How a malicious seed generation website stole $4M

Every other cryptocurrency software can facilitate wallet generation seeds natively, why does IOTA refuse to implement it?

I'm simply providing historical facts. Your bias as an invested speculator is clear. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15634175

The response to the IOTA hash flaw has a followup from MIT as well:

https://www.media.mit.edu/posts/iota-response/

  On Friday, MIT Technology Review published an article on 
  the cryptocurrency IOTA. The headline stated that the 
  currency “could outperform Bitcoin.” However, we here at 
  the MIT Media Lab have issues with the story. 
  Specifically, my colleagues in the Digital Currency 
  Initiative (DCI) recently uncovered a gaping hole in 
  IOTA’s software. And while that flaw has now been patched, 
  we certainly disagree with reporter Michael Orcutt’s 
  assertion that IOTA is “secure.” As the Director of the 
  MIT Media Lab, I felt it important we outline our specific 
  concerns. 


  — Joi*

  “The rally began in late November, after the IOTA 
  Foundation, the German nonprofit behind the novel 
  cryptocurrency, announced that it was teaming up with 
  several major technology firms to develop a ‘decentralized 
  data marketplace.’” The article goes on to say: “And the 
  high-profile names participating in its data market pilot—
  including Microsoft, Deutsche Telekom, and Fujitsu—suggest 
  IOTA is onto something.”

  IOTA’s relationships with top-tier companies continue to 
  be nebulous.


  In the Technology Review article, Orcutt linked to a 
  November 28, 2017 blog post from IOTA that gave the 
  perception that Microsoft was a partner in the 
  marketplace. However, after a flurry of media reports 
  making this claim, IOTA corrected their relationship 
  status with top-tier companies like Microsoft, Cisco, and 
  Huawei in a blog post dated December 16. That the MIT Tech 
  Review story links to IOTA’s initial blog post instead of 
  the later version is misleading.

  Though IOTA tokens can be used like any other 
  cryptocurrency, the protocol was designed specifically for 
  use on connected devices, says cofounder David Sønstebø. 
  Organizations collect huge amounts of data from these 
  gadgets, from weather tracking systems to sensors that 
  monitor the performance of industrial machinery (a.k.a. 
  the Internet of things). But nearly all of that 
  information is wasted, sitting in siloed databases and not 
  making money for its owners, says Sønstebø.


  IOTA’s system can address this in two ways, he says. 
  First, it can assure the integrity of this data by 
  securing it in a tamper-proof decentralized ledger.

  Whether or not IOTA’s ledger is “tamper-proof,” the entire 
  IOTA network went down in November, and was completely 
  inoperable for about three days. That this has never 
  happened in Bitcoin or Ethereum suggests the extent to 
  which the IOTA network relies on the “coordinator”—a 
  single point of failure—and is not truly decentralized.


  Also troubling, IOTA developers were able to transfer 
  funds out of users’ IOTA accounts. The user was then 
  required to participate in a “reclaim” process to request 
  their funds. We believe IOTA’s developers should not have 
  access to such funds; it’s rife with risk.

  Second, it enables fee-less transactions between the 
  owners of the data and anyone who wants to buy it—and 
  there are plenty of companies that want to get their hands 
  on data.


  Now, here’s where things get really interesting. Instead 
  of a blockchain, IOTA uses a “tangle,” which is based on a 
  mathematical concept called a directed acyclic graph. 
  Sønstebø says his team pursued an alternative approach 
  after deciding that blockchains are too costly—it has 
  recently cost as much as $20 per Bitcoin transaction 
  because of high demand—and inefficient to operate at the 
  scale required for the Internet of things.

  Orcutt’s claim that IOTA is free of fees is misleading. 
  Though perhaps not immediately obvious, IOTA transactions 
  are "zero fee" in exactly the same way that Bitcoin 
  transactions are. An important difference is that Bitcoin 
  has miners who can perform the proof of work for you, 
  while IOTA users do the proof of work on their own 
  devices, per transaction. However, a Bitcoin user can also 
  mine their own block to get their transactions accepted 
  into the blockchain without paying fees. To put it another 
  way, most people wouldn’t be interested in buying a 
  refrigerator operated by a hand crank, even if the 
  advertisement said “No electricity required!”


  It’s true that transactions with Bitcoin and other digital 
  currencies, even when amortized over a block with 
  thousands of other transactions, require much more work 
  than transactions in IOTA. However, the claim is not that 
  IOTA transactions are easier—the claim appears to be that 
  IOTA transactions are free.


  Semantics aside, this claim, which appears in IOTA 
  marketing materials, is deceptive; the work required is a 
  fee, whether or not it requires a monetary payment. 
  Restricting the ways in which the fee can be 
  paid—requiring that the work be done on a user’s own 
  device—doesn’t make it go away.

  “In August, researchers from MIT and Boston University 
  reported that they discovered a “serious vulnerability” in 
  a novel cryptographic technique IOTA was using. IOTA has 
  patched the vulnerability, and Sønstebø says that security 
  measures in place would have prevented anyone from losing 
  funds. The foundation has hired a third-party firm to help 
  it continue to develop the technique, which Sønstebø says 
  represents the kind of “lightweight cryptography” needed 
  for low-power connected devices, like sensors.”

  Once the Digital Currency Initiative published the break 
  in IOTA’s curl hash function, its author, Sergey 
  Ivancheglo, offered two conflicting explanations for the 
  vulnerability.


  The first explanation was that the flaw was 
  intentional—that it was meant to serve as a form of “copy 
  protection.” If anyone used this code in their own work, 
  he said, the IOTA developers would be able to exploit the 
  flaw and damage other systems that were using the hash 
  function. However, later, he offered a conflicting 
  explanation that he didn’t write the curl at all, but that
   an AI wrote it.


  We do not find either of these explanations convincing, 
  even in isolation. That they contradict each other makes 
  them even less so.