Re:The senatorial governance of Bitcoin: making (de)centrali...
by ddtaylor on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @04:45AM
(#21978444)
My understanding is that "bcash" is used as a slanderous term between the two camps struggling for power. This comment seems to be attempting to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt. As far as I am aware there is no evidence that shows Bitcoin Cash clients are attempting to "steal your bitcoin private keys".
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The senatorial governance of Bitcoin: making (de)centrali...
by kain_niak on Wednesday January 08, 2020 @03:32AM
(#21989540)
We mainly use the Bitcoin.com wallet on our phones and Electron Cash on our computers. Both are open source with many eyes looking at the code. We try to teach our user to verify hashes on upgrades and to have copies of dev pub keys on their computer to verify on a fairly regular basis (but not every upgrade).
We also try to keep scammers out our community and I think we are doing a fairly good job, better than most crypto communities.
Re:The senatorial governance of Bitcoin: making (de)centrali...
by shawabawa3 on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @08:44AM
(#21979805)
when the fork happened there were indeed scam sites that asked you to "paste your private key to see if you have BCH"
There were also replay attacks possible, so that if you paid some BCH to someone they could replay the transaction to get the corresponding BTC as well
Neither of these are a concern anymore AFAIK (the first one never really was, never give away your private key)
And yes, "bcash" has a negative connotation.
Re:The senatorial governance of Bitcoin: making (de)centrali...
by lawn on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @10:51AM
(#21981073)
You confuse it with other forks, for example in Bitcoin Gold key stealing was very prevalent. It wasn't a big problem for Bitcoin Cash. Bitcoin Cash also had replay protection from the start.