[hrehhf]

You have ignored the difference between an address with has never spent anything and an address which is being reused. Since you know everything, why not address this directly?

edit: Though unrelated to this article, here is a case where address reuse (and software bugs) led to vulnerable wallets: http://www.nilsschneider.net/2013/01/28/recovering-bitcoin-p...

[TheDong]

An address which never spent anything can still be the recipient of a transaction.

Those are the addresses which are being attacked here.