offer a development platform, on top of which it is easy to build all kinds of Bitcoin applications. Anyone can use this open-source tool; some of the better-known applications that utilize it include video-streaming service Streamium, Trezor’s web interface and BitPay’s own Copay wallet.

Within the next a couple of days, most likely on August 23, the long-awaited Bitcoin protocol upgrade Segregated Witness (SegWit) will activate. Seemingly in response to this upgrade, BitPay published a blog post titled What Bitcore Users Need to Know to Be Ready for SegWit Activation

But not everyone is happy with the contents of this blog post…

The “Major Risk” That Is (or Isn’t) SegWit

The first problem is not the most important problem, but it is worth mentioning, regardless. It concerns the topic of the blog post itself: Segregated Witness.

In the blog post, BitPay states:

Nodes which fail to upgrade to support SegWit will face major security risks, including the risk of double-spend transaction fraud.

This appears to be a bit of an exaggeration.

Segregated Witness is specifically designed to be backwards compatible. Regular nodes that do not upgrade remain part of the Bitcoin network. And importantly, since SegWit was activated by a unanimous hash-power majority, all miners should be enforcing the new rules. As such, transactions that are invalid according the new rules should never be accepted in any Bitcoin blocks at all. Even non-upgraded nodes should never see these invalid transactions confirm.

It is true that — like every other soft fork before SegWit — there are some increased risks for non-upgraded nodes. And in an additional blog post, BitPay does provide more details and nuance regarding the situation.

But the somewhat alarmist tone of the first blog post seems a bit unnecessary. Therefore, to many it appears to have had the specific goal of pushing users toward a software upgrade for very different reasons.

Which brings us to the next point…

The “Upgrade” That Is (or Isn’t) Bitcoin

While BitPay’s alarmist tone seemed like an unnecessary means, it’s the end that really ticked so many people off.

As per the “New York Agreement,” a significant group of Bitcoin companies, mining pools and individuals plans to adopt an incompatible set of protocol rules by November. Dubbed “SegWit2x,” and implemented in the BTC1 software developed by former Bitcoin Core contributor Jeff Garzik, this project would “hard fork” an increase of Bitcoin’s block weight limit, allowing for blocks of up to eight megabytes. (Whether this should technically be called a hard fork or an altcoin is debatable, but never mind that for now.)

The problem is that, while a significant group of Bitcoin companies — including, indeed, BitPay — signed on to the New York Agreement, this agreement currently does not have industry-wide consensus. Most notably, Bitcoin’s development community has almost unanimously rejected the proposal. There is also a long list of companies that never signed onto the initiative in the first place; in fact, some of them are actively opposed to it. And more informal metrics, like social media sentiment, opinion polls and network node count generally also show limited support for SegWit2x.

As such, it is likely that SegWit2x would split off to create a new blockchain and currency, not unlike what Bitcoin Cash (Bcash) did. Unlike Bcash, however, SegWit2x currently has no intention of picking a new name, nor does it plan to implement safety precautions like replay protection. (Replay protection would prevent the “same” coin from accidentally being spent on both chains.) For all intents and purposes, the companies behind SegWit2x appear to be set to claim this coin is the “real” Bitcoin, while the coin that follows the current Bitcoin protocol won’t be.

This approach is controversial. Many Bitcoin users that do not support the hard fork may prefer to keep using Bitcoin as is, without worrying about added (replay) risks or other inconveniences caused by SegWit2x. And if two different coins claim the name “Bitcoin,” it could lead to much confusion, for obvious reasons.

Regardless, in BitPay’s blog post, which speaks of an “upgrade” for Bitcore users in preparation for SegWit, the payment processor actually directs readers to download the BTC1 software; that is, the software that embeds the SegWit2x protocol, rather than the current Bitcoin protocol. It therefore appeared that the company was really trying to get Bitcore users to switch to a whole new coin, which BitPay will consider “Bitcoin.” And the payment processor initially did so without so much as warning Bitcore users that following these instructions would make them incompatible with the current Bitcoin protocol by November.

Herein lies the concern: BitPay must have known that this advice is controversial. Failing to mention the risks or consequences made the blog post seem deceptive.

The Hash Power That Supports (or Doesn’t Support) SegWit2x

Finally, after BitPay faced initial blowback for its blog post for reasons described, it included an addendum. In it, the payment processor writes:

[O]ur instructions follow this version of Bitcoin because over 95% of Bitcoin miners have adopted Segwit2x.

While this addendum provides a little bit more clarity, it is once again a bit of a questionable statement.

Perhaps most importantly: If BTC1 indeed hard forks in November, BitPay right now has no way of knowing how much hash power will really be mining on the SegWit2x chain.

While it is true that mining pools currently representing a supermajority of hash power signed on to the New York Agreement, mining pools usually don’t have full control over the hash power that is pointed toward their pools. Much of this hash power actually belongs to individual miners (“hashers”), who could switch to a new pool with the click of a few buttons. (For example, when another mining pool, Ghash.io, reached over 50 percent of total hash power on the network a couple of years ago, hashers were also urged to move to different pools.)

Furthermore, even if a specific mining pool does control its hash power, nothing in the New York Agreement says these pools should mine on the SegWit2x chain exclusively. Since miners typically dedicate their hash power to maximize profit, it is very possible that this hash power will be attributed to different chains according to the value of the coins on these chains. (This is what usually happens between altcoins. Similarly, just over the past couple of weeks, some signatories to the New York Agreement have already begun directing some hash power to the Bcash chain.)

In its addendum, BitPay appears to be ignoring these dynamics. Once again, this has an air of deceptiveness.

In BitPay’s Defense…

All that said, it should be noted that the risks are still limited, even if users follow BitPay’s instructions.

This is because BitPay is not (currently) suggesting that users run BTC1 software to send and receive transactions. Rather, BitPay is advising users to connect their Bitcore nodes to a BTC1 node as a “border node.” This means that the BTC1 node will essentially act as a network filter to reject all transactions invalid under the new SegWit rules.

Until the hard fork in November, using BTC1 as a border node shouldn’t do any harm whatsoever. BTC1 is compatible with the Bitcoin network until that point in time, and indeed enforces the new SegWit rules.

If no further action is taken, the BTC1 border node would switch to the SegWit2x blockchain by November. But even then, the current Bitcore nodes that are used to send and receive transactions will not make that switch. As such, BTC1 nodes would only let SegWit2x transactions through, which would then, in turn, be rejected by Bitcore nodes. This incompatibility between the two nodes actually means that no blocks would come through at all.

As such, no one would send or accept (confirmed) payments in a different coin than they mean to. In a worst case scenario, the whole setup essentially shuts down.

While the blog post appears deceptive in some ways, BitPay’s advice shouldn’t, in itself, cause a of loss funds.

Shortly before publication of this article, BitPay CEO Stephen Pair said in statement to Bitcoin Magazine:

This was unfortunately not the way I had intended this conversation to begin. I will have more to say on this topic in the near future, and feel I owe it to the community to say something. Unfortunately, it may take a little while for that communication to happen as I have other matters demanding my attention at the moment.

The post A Bitcoin Social Media Storm Hit BitPay This Week: Here's Why appeared first on Bitcoin Magazine.

SEC: More ICO Regulation Coming, Issuing Investment Guidelines

TheMerkle SEC Cryptocurrency ICOSAbout a week ago, the cryptocurrency world received a bit of a nasty surprise. The SEC had officially confirmed it was looking into regulation of cryptocurrency ICOs. A new statement from the U.S. agency has clarified just what it aims to achieve in the long run. The SEC is mainly concerned with the risks these ICOs pose, including fake pitches and hard sells. It is a stark warning, though it does not bring us any closer to ICO regulation just yet. SEC Continues to Eye Cryptocurrency ICOs and Their Risks Everyone who has ever looked at a sales pitch for a cryptocurrency ICO will acknowledge there are some

TheMerkle SEC Cryptocurrency ICOS

About a week ago, the cryptocurrency world received a bit of a nasty surprise. The SEC had officially confirmed it was looking into regulation of cryptocurrency ICOs. A new statement from the U.S. agency has clarified just what it aims to achieve in the long run. The SEC is mainly concerned with the risks these ICOs pose, including fake pitches and hard sells. It is a stark warning, though it does not bring us any closer to ICO regulation just yet.

SEC Continues to Eye Cryptocurrency ICOs and Their Risks

Everyone who has ever looked at a sales pitch for a cryptocurrency ICO will acknowledge there are some real risks associated. In most cases, users send Ethereum funds to a smart contract address and receive a certain amount of ICO tokens in return. Once the company raises enough money, the ICO is over and the future development of the project theoretically begins. However, there is no enforceable commitment for those companies to complete their projects, as the investors’ money resides in the smart contract the company created. If it fails to deliver on its promise, there is no real penalty for doing so.

So far, it seems there are few such “scams” to speak of just yet. However, the SEC warns the public about the potential dangers inherent in ICOs in its latest statement. The organization appears to have a few key concerns regarding the trend. Since virtually none of these cryptocurrency ICOs are registered with the SEC, none of them are officially recognized by the U.S. That means investors in failed projects will not have their funds recovered. Non-registered projects are not covered by federal securities laws, which means the money is pretty much gone. This is not an ideal situation for any investor.

It seems the aspect of cryptocurrency ICOs that concerns the SEC the most is how they are organized. In most cases, investments on such a scale are only accessible by accredited investors. In the world of ICOs, however, the requirement of investors to be registered rarely exists. Any project which deems itself exempt from such registration should be treated with the utmost caution, according to the SEC. After all, investors have no idea what their money will be used for exactly. A development roadmap or white paper would explain a lot, but there is no official guarantee or promise whatsoever.

Furthermore, the SEC wants investors to legitimately ask themselves the question of how they would get their money back if needed. Most cryptocurrency ICOs have a refund mechanism in place for unsatisfied investors. In a lot of cases, it would take a lot of time and effort to get one’s original investment back. This is a big problem that does not exist in the regulated world, as investors can always get their money back in one way or another. Thankfully, investors can often resell their tokens on exchanges in an attempt to recover their money if needed.

There are plenty of other things to be wary of when looking at cryptocurrency ICOs. Investors need to ponder whether or not the project’s blockchain is open and public, if the code has been published, and whether or not an independent audit has occurred. That last one is often a requirement to get ICO tokens listed on the big cryptocurrency exchanges. Not all projects go through those motions and will not see their tokens listed as a result. It is a major pitfall for investors when that happens.

In a way, it is good to see the SEC focus on cryptocurrency ICOs. These projects attract a lot of money and investors from all over the world including in the U.S. However, imposing regulation will likely make ICOs far less appealing to U.S. investors. It will be interesting to see how this situation plays out over the coming months and years. Right now, most ICOs dissuade U.S. citizens from investing, for obvious reasons. That situation may not necessarily change anytime soon.

Bitcoin Cash Price Nears $1000 as Breakout Continues – CoinDesk


CoinDesk

Bitcoin Cash Price Nears $1000 as Breakout Continues
CoinDesk
At press time, the cryptocurrency that powers an alternative version of the bitcoin protocol, had reached a high of more than $920 during today’s session, up more than 70% from its price of $543 just 24 hours ago. The development comes at a time when …
Bitcoin Cash Price Surpassed $700: Driving ForcesCoinTelegraph
Bitcoin Price Maintains $4000 Value as Expected dip Takes PlaceThe Merkle
Markets Update: Bitcoin Cash Rallies for Three Solid DaysBitcoin News (press release)
City A.M. –CryptoCoinsNews
all 13 news articles »

CoinDesk

Bitcoin Cash Price Nears $1000 as Breakout Continues
CoinDesk
At press time, the cryptocurrency that powers an alternative version of the bitcoin protocol, had reached a high of more than $920 during today's session, up more than 70% from its price of $543 just 24 hours ago. The development comes at a time when ...
Bitcoin Cash Price Surpassed $700: Driving ForcesCoinTelegraph
Bitcoin Price Maintains $4000 Value as Expected dip Takes PlaceThe Merkle
Markets Update: Bitcoin Cash Rallies for Three Solid DaysBitcoin News (press release)
City A.M. -CryptoCoinsNews
all 13 news articles »

Bitcoin Cash Price Nears $1,000 as Breakout Continues

The value of an alternative version of the bitcoin blockchain is soaring at press time, setting a new all-time high near $1,000.

The value of an alternative version of the bitcoin blockchain is soaring at press time, setting a new all-time high near $1,000.

This Floating Solar Farm Can Power 15,000 Homes

TheMerkle_Tesla Rooftop Tiles Solar PanelSolar energy is the next frontier for both companies and consumers. Tackling this space will not be all that easy, though. Running a major solar farm is still quite costly and requires a lot of space in which to place solar panels. The Chinese city of Huainan is best known for its coal reserves, but it is also now the place where the world’s largest floating solar farm is found, sitting atop a coal mine. A Floating Solar Farm is Quite Mesmerizing Most people think of solar farms as roofs covered with solar panels, or vast areas in the desert where panels

TheMerkle_Tesla Rooftop Tiles Solar Panel

Solar energy is the next frontier for both companies and consumers. Tackling this space will not be all that easy, though. Running a major solar farm is still quite costly and requires a lot of space in which to place solar panels. The Chinese city of Huainan is best known for its coal reserves, but it is also now the place where the world’s largest floating solar farm is found, sitting atop a coal mine.

A Floating Solar Farm is Quite Mesmerizing

Most people think of solar farms as roofs covered with solar panels, or vast areas in the desert where panels are located. That is how most farms are built, but the Chinese have a habit of doing things differently.  In the city of Huainan is the world’s largest floating solar farm, which rests atop one of the old coal mines in the region. Since coal production is still vital to the country, this augmentation was well-received and perceived as less of a threat than it otherwise would have been.

In 2008, nearly 20% of all coal production in China came from Huainan. That is a significant amount, yet it appears the region is slowly moving to more renewable energy sources. With the world’s largest floating solar farm resting atop one of those coal mines, generating electricity through different means will become even more important in the future.

This solar farm is currently generating electricity. With a 40-megawatt power plant running 120,000 solar panels, this facility will yield some interesting statistics in the near future. The US$45 million investment already has the potential to power around 15,000 homes for a full year. All things considered, this is by far one of the largest renewable energy operations  in the world today.

Floating solar farms are nothing new, though they seemed more of a niche project just a few years ago. In 2017, such projects can be found in many countries around the world. China has taken the concept considerably further than any other nation. This particular farm has over six times the output capacity of the second-largest floating solar farm, which is located in the United Kingdom.

Building a floating solar farm is the most expensive solar solution at present. It must be designed to withstand humidity as well as salt found in water. At the same time, a floating farm has certain advantages, including the fact that it is built on otherwise unused surfaces. Plus, it is far more efficient compared to other solutions, as the water on which it floats can be used to help cool the panels. There is no risk of losing water in the lake as these farms effectively mitigate evaporation. 

Taking a flooded coal mine and turning it into a viable floating solar farm is an amazing idea. The World Economic Forum certainly seems to think so too. Finding practical solutions for such a venture is not easy, considering this particular farm is larger than 160 American football fields combined. It is not something most people would think to install without giving it a second thought.  This particular farm located in the province of Anhui is extremely interesting and worth following its development.

Crypto Exchange Review: Binance

There are many cryptocurrency exchanges in China. Every digital asset creator and coin developer wants to ensure his or her project gains entry into China in one way or another, and having a fiat currency gateway for the Chinese yuan is always helpful. One of the country’s up-and-coming exchanges is Binance, although very few people seem to have heard of it. Now would be a good time to look at what this platform has to offer. Binance has Potential, But Caution is Advised Every time a new cryptocurrency exchange launches and starts to make a name for itself, users need to be wary

There are many cryptocurrency exchanges in China. Every digital asset creator and coin developer wants to ensure his or her project gains entry into China in one way or another, and having a fiat currency gateway for the Chinese yuan is always helpful. One of the country’s up-and-coming exchanges is Binance, although very few people seem to have heard of it. Now would be a good time to look at what this platform has to offer.

Binance has Potential, But Caution is Advised

Every time a new cryptocurrency exchange launches and starts to make a name for itself, users need to be wary of the potential dangers. It is not easy to launch a new exchange, especially in China. The Binance team is doing things a bit differently, as they do not provide CNY support at this time. Instead, all of their markets revolve around the trading of digital assets and cryptocurrencies, which should keep them out of most regulatory troubles for now.

Some of the exchange’s most popular markets are those for its own Binance Coin, BNB. This particular currency can be traded against both Bitcoin and Ethereum. It is always interesting to see exchanges create their own coins. In some cases, this could be seen as a way to defraud investors, although it usually serves as a legitimate way for investors to earn a passive revenue stream by supporting up-and coming exchanges. Time will tell in which category Binance Coin belongs.

Other popular markets on this platform include NEO, Ethereum, Gas, and Litecoin. Bitcoin can also be traded against USD Tether, but not fiat currencies. The company recently introduced Bitcoin Cash trading, but that market has not generated too much volume just yet, according to CoinMarketCap. There are also some relatively unknown tokens and currencies to be traded on this exchange, which could be disconcerting to some traders. It also appears Binance will soon support trading for MCO, the native token created by the Monaco debit card team.

Glancing over the rest of the Binance website, the platform seems pretty professional. Users will certainly enjoy the 0% deposit fee structure, although there is a 0.1% trading fee in place. It also has an ICO launch platform which may attract some money, but it remains to be seen how that venture will play out. There is nothing to dislike about using the platform across different devices either, as everything works as it should on computers, tablets, and phones.

It is not easy to come across other reviews of the platform, which is a somewhat troublesome sign. Given that Binance claims to be the fastest-growing exchange in all of China, one would expect more people to have written about it by now. Cryptocurrency activity is still kept under wraps by most Chinese consumers right now. This is understandable, given the uneasy regulatory situation in the country.

From what we can tell so far, Binance appears to be a perfectly legitimate exchange. ICO tokens are always a bit of a concern, although Binance Coin seems to have been received well so far. The platform is capable of quickly processing large amounts of transactions, which is something the cryptocurrency world most certainly needs right now. It is an interesting exchange to keep an eye on; that much is certain. Though it may not be the most appealing solution for people living outside of China, Binance will surely find its place in the market eventually.