At noon on February 22, a Weibo post by Dovey Wan, founding partner of Primitive Ventures, made many people aware of the trouble.
She said that a giant whale account lost 100,000 BCH worth 30 million U.S. dollars. In addition, he lost 15 million U.S. dollars in BTC.
Soon, coin and coin co-founder Pan Zhibiao tweeted: The signature was verified, and the BTC address was indeed his. He lost 1,500 BTC, worth 15 million US dollars, less than 60,000 BCH, and 30 million US dollars. The miner helped him to recover 60,000 BCH in Shuanghua. Technically speaking, it is still too late to restructure Shuanghua.
- Blockchain and Bitcoin's "Top No. Iron Powder": Microsoft
- Buffett once again attacked Bitcoin at the shareholders' meeting, but isn't it a good thing?
- A picture to understand the world currency and market
- QKL123 market analysis | US stocks have melted for the fourth time this month, and Bitcoin is still converging (0319)
- Simple, boring and tedious Bitcoin
- Getting Started | Why Bitcoin is worth investing in
Pan Zhibiao's Weibo screenshots were quickly spread in the cryptocurrency community. First, he confirmed that the coins on the protagonist's BTC and BCH addresses had moved, but did not rule out that the protagonist himself had moved the currency. Second, the BCH chain can be reorganized to recover lost coins.
260 million cryptocurrencies lost
At present, according to known information, the lost coin whale is Josh Jones, an open source software and alternative currency technology expert, and the founder of Topcoin and Bitcoin Builder. It is worth mentioning that Jones claims to own 43,768 Bitcoins in Mt.Gox (some belong to him personally and some belong to his website users), and his company is the second largest creditor of Mt.Gox.
Around 8:10 am Beijing time today, of the Bitcoin and BCH addresses provided by Jones, 1547 Bitcoins and nearly 60,000 BCH were transferred out multiple times. They are currently worth about 260 million yuan.
From his resume, Jones has been involved in cryptocurrencies since 2013. Therefore, some people claim that this is because he transferred the coin to another address of his own? Then I made a joke with the whole community and caught the eye.
It is reported that the killer whale user Jones was suspected of being attacked by a SIM card, and he posted a distress message on Reddit.
The SlowMist security team said in an interview with the media that it was speculated that he used a well-known decentralized wallet. This decentralized wallet also requires SIM card authentication, which means that there is a user system that can turn on SIM-based Card two-factor authentication. Slow Mist guessed it might be Blockchain.info.
Using phone numbers for authentication is a less desirable method of secure authentication. SIM card exchange is a low-cost, non-technical way for an attacker to gain control of a victim's wireless phone account. To launch an attack, hackers need to know how mobile wireless operators verify their identity and some information about the victim. Usually, it is sufficient to get a phone number for the victim.
Beijing Lian'an analysis said: The stolen process also requires the parties to follow up. SIM card attacks are only a means. The key is that the coins have been stolen, and they are currently being transferred. Judging from the current operation, the units dismantled during the splitting process are very small, even less than 1 BTC, and coin mixing operations have occurred during the process. If the middle market sells them to different buyers, even if this chain can follow up At that time, the ownership of Bitcoin will not be well defined legally.
From the analysis of security companies, the possibility of theft of coins is very high.
Recombinant BCH chain, 60,000 BCH can be recovered?
After discovering that his coin was stolen, Jones posted a distress message on Reddit. He said that he hoped that BCH miners could help him reorganize the BCH chain, recover the lost 60,000 BCH, and be willing to pay a heavy reward.
This information is interpreted by many people as why not talk about restructuring the BTC chain, but only the BCH chain? Isn't this the intention to black BCH, saying that BCH is not safe?
Pan Zhibiao mentioned in the noon's Weibo that technically speaking, restructuring Shuanghua still has time.
In an interview with Babbitt, Pan Zhibiao said that when this help message was sent, BCH had only 3 blocks, so the double-flower restructuring was theoretically established. As long as the miners mobilize more than the existing computing power of the BCH chain, it can be achieved. That is more than 4.3E. Because Jones lost 60,000 BCH, these losses can completely cover the cost of mobilizing so much computing power. However, if the BTC chain is rolled back, this cost is too high, and the computing power of BTC currently exceeds 100E.
Zhu Yin, the co-founder of Coin-India, told Babbitt that from the perspective of technology and strength, there are currently six or seven Bitcoin mining pools with this ability. The reason why BCH has not had these problems has fully demonstrated the goodwill of the BTC community.
However, BCH is different from BCT. At the end of 2018, after BCH and BSV were forked, BCH added a setting of more than 10 confirmations to prevent rollback of the block, which is to reorganize the protection mechanism.
In this regard, Pan Zhibiao said that in this context, if miners want to help Jones roll back the BCH chain, it means that the BCH chain may fork. In this connection, he said, this possibility is very low. From the current situation, the miners did not accept Jones's reward.
Liu Chang, a founder of Zhimi University and a PhD in economics from Peking University, said in an interview with Babbitt. Under the current framework of BTC and BCH, it is impossible to roll back the block due to lost coins, and even, BCH is more difficult to be reorganized than BTC.
He mentioned that the rollback is also related to the degree of centralization of the chain. Prior to this, there was a public coin loss event in Ethereum, which involved a lot of people in the Ethereum ecosystem. Finally, the community decided to roll back. Even so, there are still objections, so there is Ethereum Classic (ETC). It's common for individuals to lose money, but this time the amount is relatively large.
Pan Zhibiao suggested that digital currency practitioners, large amounts of digital currency, best put in hardware wallets. In addition, use only native input methods to prevent input methods from stealing input.