What’s up today?


The Cyberpunk 2077 gameplay reveal looks good.
Of course not a realistic vision of the future. Like things are too hackable via the network (=fun of course :slight_smile: )…






Long but interesting read. One passage especially caught my attention with respect to the Safe Network: “Maersk’s 150 or so domain controllers were programmed to sync their data with one another, so that, in theory, any of them could function as a backup for all the others. But that decentralized backup strategy hadn’t accounted for one scenario: where every domain controller is wiped simultaneously.”

I know the chances of the Safe Network being susceptible to a worm like Notpedya are small, and I further know that I know there’s been discussions about network restarts in the event of a global Safe Network shutdown, but humor me here. What’s the technical feasibility of an attack like NotPedya against the Safe Network?


Not having read the details of NotPedya there still are a couple of points that might help here.

It is still theoretically possible for nodes to be infected with malware/virus that triggers at a set time and it wipes the vaults. How the nodes get the virus is not important, since they can get it from a corrupted/hacked old web site, a mail that people click on the link, etc etc.

But of course to infect enough PCs running nodes to cause problems is the real question. An infected node will usually be rejected since its not following protocol, so it really becomes the “bad-actor” scenario which has been discussed in recent times and a search for it will yield you more answers/discussions


I wonder how botnets would be shut down when they use a SAFE MD in place of the C&C server(s)…


Just a thought

I guess by the time botnets are using SAFE the network is global and malware detectors will be available. Then we could see various client software that also are malware detectors and these C&C MDs would be blacklisted in the client.


Areas of impact for us to think about include innovative applications for… applications. :wink:

I like this example and I like how it helps me to change the way I think about what and how to build on SAFE and Solid:



Thanks for the insight, @neo. I was thinking as well that nodes would have to be the points of failure. But is there a scenario where a majority of nodes could fail as a result of a similar or modified attack was the question I left with before I could fully proclaim that the Safe Network is the solution in cases such as these.


Ipv6 can be tenuous for some countries


Sounds good


BTC Price jump incoming? :slight_smile:


Anyone knows a reliable debit card for cryptos that has global acceptance?


Square, is that a competitor of Circle(owner of Poloniex)?
Edit: yes and Square was founded first…


@tobbetj Hope that :muscle:
@draw I think they’re a bit different. Circle develops a platform in order to let users exchange money
Square is a bit more oriented towards businesses. They work on products like terminals etc. So restaurants and locals can accept every coin, even crypto
(Just my 2 cents. Hope to have not lost something. Correct me please if i’m wrong on something)


Just for clarification, I assume you mean either an add-on to the client or separate client that uses safe as a reference client?

I don’t feel that blacklisting should be an option to the base reference client in any form.

And wouldn’t the malware ship with its own modified client anyway? Even if I ran an add-on that blocked requests to known c&c MD’s, I don’t see how that would stop a request via a malware shipped package.



Makes sense. Use an internal blockchain to track payments, use a new one every month to keep the size down. File last month’s blockchain for accounting purposes.



Makes no sense. If it’s managed by them, then why a blockchain? They could just use a good ole RDBMS and it would be faster and cheaper. But no, it has to be a blockchain because, BLOCKCHAIN :open_mouth: And this, dear friends, is how hype leads companies to make idiotic decisions.