Data Analytics Firm LongHash Refutes Tether Manipulation Causing Bitcoin's 2017 Bull Run

  • A new report by crypto analytics firm LongHash refutes Tether's manipulation of the market and bitcoin's price.
  • LongHash found that Tether's influence on BTC is strongest when bitcoin's price falls. 

A new report by crypto data analytics firm LongHash refutes the idea that Tether manipulated the market to create bitcoin’s 2017 bull run. 

LongHash’s report disputes the previously published controversial academic paper “Is Bitcoin Really Un-Tethered?,” which argues that stablecoin manufacturer Tether played a role in manipulating the market for bitcoin’s massive bull run at the end of 2017.

The academic paper, authored by the University of Texas professor John Griffin and Ohio State University Assistant Professor Amin Shams, also claimed that a single whale investor was responsible for kick-starting the BTC price bubble. 

According to the report, LongHash analyzed a metric called “Tether Purchasing Power” to determine its influence on bitcoin’s price, 

To measure the impact of Tether on the Bitcoin market, we calculated a metric called Tether Purchasing Power, which is defined as the market cap of Tether divided by the market cap of Bitcoin. It measures how many Bitcoins can be purchased with all the Tether supply in the market at its current spot price. The higher the ratio, the more potential manipulation could have been perpetrated with Tether.

LongHash determined that Tether’s impact on the market is strongest when the price of bitcoin falls rather than increases. Per LongHash, the data suggests that if Tether was using the USDt stablecoin to manipulate the market, it would be at its strongest when BTC's price falls. PEr its report, "Tether's potential influence on Bitcoin prices" would be "maximal during bear, not bull, markets."

The report concludes current evidence “to be lacking” in supporting Tether’s manipulation of the price of bitcoin.

Featured Image Credit: Photo via Pixabay.com

'Big Spender' Bitcoin Wallet Exploit Is an 'Issue With BTC Itself', Says BCH Supporter

Michael LaVere
  • Crypto security firm ZenGo has identified a double-spend exploit dubbed "BigSpender" which affected popular bitcoin wallets.
  • Exploit allows an attacker to cancel a bitcoin transaction without the receiving user knowing. 

A crypto security firm has identified a double-spend exploit targeting popular bitcoin wallet providers. 

According to a report by ZenGo, the security firm has discovered a double and multiple spend wallet exploit for bitcoin dubbed “BigSpender.” The report claims the exploit allows an attacker to cancel a bitcoin transaction but still have it appear in a victim’s vulnerable wallet. 

The report reads, 

The core issue at the heart of the BigSpender vulnerability is that vulnerable wallets are not prepared for the option that a transaction might be canceled and implicitly assume it will get confirmed eventually.

As CryptoGlobe reported, ZenGo found that a user’s balance would be increased following an unconfirmed incoming transaction, without a subsequent decrease in the event the transaction being double-spent. The firm outlined how an attacker could use the exploit to cancel transactions of sent bitcoin while still receiving goods and services in return. 

The security firm tested nine popular cryptocurrency wallets and found BRD, Ledger Live and Edge to be vulnerable to the exploit. All three companies were notified by ZenGo of the threat and subsequently updated their products. However, the firm noted that “millions” of crypto users may have been exposed to the attack prior to the update. 

Bitcoin Cash supporter Hayden Otto told Cointelegraph the exploit is particularly concerning for bitcoin-accepting merchants. 

He said, 

The technique is facilitated by RBF (replace by fee), a so-called ‘feature’ added at the protocol level by the Bitcoin Core developers.The issue exists if you use BTC. Wallet software can only make some trade off, which results in a worse BTC user experience, in order to try to protect BTC users.

Otto claimed the exploit was derived from “an issue with BTC itself” and had little to do with wallet software. 

Featured Image Credit: Photo via Pixabay.com