Breaking open the Mt. Gox case, part 1

Re:Breaking open the Mt. Gox case, part 1 by jmcqk6 on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @04:36PM (#14860073)

>I have to admit, that is a reasonable assumption.

I really have to disagree. You get breached, you change your private keys. There shouldn't be a debate about that.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Breaking open the Mt. Gox case, part 1 by dopamean on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @05:19PM (#14860471)

You don't have to disagree. I dont think he's arguing that you shouldn't change the keys based on that assumption.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Breaking open the Mt. Gox case, part 1 by SolarNet on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @05:09PM (#14860392)

I think his point is that when it comes to stuff like this, our intuition about reasonable assumptions is wrong. And we must as both you and the parent post say, be systematic about the response.

[ Parent | on HN ]