Closed Parkcora closed 2 years ago
Hello, I had to find out earlier than you issue260
The first submmit issue about these addresses is #65, it has beed labelled as invaild report. i think your report contains some real users(i have excluded legit users), and just as https://github.com/safe-global/safe-user-allocation-reports/issues/65#issuecomment-1250382972 say, having the some onwer is not enough reasoning for a valid submission, the root cause why they are sybil attackers is they also try to get more airdrops with safe on other chains
I didn't offend you.
but, it seem that i found they interact with same nft first,
and then you check them on other chain to select of them further.
so. could you point which of user is real in my issue260?
we could have a debate
you just totally copy my method and do some more work, so admire
@Parkcora hello, it seem that you really copy @skydotone in issue260?
@JUSxuaxuan Thank you, sir
@Parkcora Can you answer me?
@Parkcora Can you answer me? we could have a check together. man just make it clear.
@Parkcora Can you answer me? we could have a check together. man just make it clear.
Who edited 3 days ago is asking for an answer from who edited 4 days ago.
@Parkcora Can you answer me? we could have a check together. man just make it clear.
Who edited 3 days ago is asking for an answer from who edited 4 days ago.
but i found this method (Same NFT) early than you, can you deny it?
just because i edit it, so i should be killed?????
98 Related Safe Addresses:
Reasoning
The above behaviors of safes could be verified by visiting the debank links in the following table.
Methodology
It can be identified by visualization and further analysis of the details of the above transaction listed using debank.
Safe Address
0xD50fF80Ce8EFc38D024272f4019978Dc017eA200