SafeCoin Loss Protection 2.0

I haven’t read about this anywhere so I ask.

What if I got 1000 SAFEcoins in my wallet and forget my password. Will these 1000 SAFEcoins be lost forever? bitcoin got the problem of “Zombie coins”, the article even says that 30% of bitcoins are lost forever. SAFEcoin will be super precious, because they are a resourced based money. So how to we fight this?

Should we have a mechanism in place that after 10 years of inactivity the SAFEcoins are destroyed and can be reused? So once in 10 years, your SAFEcoins should be send to yourself and your wallet warns you about this event?

Completely disagree. First, it poses an unacceptable accounts control. Second, you need to add global time to the SAFE network which has been avoided because it is a possible attack vector.


Imagine if 30% of the SAFEcoin in existence just disappearing. Is that not a waste of resources? I realize that you can counter this with divisibility, but everything in the universe just recirculate.

Mastering time is beyond me, but if £625m is lost forever in the SAFE Network’s economy, I got a feeling that we wasted an opportunity yet again. If you can just buy SAFEcoins with fiat and computing power it might just be a matter of time before somebody can buy up all the resources. Buying SAFEcoin is not a problem, because printing fiat currency is not a problem.

[quote=“digipl, post:2, topic:7284”]
First, it poses an unacceptable accounts control.
[/quote]No offense here, but if you lost/forgot the password to your wallet with 1000 SAFEcoins you’re already not in control of your account anymore.

I don’t know the answer to this question, but we need to find an elegant solution. This might sound crazy,but:
SAFEcoin = is the soul
our Wallet = is the body

I see no reason for putting the coins back in circulation.

The theoretical increase in value of “unlost” coins is in itself a motivation to take measures not to lose your key. Even if there is just one coin left, it is infinitely divisible, so does it matter anyway?


The value remains, it is not lost but redistributed (invisibly) among the remaining holders through deflation.


This feature sounds that it would just cause so much more bad than good.

If you make any wallet able to be controlled by someone using something else than the private key, you compromise the security of the whole network.


Unused safecoins are just saved away from being used .
Safecoins are divisible , a reduced supply does not mean they don’t get farmed ,
and all the other safecoins get more precious , too . Some projects intend to burn safecoins …
I’d say zombie coins are not our problem to deal with at this point , let’s not add clutter .

A simple procedure to reset an owners password upon verifying ownership may be possible ,
e.g. associating email , phone number , another detail . This could be even made by a service , !

Let’s keep safecoin simple , the best equivalent of Cash in its new digital form , it is a primordial feature .


I’d like to leave an honest comment to your musings, but it was only yesterday that I was moderated for my combative responses to the great ideas Mr. Eddy shares with us here every week.

Oh, don’t say that! Most of members on this topic (so far) have argued that something like that would be a great feature.

Read that hilarious topic here (35 likes, it must be true!):

1 Like

In this topic ‘0’ people agree (or are you talking about the other topic, so not ‘this’ topic?)


When I said “that hilarious topic here” (meaning below), you can see it the bottom right corner of the excerpt from linked content - 35 hearts so far).

It’s confusing but I now understand you were talking about another topic.

this is irrelevant, all one needs to do is add more decimal places and let market forces of supply and demand do their work.

you can always pay someone to brute force your forgotten password if you still have the encrypted private key. i’m sure it could be done in less than one day…


Group ownership of accounts should be the standard. An individual should not be expected to protect a private key. An individual should be asked to select a group, a third party, or several, to divide the ownership of their account up.

This way their key can be re-combined at any time by their peers. Otherwise SAFE doesn’t provide security because the average person cannot protect a private key.


This idea comes from a good place and with good intentions but I personally have to say I do not think it is a good thing for SAFE. Lost money is lost money and crypto currencies by their nature are like @Astroman said infinitely divisible.

It all comes down to the wallet providers to make a fool proof wallet for SAFE users.

SQRL I think is still the best way to login, it’s weakness is a master password. Instead of a master password, if we can make it so that users can split up their wallet’s key and recover that through family/friends/email then at least we’re getting there.

What we also be fun to see, is a mobile phone OS running on the SAFE Network, just like Nextbit’s cloud first phone. A combination of this would prevent loosing coins & maybe mobiles getting hacked.

We should have something like this

Hopefully the first wallet introduced by the Maidsafe Devs will set the standards and have things like 2FA, multisig and backups.

That has been confirmed by David to be implemented…maybe we’ll see it listed in the updated road-map. The new road-map release will be a good opportunity to drill down and maybe focus the discussions on what we know is coming rather what were wishing for.


Lol here we go - 2FA, eff yeah!

1 Like