4 ms·
Dan may be random, but he's no "random security researcher". And he has, in fact, hacked "just about everything" a time or two by discovering and exploiting com
by marshray 14y ago
Dan may be random, but he's no "random security researcher". And he has, in fact, hacked "just about everything" a time or two by discovering and exploiting common mode vulnerabilities.
His point of view is worth listening to.
- deepblueocean 14y agoHis point of view is certainly worth listening to, but Dan should know better than anyone that the fact that even he can't break something is still not an argument for (or even a suggestion of) its security.
- Scaevolus 14y agoA skilled auditor finding no flaws in something is evidence in favor of there being few flaws in it. He never says there aren't any. He says there are surprisingly few.
- marshray 14y agoIf an audit by a talented, experienced, and motivated security consultant isn't "even a suggestion of its security", than what is? He didn't say "it's is perfectly 100% secure", he said "BitCoin surprised me" and "the core technology actually works [] to a degree not everyone predicted".
- lawnchair_larry 14y agoIsn't that overstating his accomplishments a bit? Unless by "just about everything", you mean the DNS bug and the media, sure... None of his published work seems consistent with the skillset that would qualify one to thoroughly audit bitcoin. He tends to stick to higher-level, less technical vulnerabilities.