it's ok.
what's funny is that this hole was found by a researcher, yes this is done for example in Microsoft operating systems and others. But for some reason this is especially bad :) yeah, at the moment it is not known if this hole has been exploited. I guess there is a 0.5% chance of it.
Finding the bug is not enough. You also need to understand the cryptographic circuit deeply enough to build a working exploit. The researcher reportedly found the flaw and then developed a proof-of-concept exploit in a controlled environment
@JesusMartinez If a malicious actor had found it years ago, they would face a dilemma. but ZEC at 600 ++
Use it aggressively β risk detection through economic anomalies.
Use it slowly β gain less profit and still risk discovery later.
@cameron by researchers. $ZEC @cameron $CYPH
Finding the bug is not enough. You also need to understand the cryptographic circuit deeply enough to build a working exploit. The researcher reportedly found the flaw and then developed a proof-of-concept exploit in a controlled environment
what's also funny is that this hole was found by a researcher, yes this is done for example in Microsoft operating systems and others. But for some reason this is especially bad :) yeah, at the moment it is not known if this hole has been exploited. I guess there is a 0.1% chance of it.
@cameron funny.. if someone had exploited the $ZEC loophole, I don't think there would be anywhere near $600. now ZEC is secure but BTC.. let see BTC itself maybe OK but i bet Lighting has some bugs here and there. $BTC