News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Upgradeable smart contracts in Ethereum by akerro on Wednesday April 18, 2018 @12:48PM (#16868850)
I heard that story behind this is that one of close friends of ETH developers lost a few $M in smart-contracts, so they want to be able to update its source code to access the ETH, is that true? How would that work?
Re:Upgradeable smart contracts in Ethereum by 45h34jh53k4j on Wednesday April 18, 2018 @01:15PM (#16869074)
$91 million of Polkadot ICO funds, Gavins ICO. Gavin a cofounder of Ethereum, and the creator of Solidity.

So its more like the cofounder of Ethereum lost $91 million dollars in his own wallet, using his own smart contracts, using the language he wrote.

I am against the proposal to undo the deleted multisig wallet contract. Everyone makes mistakes, some are worse than others. You can never learn if every mistake can be undone.

Re:Upgradeable smart contracts in Ethereum by davesque on Wednesday April 18, 2018 @02:13PM (#16869574)
The article is only partly related to that incident. People have been trying to figure out reasonable mechanisms for doing smart contract updates since before the Parity Multisig matter. What is discussed in the article is being used today and doesn't require implementation of an EIP.

The desire to sort out how to do updates is motivated by much more than just that particular incident.

Re:Upgradeable smart contracts in Ethereum by ancorevard on Wednesday April 18, 2018 @01:14PM (#16869057)
Re:Upgradeable smart contracts in Ethereum by tuesdayrain on Wednesday April 18, 2018 @01:26PM (#16869161)
It's true, but it's not related to OP's article.
Re:Upgradeable smart contracts in Ethereum by fbonetti on Wednesday April 18, 2018 @01:12PM (#16869046)
You can't modify smart contract code once it's been deployed, period. Ether that's locked up in bugged out contracts is permanently lost.

This post describes a strategy for writing contracts that proxies the actual implementation of the contract to another contract. If the contract needs to be modified, a new contract is deployed and the original contract is set to point to the new contract.

Edit: I misread your comment. There has been a discussion over of a possible hard fork in order to recover lost funds, but that's not what the author is referring to in this post.