Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Defcon

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9
61
Silk Road Discussion / Re: Full Disclosure
« on: February 15, 2014, 11:43:17 pm »
How about we leave this place and go to themarketplace.i2p that already has multisig?

themarketplace encourages users to download a custom bitcoin client. This is a terrible security practice, and largely why we want to improve existing bitcoin clients through official channels rather than providing our own bitcoin client with potential malware.

Never download a binary from the darknet and execute it on your computer.

62
Silk Road Discussion / Re: Backopy. now that was a leader
« on: February 15, 2014, 11:38:15 pm »
I also have deep respect for backopy, and would work alongside him in a heartbeat. We serve the same community, and he is possibly the only unquestionably-ethical administrators in the darknet. I hope to also share that title after proving my words, but it's a long road and backopy deserves much respect.

I wish our fee earnings could cover our losses, and would absolutely cover everyone's losses immediately if I could. This is my mistake, and I hate that the very cause I hope to devote my life to was damaged by my oversight. I would do anything to refund everyone and just move forward.

63
Silk Road Discussion / Re: Full Disclosure
« on: February 15, 2014, 11:31:34 pm »
only FE market with current feedback system= scammer s heaven

We are open to suggestions. "Current feedback system" - what quick improvements would you make to enable FE-only to operate safer?

64
Silk Road Discussion / Re: Full Disclosure
« on: February 15, 2014, 11:30:12 pm »
So the coins were in hot storage because 3 days later some of them would be used for AF? why have them sit in hot storage for 3 days?

Not being sarcastic or provocative or w.e, I just really don't get it.

We thought we would be ready to launch during the weekend, and were delayed. I should have withdrawn hot storage immediately, this is completely my fault. Projecting release dates when collaborating with developers anonymously is very difficult. For those three days, I honestly believed we were within 6 hours of the code being ready to launch at any moment. Again, completely my fault for not withdrawing hot storage immediately after we missed the weekend launch window. (reference last week's "Weekend Update" thread)

65
Silk Road Discussion / Re: Full Disclosure
« on: February 15, 2014, 11:25:44 pm »
One question Defcon. You say your personal funds have gone. Which is presumably why you're not offering to help repay the community with both your own profits and future SR profits.....But... Why would you keep your personal funds in the marketplace and not in a wallet off-site. What if SR had been seized by the feds?

The majority of my commission fees were also sitting in our infrastructure, I had not withdrawn them to my personal cold storage. When we almost lost cold storage in December I decided to work for six months for free, and publicly announced this. When cold storage was returned, my mindset was already fine with not getting paid.

I decided the best use of money for the community would be for the marketplace itself to build up enough funds to offer BTC hedging services again, like SR1.

This decision, combined with high stress levels, resulted in an unwise amount of commission bitcoins being in our infrastructure.

66
Silk Road Discussion / Full Disclosure
« on: February 15, 2014, 11:06:44 pm »
I am deeply thankful for the hundreds of supportive messages I've received. I am consistently blown away by how the core of this community come together in times of strife.. To the multitude of you who lost faith in Silk Road, I still am glad I've heard your words.

I am still devastated that I have failed you. And even I have fallen victim to this attack – the majority of my personal earnings are completely gone. My life is not in danger though, and my identity is still protected – I’m thankful for this.

So now, it’s time to share with you our plan to move forward.

I realize you have no way of knowing whether I'm telling the truth, on anything. Trying to communicate the authenticity of my true character on the darknet is difficult to say the least, and I do not expect any of you to take me at my word. But my actions over the next few weeks will speak louder than words ever could, and if you stick around you’ll realize this.

Silk Road is Not Dead

We are here to stay, and for the most part, I believe our values are the same as yours – the community’s. And even though I represent the latest idiot to make a security mistake, I am unlike those who simply give in, and am determined to use lessons learned to fight for this community's long term security.

I'm focusing on multi-signature transactions as our only safe trading mechanism long term. Additionally, I am ready and willing to collaborate with other darknet administrators and utilize our talented penetration testing team to help them to regularly audit their security.

And although the tinfoil club will probably hate this and continue to tear me to shreds without regard for my actions in December, and whether you choose to believe them or not, here are the facts:

1. I live a very busy and complicated life. I take OPSEC to extreme levels which consume many of my hours per day. Any time you see me here, it means I have completed a checklist which requires over an hour of preparation for me to reposition and reconfigure many things to ensure I leave the most minimal trail possible and can "safely" connect to this place. This job will never be safe, and it is impossible to be perfectly covert. I know what I am facing, both from LE and from vendors who do not share my opinions of non-violence.

2. All released announcements were my true plans, and all delays were due to unanticipated external factors upon which I cannot elaborate. My staff has been very frustrated at my lack of ability to keep the dev team on time. Again, this is completely my fault and something for which I take complete responsibility. I do not trust any developers, so I meticulously review anything the dev team sends to me. Many have criticized me for this, and I listened to them. Had I reviewed the code EVEN MORE meticulously and delayed the fix to speed up slow withdrawals last month, transaction malleability would not have affected us at all. This is completely my fault for listening to critics instead of my own sense of caution.

3. The public has known that auto-finalize has been disabled for a long time, and has known that the escrow balance is massive.

4. Any smart person could deduce that re-enabling of auto-finalize requires me to move a vast sum from cold storage to the hot storage wallet to ensure adequate fund availability (which admittedly was too large and one of my biggest failures this month). The attack was surgical and timed perfectly.

The reason such a high quantity of coins was stolen was because we were preparing to implement auto-finalization and had therefore moved a huge volume from the cold storage to the hot storage to ensure the coins from all auto-finalized orders could be withdrawn without a hitch.

Here are as many details on the attack as I can provide. I am still investigating, and do not want to leak anything which could compromise any other markets. Transparency in this issue is key, however, you deserve as granular an explanation as possible as to why this happened.

SR2 Attack Investigation Results as of Feb 15

1. When withdrawal delays were happening last month, we wrote a custom bitcoin implementation using several available libraries a reference, and built it on a shared infrastructure to load balance across accounts and provide risk mitigation if ever one server was compromised.

2. As this implementation was being written by behind-the-scenes dev staff, a lynch mob was getting exponentially worse in the forums. Our moderator staff became more and more insistent that it was crucial to fix this problem immediately, relaying to me many concerns, and threats, from the community.

3. We cut a corner, deciding to watch transactions. Many community members were reporting missing withdrawals, weeks after sending them. We implemented a liberal check to the "Refresh Deposit Balances" link on the account page - in essence, we allowed it to search deeply for any missing coins, rescanning and rescanning. One of our team members was familiar with MtGox's procedures and source code and vouched for the idea. Our thoughts were that if the largest bitcoin exchange was using this approach to find missing coins, it must be commonplace. (I received her/his permission to publish this.)

4. The transaction malleability bug was published last week at a time when I was disconnected from the internet for an extended period for OPSEC reasons. I did not become aware of the threat until the attack was already occurring. This was a failure on my part to trust more staff with critical access to stop withdrawals. The people who did have access to disable withdrawals were terrified of doing it without my permission, due to how negatively the community reacts when withdrawals are turned off. They knew if they disabled withdrawals, then re-enabled them, there would be a run on the bank and I would need to be online to deposit cold storage into hot storage. In effect, this was my failure to emphasize to staff that it is ALWAYS okay to lean on the side of caution and hit killswitches as they deem necessary. It was also my failure to communicate expectations to the community that sometimes killswitches will have to be hit, and it just means we're playing it safe. This month it is clear we did not play it safe. Killswitches are pointless if the only person confident enough to hit them is the boss.

5. The attacker used an account first registered in early Jan to try exploiting the vulnerability. Looking back at the account's history indicates that this account has been used to pentest many aspects of our system unsuccessfully. Every previous attempt to find an attack vector failed, due to hardening done by our penetration testing team. I had previously seen these attempts in the logs as something to celebrate: "Look, our hardening is working, this hacker would have won, but we put security over features!" - Several people suggested disabling the hacker's accounts, but that is pointless in our business as anyone can simply re-register.

6. We are still unclear as to the exact approach used to cause our servers' perception of transactions to mismatch with reality, because we have largely been focusing on preparing for relaunch and building communication to share with you, the community, over the past day. To the best of our understanding, the attacker deposited increasingly larger amounts of bitcoins, and withdrew them while flooding the blockchain with DDoS of similar transactions.

7. Our system reflected his withdrawals, and his account showed as zero.

8. The attacker rapidly clicked "Refresh deposits" link until our code assumed that the transaction failed (all indications point to malleability as the root case). Our system re-credited his account with the X BTC it judged "unsuccessfully" withdrawn. This, again, due to the liberal rescanning mechanisms added last month (see point 3).

9. In reality, our servers perceived the transactions inaccurately and the BTC were successfully withdrawn. As a result our system inaccurately represented the user's balance as larger than it truly was. This allowed the attacker to withdraw coins again.

10. The attacker began depositing larger amounts, such as 50 BTC at a time, in order to exploit the vulnerability quickly.

11. They then drained our entire hot storage in one bitcoin server shard, and tried the attack from one of their other accounts. The other account was on a different shard, and allowed that hot storage to be drained.

12. The attacker continued using different accounts until virtually all of our hot storage shards were drained.

Due to the type of vulnerability, our accounting system had an inaccurate perception of bitcoins on hand and therefore did not trigger any alerts until real user withdrawals began failing unexpectedly. This was a failure on our part to build a new server alert to check each shard of the new shared bitcoin infrastructure, and another symptom of how rushed we were when implementing the new system during a forum lynch-mob about slow withdrawals.


Lessons learned so far:

1. More staff should have access to killswitches and should not be afraid to use them. Even if it's just because of some news post about on clearnet about some "Transaction Malleability" thing. Killswitches should be used liberally and regularly.

2. A community needs to be comfortable with regular downtime - especially during periods when community safety and the safety of its money could be threatened. A good staff will be responsibly paranoid and hitting killswitches as they deem necessary, and should not be afraid of their community panicking each time precaution is exercised.

3. There’s more to web security than rigorous penetration testing. It also requires the constant review of external services, systems and infrastructures.

4. Never make assumptions when implementing protocols you did not design. Had we not trusted MtGox's staff procedures, we would have reviewed our approaches with much more rigor. Just because a large company's procedures are successful does not make them are safe.

5. Accept that your community will hate you regardless. In the darknet, you will be crucified by your community if anything ever goes wrong. Psychologically prepare for everyone to hate you, because you inevitably will fail at something, and you will need to stay determined no matter what. Don't let it get to your head, and don't let it affect your rigor with security. We cut corners with our deposit/withdrawal speed optimizations because we were afraid of the lynch-mob. We were foolish in this regard. We should have taken the entire site offline for as long as it took to implement a high-volume fault-tolerant bitcoin server in a well-tested, rigorous manner. This cost us an unspeakable amount of trust that we had slaved to build, some of us for years.

This is where we're at, with as much transparency as this medium allows:

The worst that could happen did not happen.

The worst thing that could happen for our community's finances, however, did.

We hate that it occurred under our watch.

There is nothing we can do to change this. All we can do is be transparent about where we are at, and move forward.

To those who will respond here for dramatic effect, please consider contributing your energy to the reconstruction of our community. If you cannot bring yourself to do this, then please take your negativity elsewhere. This is simple. If you have lost faith in Silk Road, I don't blame you in the least. I also do not want to read about it in perpetuity.

Trolling is easy. Trolling during a disaster is cowardice. Choosing to strengthen rather than troll, when trolling is the popular move - that's noble. I know that I speak for all Silk Road staff, seen and unseen, when I speak these words: We are going nowhere. We will remain, rebuild, and move forward toward the greater goal for which we strive by our running of this marketplace: Personal freedom and foundational human rights.

Silk Road will always rise again.

Code: [Select]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

I am deeply thankful for the hundreds of supportive messages I've received. I am consistently blown away by how the core of this community come together in times of strife.. To the multitude of you who lost faith in Silk Road, I still am glad I've heard your words.

I am still devastated that I have failed you. And even I have fallen victim to this attack – the majority of my personal earnings are completely gone. My life is not in danger though, and my identity is still protected – I’m thankful for this.

So now, it’s time to share with you our plan to move forward.

I realize you have no way of knowing whether I'm telling the truth, on anything. Trying to communicate the authenticity of my true character on the darknet is difficult to say the least, and I do not expect any of you to take me at my word. But my actions over the next few weeks will speak louder than words ever could, and if you stick around you’ll realize this.

Silk Road is Not Dead

We are here to stay, and for the most part, I believe our values are the same as yours – the community’s. And even though I represent the latest idiot to make a security mistake, I am unlike those who simply give in, and am determined to use lessons learned to fight for this community's long term security.

I'm focusing on multi-signature transactions as our only safe trading mechanism long term. Additionally, I am ready and willing to collaborate with other darknet administrators and utilize our talented penetration testing team to help them to regularly audit their security.

And although the tinfoil club will probably hate this and continue to tear me to shreds without regard for my actions in December, and whether you choose to believe them or not, here are the facts:

1. I live a very busy and complicated life. I take OPSEC to extreme levels which consume many of my hours per day. Any time you see me here, it means I have completed a checklist which requires over an hour of preparation for me to reposition and reconfigure many things to ensure I leave the most minimal trail possible and can "safely" connect to this place. This job will never be safe, and it is impossible to be perfectly covert. I know what I am facing, both from LE and from vendors who do not share my opinions of non-violence.

2. All released announcements were my true plans, and all delays were due to unanticipated external factors upon which I cannot elaborate. My staff has been very frustrated at my lack of ability to keep the dev team on time. Again, this is completely my fault and something for which I take complete responsibility. I do not trust any developers, so I meticulously review anything the dev team sends to me. Many have criticized me for this, and I listened to them. Had I reviewed the code EVEN MORE meticulously and delayed the fix to speed up slow withdrawals last month, transaction malleability would not have affected us at all. This is completely my fault for listening to critics instead of my own sense of caution.

3. The public has known that auto-finalize has been disabled for a long time, and has known that the escrow balance is massive.

4. Any smart person could deduce that re-enabling of auto-finalize requires me to move a vast sum from cold storage to the hot storage wallet to ensure adequate fund availability (which admittedly was too large and one of my biggest failures this month). The attack was surgical and timed perfectly.

The reason such a high quantity of coins was stolen was because we were preparing to implement auto-finalization and had therefore moved a huge volume from the cold storage to the hot storage to ensure the coins from all auto-finalized orders could be withdrawn without a hitch.

Here are as many details on the attack as I can provide. I am still investigating, and do not want to leak anything which could compromise any other markets. Transparency in this issue is key, however, you deserve as granular an explanation as possible as to why this happened.

SR2 Attack Investigation Results as of Feb 15

1. When withdrawal delays were happening last month, we wrote a custom bitcoin implementation using several available libraries a reference, and built it on a shared infrastructure to load balance across accounts and provide risk mitigation if ever one server was compromised.

2. As this implementation was being written by behind-the-scenes dev staff, a lynch mob was getting exponentially worse in the forums. Our moderator staff became more and more insistent that it was crucial to fix this problem immediately, relaying to me many concerns, and threats, from the community.

3. We cut a corner, deciding to watch transactions. Many community members were reporting missing withdrawals, weeks after sending them. We implemented a liberal check to the "Refresh Deposit Balances" link on the account page - in essence, we allowed it to search deeply for any missing coins, rescanning and rescanning. One of our team members was familiar with MtGox's procedures and source code and vouched for the idea. Our thoughts were that if the largest bitcoin exchange was using this approach to find missing coins, it must be commonplace. (I received her/his permission to publish this.)

4. The transaction malleability bug was published last week at a time when I was disconnected from the internet for an extended period for OPSEC reasons. I did not become aware of the threat until the attack was already occurring. This was a failure on my part to trust more staff with critical access to stop withdrawals. The people who did have access to disable withdrawals were terrified of doing it without my permission, due to how negatively the community reacts when withdrawals are turned off. They knew if they disabled withdrawals, then re-enabled them, there would be a run on the bank and I would need to be online to deposit cold storage into hot storage. In effect, this was my failure to emphasize to staff that it is ALWAYS okay to lean on the side of caution and hit killswitches as they deem necessary. It was also my failure to communicate expectations to the community that sometimes killswitches will have to be hit, and it just means we're playing it safe. This month it is clear we did not play it safe. Killswitches are pointless if the only person confident enough to hit them is the boss.

5. The attacker used an account first registered in early Jan to try exploiting the vulnerability. Looking back at the account's history indicates that this account has been used to pentest many aspects of our system unsuccessfully. Every previous attempt to find an attack vector failed, due to hardening done by our penetration testing team. I had previously seen these attempts in the logs as something to celebrate: "Look, our hardening is working, this hacker would have won, but we put security over features!" - Several people suggested disabling the hacker's accounts, but that is pointless in our business as anyone can simply re-register.

6. We are still unclear as to the exact approach used to cause our servers' perception of transactions to mismatch with reality, because we have largely been focusing on preparing for relaunch and building communication to share with you, the community, over the past day. To the best of our understanding, the attacker deposited increasingly larger amounts of bitcoins, and withdrew them while flooding the blockchain with DDoS of similar transactions.

7. Our system reflected his withdrawals, and his account showed as zero.

8. The attacker rapidly clicked "Refresh deposits" link until our code assumed that the transaction failed (all indications point to malleability as the root case). Our system re-credited his account with the X BTC it judged "unsuccessfully" withdrawn. This, again, due to the liberal rescanning mechanisms added last month (see point 3).

9. In reality, our servers perceived the transactions inaccurately and the BTC were successfully withdrawn. As a result our system inaccurately represented the user's balance as larger than it truly was. This allowed the attacker to withdraw coins again.

10. The attacker began depositing larger amounts, such as 50 BTC at a time, in order to exploit the vulnerability quickly.

11. They then drained our entire hot storage in one bitcoin server shard, and tried the attack from one of their other accounts. The other account was on a different shard, and allowed that hot storage to be drained.

12. The attacker continued using different accounts until virtually all of our hot storage shards were drained.

Due to the type of vulnerability, our accounting system had an inaccurate perception of bitcoins on hand and therefore did not trigger any alerts until real user withdrawals began failing unexpectedly. This was a failure on our part to build a new server alert to check each shard of the new shared bitcoin infrastructure, and another symptom of how rushed we were when implementing the new system during a forum lynch-mob about slow withdrawals.


Lessons learned so far:

1. More staff should have access to killswitches and should not be afraid to use them. Even if it's just because of some news post about on clearnet about some "Transaction Malleability" thing. Killswitches should be used liberally and regularly.

2. A community needs to be comfortable with regular downtime - especially during periods when community safety and the safety of its money could be threatened. A good staff will be responsibly paranoid and hitting killswitches as they deem necessary, and should not be afraid of their community panicking each time precaution is exercised.

3. There’s more to web security than rigorous penetration testing. It also requires the constant review of external services, systems and infrastructures.

4. Never make assumptions when implementing protocols you did not design. Had we not trusted MtGox's staff procedures, we would have reviewed our approaches with much more rigor. Just because a large company's procedures are successful does not make them are safe.

5. Accept that your community will hate you regardless. In the darknet, you will be crucified by your community if anything ever goes wrong. Psychologically prepare for everyone to hate you, because you inevitably will fail at something, and you will need to stay determined no matter what. Don't let it get to your head, and don't let it affect your rigor with security. We cut corners with our deposit/withdrawal speed optimizations because we were afraid of the lynch-mob. We were foolish in this regard. We should have taken the entire site offline for as long as it took to implement a high-volume fault-tolerant bitcoin server in a well-tested, rigorous manner. This cost us an unspeakable amount of trust that we had slaved to build, some of us for years.

This is where we're at, with as much transparency as this medium allows:

The worst that could happen did not happen.

The worst thing that could happen for our community's finances, however, did.

We hate that it occurred under our watch.

There is nothing we can do to change this. All we can do is be transparent about where we are at, and move forward.

To those who will respond here for dramatic effect, please consider contributing your energy to the reconstruction of our community. If you cannot bring yourself to do this, then please take your negativity elsewhere. This is simple. If you have lost faith in Silk Road, I don't blame you in the least. I also do not want to read about it in perpetuity.

Trolling is easy. Trolling during a disaster is cowardice. Choosing to strengthen rather than troll, when trolling is the popular move - that's noble. I know that I speak for all Silk Road staff, seen and unseen, when I speak these words: We are going nowhere. We will remain, rebuild, and move forward toward the greater goal for which we strive by our running of this marketplace: Personal freedom and foundational human rights.

Silk Road will always rise again.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=G++m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

67
Silk Road Discussion / Re: DEFCON RESIGN NOW
« on: February 14, 2014, 02:38:21 am »
It's simple, just use the millions you made+the 8% vendor fee from future purchases. That is, if the staff cared about this community

where exactly are these millions you speak of? you've seen my character. I absolutely will send you any millions I might have misplaced, let me know if you're holding them.

I will fight to get this community paid back once I think of a way to rebuild trust and get everything running again. Until then if it's any sick comfort be assured that I lost the vast majority of my earnings alongside yours, except I'm living in insane opsec situations, constantly watching over my shoulder, and am responsible for thousands of people's user data and therefore thousands' of people's physical safety and freedom from prison.

You have no idea what operating something of this scale does on the brain and the human body.

I'm trying to stay professional about this, but all of these "hey millionaire, just pay it back" arguments really piss me off. If I could screenshot my wallet right now without fear of it compromising my identity I absolutely would. I'm just as bad off as you are, except you are not getting blamed for trying to destroy the community you've fought four months to rebuild from scratch.

Get some context of history. I'm here, I'm not rich, we're four months into this thing, vendors have made way more money than has been stolen, and I better start acting professional again because I'm not leaving and neither are you, especially until this entire mess is cleaned up.

But sure, if you want me to resign and let go of our one chance to get coins back, that seems like a wise decision the community is welcome to vote on. If you vote for me to completely abandon the highest-trafficked site on the darknet, and the largest marketplace on the darknet - which could be salvaged to generate fees again and help get people repaid - then by all means call a vote. But give people two days to breathe, this is too much.

68
UPDATE 2: After further investigation this issue is more serious than we expected, we are taking the site offline immediately to ensure we find the root of the problem quickly.

UPDATE 1: The site is back online as we continue to investigate, we have disabled the accounts generating the unusual load.

Staff has taken the marketplace offline for unplanned maintenance to investigate unusual server load, in response to a safeguard alert.

I will update this post with more information as we investigate the issue.

69
Silk Road Discussion / Weekend Updates *Update 2/12*
« on: February 07, 2014, 03:15:53 pm »
2/12/14 - I will be online for the next 36 hours working through these issues.

UPDATE: These updates are officially being postponed for at least a day or two. We found that the dispute ability for unfinalized orders caused bugs within the rest of the finalization process so further debugging is required. Apologies for yet another delay, but this code needs a few more tweaks before being implemented into production.

This has been an incredibly busy week for staff.

This weekend we will be releasing the following updates to the marketplace:

1. Auto-finalize will be enabled responsibly - Buyers will have three days to dispute any current unfinalized orders. If the order is undisputed, the order will auto-finalize in three days. For new orders, the autofinalize time will be set to a new formula currently in discussion, which will be based on the vendor's estimated shipping time for the order's shipping method.

2. Support interface - Security hardening has completed on the new support features. We apologize for the delay releasing this, but the issue could not be ignored. Launch details on the support interface will appear in a separate post this weekend.

3. Dispute Center: Messaging - The dispute center will allow for messaging between customer and vendor. The ability to suggest a resolution or to escalate the dispute to support staff will be launched in 3-5 days after this release once further testing is completed.

We are not ready to commit to an exact release time, but all of these features will be deployed before Monday 12:00:00 UTC at latest.

You will see a planned maintenance forum post at least four hours before the downtime. We do not expect the deploy to take more than three hours.

Thank you for your patience, we only release features when they are secure. We realize that this philosophy often causes a collective high blood pressure within our community, but assure you that many of our lovely vendors offer fine remedies for hypertension.

70
Silk Road Discussion / Support + Captcha Launch: Jan 31st (UPDATE 6)
« on: January 27, 2014, 03:27:19 pm »
UPDATE 6: Launch rescheduled. Updates continue in this thread: http://silkroad5v7dywlc.onion/index.php?topic=22969.0

UPDATE 5: The new CAPTCHA system has been implemented, resolving the affected login failures.The support UI integration is almost complete as well. Our latest test pass in our offline environment revealed that while placing tickets older than seven days into a "Resolved" status, the system would occasionally throw an error which gets placed into the ticket and caused it to re-open all those it had processed.

We are troubleshooting the root cause of the error as we speak. Once that is found/rectified, we will attempt another sync and implement it into production. Apologies for yet another delay, but once complete, support will be able to respond quicker than at any point in Silk Road's history.

UPDATE 4: The hardening took more hours than expected, the dev team has delivered the improved code to the security team but they are still in the process of testing it. We apologize for the delays getting this out. This fix to the new release was essential and could not be postponed. Our next opportunity to release is in ~10-14 hours with all dev staff online. Will update here when we know the exact time.

UPDATE 3: Launch is unlikely for the 28th, our security team just raised a very valid concern. We are playing it safe, hardening code, then will be launching on the 29th. Staff apologies for the delays, we prioritize security above features no matter how long-awaited they are.

UPDATE 2: A server update is taking longer than expected. Rather than be offline for more than an hour, we are pushing back the window again. As a result of this update the downtime will only be thirty minutes, and will start at 17:00 UTC.

UPDATE: Pushed back a few hours to 15:00 to ensure that all of the dev team is online during the launch, and because one of your admins is very hungover. Good morning cruel world.

The team has been working very hard behind the scenes to keep deposits/withdrawals flowing quickly, and to continue scaling our infrastructure in ways that still preserve security.

We are now ready to launch two important changes to the marketplace:
1. New Support System - Staff has had access to an incredible new support interface for over a week now, and after security test results we have decided that it is safe to continue the rollout to marketplace customers. You may notice a new response from staff which you did not previously see. This is not a bug, it is a symptom of staff testing the new interface by responding to you before launch.

IMPORTANT: In order to help staff resolve the massive support backlog as quickly as possible, we are marking all issues over seven days old as resolved. This does not mean we are ignoring you. If you are affected by this, simply open the support request and add a new message. This will re-open the request. This might seem like a strange approach, but it will allow our staff to focus on actually resolving issues rather than sending hundreds of "Does this issue still exist?" responses.

2. CAPTCHA Improvement - We have rewritten the CAPTCHA system, resolving a bug affecting login and registration.

Staff appreciates your support as we have been heads-down writing and testing these updates.

I will update this post when the launch is complete.

71
Bug Reports / Re: Silk Road Known Bugs
« on: January 17, 2014, 09:16:03 pm »
Please remove the tumbler for now to fix the slow withdrawls and deposits and the negative balance issues.

The tumbler is not the source of any current delays. Delays are caused by the huge increase in Bitcoin transactions, which our original accounting architecture has been unable to support. The market is growing rapidly, which is great for business, but hard on on our young infrastructure. The updates pushed out over the past week have been steps towards optimizing this.

72
Silk Road Discussion / Re: BTC IS AT PROPER LEVELS! TY SR2 STAFF
« on: January 15, 2014, 05:19:01 pm »
THANKS FOR THANKING A++++++ COMMUNITY MEMBER FAST FEEDBACK WOULD BUY AGAIN

73
Customer Support / Re: Negative Account Balances?!??!
« on: January 14, 2014, 04:40:57 pm »
Restarting tor won't make any difference, you're seeing the 5-10min delay of deposits being checked after login.

Next person who sees a negative balance: copy/paste your transaction list while it is negative, then copy/paste your transaction list again once it goes positive. Message it to me encrypted. We'll get to the bottom of this.

74
Bug Reports / Re: BTC rate on SR hasn't been updated in hours???
« on: January 14, 2014, 04:36:34 pm »
Mods?  Can anyone comment?

We use an average of several top exchanges, a few of which seem to be returning lagged BTC rates. This has been a pain since launch - there is a real lack of reliable data out there. We have switched providers several times and tweaked the formula, but users complain the same amount as before. Some day we'll have time to research this further and get it right, but at the moment there are way higher priorities.

Defcon, you likely will not see this and thus not respond but this isn't an issue of complaining about what rate SR is using and how they come about it.  There is a BUG in the system that just started yesterday where the rate DOES NOT CHANGE at all.  It is FROZEN for some reason and luckiliy the price of BTC hasn't flucuated violently enough for it to matter too much but there is clearly a problem where the rate is just plain not updating anymore, regardless of how SR is coming up with the rate.


We use an average of several top exchanges, a few of which seem to be returning lagged BTC rates.

"a few of which seem to be returning lagged BTC rates."

It doesn't matter how often we update a rate if our providers are returning the wrong values.

Fixing this is on the list.

75
Bug Reports / Re: BTC rate on SR hasn't been updated in hours???
« on: January 14, 2014, 08:25:47 am »
Mods?  Can anyone comment?

We use an average of several top exchanges, a few of which seem to be returning lagged BTC rates. This has been a pain since launch - there is a real lack of reliable data out there. We have switched providers several times and tweaked the formula, but users complain the same amount as before. Some day we'll have time to research this further and get it right, but at the moment there are way higher priorities.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9