>> (p.1)
    Author Topic: Bitcoins are not, in practice, fungible  (Read 9597 times)

    • makomk (OP)
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 686
    Merit: 564


    View Profile
    December 30, 2011, 01:36:51 PM
     #1
    Something interesting happened in #mtgox last night. A user got their account locked down and MagicalTux said that the reason for it was that the coins could be traced back to a theft a long time ago. He unlocked the account in question, but it means that the widely-held assumption that Bitcoins are fungible - that it doesn't matter which you get paid with - isn't true and hasn't been for some time. Some Bitcoins are tainted and will cause you problems when you try to exchange them while others aren't, and there's no easy way to tell which is which just by looking at them. (Wonder if there's a way to require payment with recently-mined bitcoins...)

    I have no idea whether or how this will affect Bitcoin though.
    Quad XC6SLX150 Board: 860 MHash/s or so.
    SIGS ABOUT BUTTERFLY LABS ARE PAID ADS

  • Revalin
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 728
    Merit: 500


    165YUuQUWhBz3d27iXKxRiazQnjEtJNG9g


    View Profile
    December 30, 2011, 01:55:07 PM
     #2
    I was wondering when we'd see some of the first cases of this.

    Long term I expect it'll be the same as it is with fiat: if you deposit some bills at a bank with serial numbers associated with a robbery or ransom, you'll probably get some extra attention and questions, but ultimately the value remains yours.
    		 
          War is God's way of teaching Americans geography.  --Ambrose Bierce
    Bitcoin is the Devil's way of teaching geeks economics.  --Revalin 165YUuQUWhBz3d27iXKxRiazQnjEtJNG9g

  • Littleshop
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1386
    Merit: 1004



    View Profile WWW
    December 30, 2011, 01:58:34 PM
     #3
    Quote from: makomk on December 30, 2011, 01:36:51 PM
    Something interesting happened in #mtgox last night. A user got their account locked down and MagicalTux said that the reason for it was that the coins could be traced back to a theft a long time ago. He unlocked the account in question, but it means that the widely-held assumption that Bitcoins are fungible - that it doesn't matter which you get paid with - isn't true and hasn't been for some time. Some Bitcoins are tainted and will cause you problems when you try to exchange them while others aren't, and there's no easy way to tell which is which just by looking at them. (Wonder if there's a way to require payment with recently-mined bitcoins...)

    I have no idea whether or how this will affect Bitcoin though.

    Well if that were true (which I personally doubt)......

    That would only mean that bitcoins are not fungible at mtgox and with any merchant or exchange that wanted that behavior.  Customers could choose if they wanted to deal with exchanges like that or not.  
    Seller since 2011 hundreds of orders shipped

  • BadBear
    v2.0
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1652
    Merit: 1134



    View Profile WWW
    December 30, 2011, 01:59:10 PM
     #4
    This already happened once before, I've been searching but I can't find it, just tons of results about the original theft (it was allinvains coins). 
    1Kz25jm6pjNTaz8bFezEYUeBYfEtpjuKRG | PGP: B5797C4F

    Tired of annoying signature ads? Ad block for signatures

  • ineededausername
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 784
    Merit: 1000


    bitcoin hundred-aire


    View Profile
    December 30, 2011, 02:18:54 PM
     #5
    Why is mtgox still locking down those accounts? The bitcoins were probably sold long ago at Tradehill.
    (BFL)^2 < 0

  • CliffordM
    Member
    **
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 95
    Merit: 10


    View Profile
    December 30, 2011, 02:41:37 PM
     #6
    Well it won't stop the bit coin network from transacting in those coins (and ultimately laundering them) unless there's a change in the software to create some sort of address blacklist.  The worrying aspect is MtGox deciding to act as a policeman.  If they are going to do that I think they should make it quite clear.

  • makomk (OP)
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 686
    Merit: 564


    View Profile
    December 30, 2011, 03:04:32 PM
     #7
    Quote from: ineededausername on December 30, 2011, 02:18:54 PM
    Why is mtgox still locking down those accounts? The bitcoins were probably sold long ago at Tradehill.
    Almost certainly - that's where the person depositing them reckoned they got them from originally. Though in theory I guess the amount of tainted bitcoins should be increasing over time until we hit the point where Mt Gox give up...
    Quad XC6SLX150 Board: 860 MHash/s or so.
    SIGS ABOUT BUTTERFLY LABS ARE PAID ADS

  • ineededausername
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 784
    Merit: 1000


    bitcoin hundred-aire


    View Profile
    December 30, 2011, 03:07:27 PM
     #8
    Why did tradehill decide not to cooperate with this blacklisting thing?  Was it the moral hazard?
    (BFL)^2 < 0

  • finway
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 714
    Merit: 500


    View Profile
    December 30, 2011, 03:08:30 PM
     #9
    locked because it could be traced back to a theft ? Really ?  Shocked
    Tips welcome: 1ALatCsyZ2fh4gLQNij1RuTeU3cuywE9YD

  • kokojie
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1806
    Merit: 1003



    View Profile
    December 30, 2011, 05:12:40 PM
     #10
    blacklisting is never a good idea

    Quote from: ineededausername on December 30, 2011, 03:07:27 PM
    Why did tradehill decide not to cooperate with this blacklisting thing?  Was it the moral hazard?
    btc: 15sFnThw58hiGHYXyUAasgfauifTEB1ZF6

  • DeathAndTaxes
    Donator
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1218
    Merit: 1187


    Gerald Davis


    View Profile
    December 30, 2011, 05:20:35 PM
     #11
    Quote from: ineededausername on December 30, 2011, 03:07:27 PM
    Why did tradehill decide not to cooperate with this blacklisting thing?  Was it the moral hazard?

    Because they shouldn't.  Mt. Gox is wrong.

    There is no way to know the party in possession of the coins is the thief.

    Thief steals coins.
    Thief says I will give you 100K BTC for an equivalent amount of gold.
    Thief has already profited, you have given up gold and are holding coins.  If those coins are worthless (or worth less in value) because of some merchants belief they have a God given right to be the Bitcoin Police then it undermines the entire system.

    TL/DR version.
    A bitcoin is only worth a bitcoin by consensus.  People deciding some bitcoins are worth more than other Bitcoins is not only idiotic it undermines the entire system. 

  • BadBear
    v2.0
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1652
    Merit: 1134



    View Profile WWW
    December 30, 2011, 05:28:40 PM
     #12
    Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on December 30, 2011, 05:20:35 PM
    Quote from: ineededausername on December 30, 2011, 03:07:27 PM
    Why did tradehill decide not to cooperate with this blacklisting thing?  Was it the moral hazard?

    Because they shouldn't.  Mt. Gox is wrong.

    There is no way to know the party in possession of the coins is the thief.

    Thief steals coins.
    Thief says I will give you 100K BTC for an equivalent amount of gold.
    Thief has already profited, you have given up gold and are holding coins.  If those coins are worthless (or worth less in value) because of some merchants belief they have a God given right to be the Bitcoin Police then it undermines the entire system.

    TL/DR version.
    A bitcoin is only worth a bitcoin by consensus.  People deciding some bitcoins are worth more than other Bitcoins is not only idiotic it undermines the entire system. 


    Agreed.  At least they aren't "confiscating" them or returning to the previous holder.  Slippery slope though. 
    1Kz25jm6pjNTaz8bFezEYUeBYfEtpjuKRG | PGP: B5797C4F

    Tired of annoying signature ads? Ad block for signatures

  • ineededausername
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 784
    Merit: 1000


    bitcoin hundred-aire


    View Profile
    December 30, 2011, 06:28:28 PM
     #13
    Quote from: BadBear on December 30, 2011, 05:28:40 PM
    Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on December 30, 2011, 05:20:35 PM
    Quote from: ineededausername on December 30, 2011, 03:07:27 PM
    Why did tradehill decide not to cooperate with this blacklisting thing?  Was it the moral hazard?

    Because they shouldn't.  Mt. Gox is wrong.

    There is no way to know the party in possession of the coins is the thief.

    Thief steals coins.
    Thief says I will give you 100K BTC for an equivalent amount of gold.
    Thief has already profited, you have given up gold and are holding coins.  If those coins are worthless (or worth less in value) because of some merchants belief they have a God given right to be the Bitcoin Police then it undermines the entire system.

    TL/DR version.
    A bitcoin is only worth a bitcoin by consensus.  People deciding some bitcoins are worth more than other Bitcoins is not only idiotic it undermines the entire system. 


    Agreed.  At least they aren't "confiscating" them or returning to the previous holder.  Slippery slope though. 

    OK makes sense.  Another reason to dislike mtgox.
    (BFL)^2 < 0

  • Littleshop
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1386
    Merit: 1004



    View Profile WWW
    December 30, 2011, 07:29:53 PM
     #14
    Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on December 30, 2011, 05:20:35 PM

    Because they shouldn't.  Mt. Gox is wrong.

    There is no way to know the party in possession of the coins is the thief.

    And further, trying to collect data based on where they came from is flawed too.  Let say a thief wants to cover his tracks...

    They place an order with an online store like mine, and send the merchandise to someone they do not like (placing the order as that person)....  Now I try to sell them, and the exchange asks me for information on where the coins came from.  I would not tell them, but if they did get that info....  It could lead to the wrong person.
    Seller since 2011 hundreds of orders shipped

  • evoorhees
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1008
    Merit: 1023


    Democracy is the original 51% attack


    View Profile
    December 30, 2011, 10:03:58 PM
     #15
    This is an interesting topic...

    I wonder, since bitcoins are divisible to 8 decimal places, and coins are churned and spent and divided and recombined, does this not mean that long term one would expect all accounts to have some fractions of "tainted" coins? Just like every person's normal dollar wallet probably has some bills that were involved in sketchy activity.

    All coins will end up being tainted, and thus it wont' matter and it will be a meaningless observation.

  • FreeMoney
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1246
    Merit: 1020


    Strength in numbers


    View Profile WWW
    December 30, 2011, 10:25:59 PM
     #16
    Quote from: evoorhees on December 30, 2011, 10:03:58 PM
    This is an interesting topic...

    I wonder, since bitcoins are divisible to 8 decimal places, and coins are churned and spent and divided and recombined, does this not mean that long term one would expect all accounts to have some fractions of "tainted" coins? Just like every person's normal dollar wallet probably has some bills that were involved in sketchy activity.

    All coins will end up being tainted, and thus it wont' matter and it will be a meaningless observation.

    For some the taint will be more severe and more recent.

    Naive merchants like MtGox will only be catching innocent users because it is trivial to shuffle coins and/or use a merchant or exchange that doesn't hassle people.
    Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.

  • DeathAndTaxes
    Donator
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1218
    Merit: 1187


    Gerald Davis


    View Profile
    December 30, 2011, 10:29:23 PM
    Last edit: December 31, 2011, 04:41:43 AM by DeathAndTaxes
     #17
    Quote from: FreeMoney on December 30, 2011, 10:25:59 PM
    Quote from: evoorhees on December 30, 2011, 10:03:58 PM
    This is an interesting topic...

    I wonder, since bitcoins are divisible to 8 decimal places, and coins are churned and spent and divided and recombined, does this not mean that long term one would expect all accounts to have some fractions of "tainted" coins? Just like every person's normal dollar wallet probably has some bills that were involved in sketchy activity.

    All coins will end up being tainted, and thus it wont' matter and it will be a meaningless observation.

    For some the taint will be more severe and more recent.

    Naive merchants like MtGox will only be catching innocent users because it is trivial to shuffle coins and/or use a merchant or exchange that doesn't hassle people.

    Exactly.  It is scary though that MtGox even feels they should have the power to investigate coin histories.  I mean shit in some ways that is WORSE than bank.  It also sets a bad precedent.  MtGox complains about all the regulatory hoops doing stupid shit like performing their own internal "investigations" into coin history is just going to invite such regulation.

    "Look MtGox has been Bitcoin Police for years so lets make that a requirement for any exchange and at the same time create a national registry of bad coins and a investigation arm, some requirements for people to document the history of their coins, etc". 

  • miscreanity
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1316
    Merit: 1005


    View Profile
    December 31, 2011, 02:17:44 AM
     #18
    Quote from: evoorhees on December 30, 2011, 10:03:58 PM
    This is an interesting topic...

    Very - it's a moral issue that really has nothing to do with the underlying structure, but could still be viewed negatively from a certain perspective. Like anything else, I'd expect the time duration from an incident to gradually reduce any apprehension, just as people don't seem to be quite as sensitive anymore about the bubble and exchange security concerns.

  • amencon
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 410
    Merit: 250


    View Profile
    December 31, 2011, 06:57:02 AM
     #19
    Hmm nice that this was brought up.  I expect MtGox will be reading this and will choose a different course of actions next time this issue comes up.  The arguments made against locking accounts with "tainted" coins are very compelling.

  • julz
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1092
    Merit: 1001



    View Profile
    December 31, 2011, 09:27:12 AM
     #20
    See this for some thoughts on how taint-tracking systems may actually be inevitable:
    http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/2119/is-there-any-way-the-bitcoin-network-could-resist-a-viral-tainted-coin-tagging-s
    @electricwings   BM-GtyD5exuDJ2kvEbr41XchkC8x9hPxdFd
    Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 »  All
      Print  
Page 1
Viewing Page: 1

IRLBTC™ © 2025 IRLBTC.com