LA Times gets it wrong: "transaction malleability could allow someone to spend #bitcoin twice, which is tantamount to counterfeiting"
-
-
Replying to @GTN310
.
@GTN310@jgarzik@latimes Plainly double spends are possible:http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1xm49o/due_to_active_malleable_transaction_relayers_it/ …1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jgarzik
.
@jgarzik@GTN310@latimes Would you dispute the possible scenario here?http://qz.com/175565/why-nobody-can-withdraw-bitcoins-from-one-of-the-currencys-largest-exchanges/ …1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @hiltzikm
@hiltzikm@GTN310@latimes@RitchieSKing Yes, that is a valid attack scenario. But again, not a double-spend. Relies on social engineering.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jgarzik
.
@jgarzik@GTN310@latimes@RitchieSKing Would it be fairer to say that the risk is to mtgox, that it double-pays?6 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@hiltzikm @jgarzik @GTN310 @latimes @RitchieSKing in other words the real story here is that #MtGox is full of sh*t. http://cryto.net/~joepie91/blog/2014/02/10/why-mtgox-is-full-of-shit/ …
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.