News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by Cyph0n on Sunday June 19, 2016 @02:10PM (#11933910)
But wasn't the smart contract system the selling point for the novelty of Ethereum? If it doesn't work reliably, why should we use it over the more mature and stable Bitcoin?
Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by anonymousab on Sunday June 19, 2016 @02:30PM (#11933987)
It works reliably, insofar as you are fully able to write and execute a desired contract, but also able to write a contract that shoots you in the foot.

Like a certain programming language's features, it may happen to be easier than not.

Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by Cyph0n on Sunday June 19, 2016 @02:54PM (#11934119)
That's a strange way to design a financial contract system. I mean, just like Rust checks for memory safety at compile time, can't the contract language make similar checks? Or perhaps the contracts can run in a simulator first?
Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by nawitus on Sunday June 19, 2016 @04:33PM (#11934541)
Yes, you can write a contract language (or improve an existing one) which contains static checks. That hasn't been implemented yet probably because of lack of resources. The higher level contract language is compiled down to byte code.

You can in addition implement these safety checks to be executed during runtime, but that costs money.

Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by erikpukinskis on Sunday June 19, 2016 @05:59PM (#11934905)
It's not a financial contract system. It's a decentralized general purpose computing platform. It can be used for financial contracts.
Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by 21echoes on Sunday June 19, 2016 @02:31PM (#11933990)
My understanding is that the bug was in a particular contract written using the Ethereum contract "language", not Ethereum itself. E.g., one does not stop using Python because there's a bug in Quora
Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by Animats on Sunday June 19, 2016 @02:46PM (#11934068)
The people who screwed up the DAO smart contract can't fix the problem from within the DAO, and they want to change the rules of Etherium to fix the DAO's problem. The fact that the same people are behind Etherium, the DAO, and the programmable door-lock startup makes this possible. It also makes it suspicious. In the Bitcoin world, all too often we've seen an "outside hack" that turned out to be insiders.
Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by wcummings on Sunday June 19, 2016 @04:44PM (#11934592)
>and the programmable door-lock startup

The door lock company is the funniest part of the whole thing. It makes this meltdown so much less surprising tbh.

Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by stale2002 on Sunday June 19, 2016 @05:57PM (#11934893)
Oh god, its some random IoT company that is using the blockchain to run its IoT platform for no reason, and then decided to pivot into a decentralized investment fund.
Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by Animats on Sunday June 19, 2016 @06:21PM (#11934994)
It's all the same guy, Vitalik Buterin. He's behind Etherium, the DAO, and the door lock company, "Slock.it UG".
Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by stale2002 on Sunday June 19, 2016 @05:51PM (#11934872)
Whats up with the door lock thing? I haven't heard about that.
Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by nawitus on Sunday June 19, 2016 @05:58PM (#11934901)
Probably refers to this: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ethereum-based-slock-reveals-first-...

Somewhat related: the lock in my apartment is actually based on cryptography too. It uses SHA-1, which is somewhat scary, because it's not considered "safe" anymore. The algorithm was probably chosen because it uses less energy compared to safer ones, as the lock gets the energy from the turning of the key.

Re:Another successful DAO attack recursive split by tamana on Sunday June 19, 2016 @07:03PM (#11935157)
Sha-1 is only unsafe if an attacker can get a copy of the hashed password