4 ms·

There was no hack. The contact executed as designed. The "hack" was the scramble to figure out how to scuttle a valid transaction.

Hermel 10y ago
It certainly did not execute as intended.
- nas 10y ago
  It certainly did. The code was the terms of the contract. From Slock.it: """ The terms of The DAO Creation are set forth in the smart contract code existing on the Ethereum blockchain at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413. Nothing in this explanation of terms or in any other document or communication may modify or add any additional obligations or guarantees beyond those set forth in The DAO’s code. Any and all explanatory terms or descriptions are merely offered for educational purposes and do not supercede or modify the express terms of The DAO’s code set forth on the blockchain. """
  - jsprogrammer 10y ago
    I think the "hacker" is going to have a massive fraud lawsuit on their hands against the DAO. Combine that with bad faith arguments for punitive damages and they can probably wipe out the entire organization.
    - cel1ne 10y ago
      I think a real world judge would not need to take into account how smart contracts work at all (a contract without a hand-written signature???) and blame both sides: @Organization: How could you promise people to handle their money without any audits? @Hacker: You don't get to keep the money you managed to siphon out the hands of these irresponsible people.
      - jsprogrammer 10y ago
        "hacker": My transaction was valid and executed per the organization contract. Others then conspired to invalidate the transaction. Now, my transaction is dead.
        cel1ne 10y ago
        "hacker", yes, I forgot the quotes. The question remains whether the organization contract is acknowledged by a court.
  - hiou 10y ago
    This is my concern. There will forever be a giant asretisk after all crytocurrency rules now. * Unless a significantly bad event happens to anyone with enough power to fork it.
    - nas 10y ago
      As someone theoretically interested in investing in things governed by Ethereum "smart" contracts, what the rules of how the contracts are executed? Obviously it is no longer just computer code that rules. There is some, to my mind, ad hoc process involving politics. Sorry, but my money is not touching that system. No thank you. The DAO was literally the "to big to fail" investment of Ethereum.
- drdeca 10y ago
  Not as anticipated, and, pretty much not as intended by those writing it, But it was executed as it was agreed to, with an explicit agreement that the agreement would be understood as written, not as intended.
- jsprogrammer 10y ago
  The DAO code was reviewed [1] by the best security audit company in the world [0] and was/is made from irrefutable computer code [0]. [0] https://slock.it/dao.html https://slock.it/dao.html [1] https://blog.slock.it/deja-vu-dao-smart-contracts-audit-results-d26bc088e32e#.a47w719ha https://blog.slock.it/deja-vu-dao-smart-contracts-audit-resu...

Hermel 10y ago

It certainly did not execute as intended.

nas 10y ago
It certainly did. The code was the terms of the contract. From Slock.it: """ The terms of The DAO Creation are set forth in the smart contract code existing on the Ethereum blockchain at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413. Nothing in this explanation of terms or in any other document or communication may modify or add any additional obligations or guarantees beyond those set forth in The DAO’s code. Any and all explanatory terms or descriptions are merely offered for educational purposes and do not supercede or modify the express terms of The DAO’s code set forth on the blockchain. """
- jsprogrammer 10y ago
  I think the "hacker" is going to have a massive fraud lawsuit on their hands against the DAO. Combine that with bad faith arguments for punitive damages and they can probably wipe out the entire organization.
  - cel1ne 10y ago
    I think a real world judge would not need to take into account how smart contracts work at all (a contract without a hand-written signature???) and blame both sides: @Organization: How could you promise people to handle their money without any audits? @Hacker: You don't get to keep the money you managed to siphon out the hands of these irresponsible people.
    - jsprogrammer 10y ago
      "hacker": My transaction was valid and executed per the organization contract. Others then conspired to invalidate the transaction. Now, my transaction is dead.
      - cel1ne 10y ago
        "hacker", yes, I forgot the quotes. The question remains whether the organization contract is acknowledged by a court.
- hiou 10y ago
  This is my concern. There will forever be a giant asretisk after all crytocurrency rules now. * Unless a significantly bad event happens to anyone with enough power to fork it.
  - nas 10y ago
    As someone theoretically interested in investing in things governed by Ethereum "smart" contracts, what the rules of how the contracts are executed? Obviously it is no longer just computer code that rules. There is some, to my mind, ad hoc process involving politics. Sorry, but my money is not touching that system. No thank you. The DAO was literally the "to big to fail" investment of Ethereum.
drdeca 10y ago
Not as anticipated, and, pretty much not as intended by those writing it, But it was executed as it was agreed to, with an explicit agreement that the agreement would be understood as written, not as intended.
jsprogrammer 10y ago
The DAO code was reviewed [1] by the best security audit company in the world [0] and was/is made from irrefutable computer code [0]. [0] https://slock.it/dao.html https://slock.it/dao.html [1] https://blog.slock.it/deja-vu-dao-smart-contracts-audit-results-d26bc088e32e#.a47w719ha https://blog.slock.it/deja-vu-dao-smart-contracts-audit-resu...