Bitcoin News

For the first time in Bitcoin, spending money was seen again

The BitMEX Exchange Research Division has identified a bitcoin transaction that is said to be Double Spend; This is the first time this has happened on the Bitcoin network.

To Report The Bitcoin Telegraph, BitMEX Research, has identified a transaction with a value of 0.00062063 bitcoin, which the company says is not a replacement for a transaction using RBF, but is suspected of re-spending bitcoin.

On January 20, Bitmax’s ForkMonitor reported that several blocks had been created in block 666833. An hour later, Bitmax Research attributed the orphaned block to an alternative transaction using a fee increase. This type of transaction occurs when a new transaction with a higher fee replaces an unapproved transaction.

Double Espand Bitcoin
Fork Monitor Report

However, ForkMonitor subsequently updated its recommendations and announced that no RBF was detected in the transaction. Criticizing the confusing messages of Bitcoin Research, an Australian Bitcoin fan, meanwhile, said the re-spending transaction was worrying, even if it was low in value. He wrote about this:

Well, there seems to be a real re-spending on Bitcoin, not an RBF, but a real re-spending. Only $ 22 million, but possibly $ 22 million [دلار] Be.

One of the main features of Bitcoin mentioned in Satoshi Nakumoto’s White Paper was that it solved the problem of re-spending. The ability for a decentralized network to verify on its own, without the need for a centralized system, that a currency is not spent more than once was a challenge that has challenged previous efforts to create a decentralized digital currency.

In July, digital currency security company ZenGo re-identified a malicious spending code that targeted several popular Bitcoin wallets.

The wallet makers removed the malicious code, but Hayden Otto, a supporter of Bitcoin Cash, warned that the vulnerability could be an inherent problem with Bitcoin RBF performance. He himself had already pointed out this weakness in a controversial video.


Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button