Bitmain hacking confusion

Bitmain users report being confused by the company's 2FA 
22 August 2017   4566

On Monday, August 21st, the reports on Bitmain, a high-end ASIC chip manufacturer and Bitcoin mining operation, being hacked began to appear on reddit.com and on the company's forum.

Thus, some of Bitmain’s customer data was allegedly compromised leading Bitmain to ask users to change their passwords. There's a screenshot of an e-mail that the user claims he received from Bitmain posted on Twitter:

According to the information the reddit.com user andonevris told ethnews.com, the greeting message did actually look like a hacking attack report:

I can confirm. I tried to log in to my account yesterday and was greeted with a message that the server had been breached and user data was stolen but was encrypted, also advised to change my password.
 

andonevris
reddit.com user

However, fortunately for Bitmain, the reason for the need for password changing is, probably, quite different. 

Thus, Bitmain has not confirmed the hack on any of its official channels, while many users have complained about a recently implemented two-factor authentication (2FA) process on the company’s forum. It’s possible that Bitmain hastily enacted 2FA to address the password theft. A significant number of customers did not previously have 2FA enabled and now, for some reason, when these users try to log in, the Bitmain website requests a non-existent 2FA code.

The company's representatives claim that all services of the system have been checked and no vulnerabilities were revealed.

US Crypto Companies to Support TON in Case With SEC

The Blockchain Association said Telegram taken sufficient measures to ensure that the Gram token offer met SEC requirements
23 January 2020   133

The Blockchain Association, which combines companies such as Coinbase, Circle, 0x and Ripple, issued an expert opinion as part of the ongoing proceedings of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) with Telegram.

Previously, the Digital Commerce Chamber launched a similar initiative. The blockchain association, however, was more straightforward and stated that Telegram had taken sufficient measures to ensure that the Gram token offer met SEC requirements. According to members of the organization, the actions of the SEC can damage not only Telegram, but the market as a whole.

The Court should not block a long-planned, highly anticipated product launch by interfering with a contract between sophisticated private parties. Doing so would needlessly harm the investors that securities laws were designed to protect.

 

The Blockchain Association

The Blockchain Association notes that for many years it has not been possible for SEC to obtain clear and unambiguous guidance for conducting activities in the cryptocurrency space, while the claims of the regulator make the current situation even more ambiguous. 

The SEC’s lawsuit also raises novel questions regarding whether companies are forbidden from raising funds from sophisticated U.S. investors, under well-established regulatory provisions, to build blockchain networks.

 

The Blockchain Association

They cite examples of startups TurnKey Jet and Pocketful of Quarters, in respect of which the regulator recommended not to apply legal measures, adding that such litigations inevitably involve high costs and do not guarantee industry participants that they will not be prosecuted in the future.

Telegram discussed its plans with SEC staff for a year and a half, provided copious information and responded to limited feedback by adjusting the design of its transaction. Yet, at the end, the SEC has sued, and the SEC’s briefs thus far say nothing about the substance of those discussions. 

 

The Blockchain Association

In conclusion, the group asks the court to “reject the SEC’s arguments that the not-yet-in-existence Grams were securities at the time of the Purchase Agreements.”