Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Blockchain Analysis of the July 13th Mueller Indictment

blog.cotten.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 128 posts

Re: A Blockchain Analysis of the July 13th Mueller Indictment

#111

Post by peteretep »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #86
peteretep wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. The former tech director of the NSA, William Binney etc It's interesting, this is the second time I've seen this talking point in two days. The first one linked to a slightly less blog-ish source, and pointed out that this "fact" had been established in _The Nation_, a reasonably well-respected and left-sympathetic newspaper. Here's the article in The Nation: https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises…

http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/346468-why-the-lates... "In the end, Fidelis, FireEye, SecureWorks, Threat Connect and other CrowdStrike competitors all confirmed Crowdstike’s results."

What a great quote from that article:

"I find it interesting that people are so eager to [ignore credible evidence], but willing to accept the forensics of an anonymous blogger, with no reputation, that no one knows anything about”

Holy 2018.

Re: A Blockchain Analysis of the July 13th Mueller Indictment

#112

Post by weddpros »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #43
weddpros wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Next time you want to frame someone, send money simultaneously to them AND to the Bitcoin address cited in the article, and they'll be linked to a Russian conspiracy...

If they find evidence the wallet owner communicated with you to send the money and then used the transaction to pay for goods and services used in the course of a criminal act, then you might be in trouble. Otherwise, I don't see why you think it would be viewed as anything but a stupid prank.

I guess the government investigating why your wallet is somehow related to a russian spy's wallet may cause quite some trouble in your life.

Maybe they'll accuse you of financing terrorism in the end. It's your right to trust justice to never make mistakes.

Re: A Blockchain Analysis of the July 13th Mueller Indictment

#113

Post by downandout »

duxup wrote: post #68
guelo wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't know if that is true, you are just recycling unsubstantiated conspiracy theory propaganda.

Dude's profile: >HN used to be a place where thoughtful conversation could take place; now it's nothing more than a den of bullies attempting to spread misinformation that supports their political views. It's a hyper-liberal echo chamber. >I am going continue posting because I hate bullies and won't allow them to tell me what to do, but each and every one of my comments now gets auto-downvoted by GDPR zealots. I don'…

> I guess this means you lost.

How, exactly? And what is that you're saying signifies that I have "lost"?

That yet another random HN poster (@guelo in this case) intentionally mischaracterized hard facts - the fact that all of the people indicted were Russian citizens, and that Russia does not extradite its citizens - as "unsubstantiated conspiracy theory propaganda" hardly surprises me, but it in no way makes me "lose". Such is the nature of HN these days, and it saddens me to see this place devolve into this.

Many of the people here dismiss or ignore cold, hard facts when those facts are not favorable to their side in almost every comment thread on HN. @Guelo is the offender this time, but there are countless others. Facts cannot be argued with, and so in this case, he simply dismissed them because he didn't like those facts. It's wrong that people choose to do this, and that is the crux of the message on my profile page that you quoted, but they do it all the time and I will point it out whenever I see it.

Your comment is even more bizarre to me. You essentially said "You got schooled!" when someone said that the facts I presented were unsubstantiated propaganda, even though they are simply undeniable facts. He presented no argument to support his comment, such as proof of some sort of new extradition treaty that would allow for Russian spies in Russia to be extradited to the US. That would certainly make me "lose" this argument, and I would be happy to concede at that point. Short of that, I can't see that I have "lost" anything based on his comment. You essentially jumped a on a bandwagon where there was no wagon - but rather just a band, making meaningless noises.

Re: A Blockchain Analysis of the July 13th Mueller Indictment

#114

Post by downandout »

civilitty wrote: post #62
downandout wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only problem is there is no way to prove that that address actually belongs to the GRU. They don't have to. This case isn't going to trial; it was basically a PR stunt. It wouldn't survive a trial. The strategy is simple: Indict a bunch of people that you cannot extradite, and you get a PR win with just some broad strokes and have to prove nothing. You get to keep your unlimited budget to continue the investigati…

That's idiotic and completely ignorant of how large scale criminal prosecutions work. Conspiracy and RICO charges necessitate many low level indictments to demonstrate to the court that there is probable cause to the indict the bigger fish and restrict them until trial. Since indictments have a lower threshold than convictions, they are easily challenged when they are brought up as relevant evidence. Mueller has alre…

Conspiracy and RICO charges necessitate many low level indictments to demonstrate to the court that there is probable cause to the indict the bigger fish and restrict them until trial.

There will be no trial in this case, so your point is moot. The government gained no leverage with these indictments either, because the people it indicted are beyond the reach of the US government. That was the whole point of my comment. There is exactly one person that was affected in any way by this indictment - and that was Mueller himself, who was congratulated on a job well done by a press that is hungry for Russia-related headlines. The case itself will not be prosecuted unless one of these guys happens to come to the US on vacation or something, but that is extremely unlikely since they know they are under indictment.

Mueller has already brought these charges in front of a judge

I see that someone else already corrected you on this, but for the record, that person is correct. No judge has ruled on the merits of this case, and the standard that the grand jury uses to indict is very low relative to the standard used at trial.

So, in closing, there are 2 undeniable facts at issue here:

1) All of those indicted are Russians residing in Russia; and

2) Russia does not extradite its citizens to the US.

Therefore, it is not "clearcut propaganda" but rather an undeniable fact to say that this case has no chance of actually being prosecuted in the US, and that the only person affected by this indictment at all was Mueller himself. Mueller presumably knew that he was indicting only Russians that would never be extradited, and therefore knew that the case was not going to actually be prosecuted.

Re: A Blockchain Analysis of the July 13th Mueller Indictment

#115

Post by gasull »

rhizome wrote: post #22
craigc wrote: post #19

The only problem is there is no way to prove that that address actually belongs to the GRU. The transaction referenced in the indictment clearly happened, but Mueller and his team could have easily searched through the Bitcoin blockchain to find any transaction that paid for a VPN, hosting, or domain registration using Bitcoin on or around the date of the hack. The indictment makes it sound like the request for 0.026…

You might be interested in Micah F. Lee's take: https://theintercept.com/2018/07/18/mueller-indictment-russi...

That's a great article, but it misses a point:

There were two batches of emails published by WikiLeaks. The second batch wasn't published by GRU's front DCLeaks / Guccifer 2.0. So it's possible that the source of that second batch is a different one, and it's certainly possible it could be Seth Rich.

https://archive.is/6MKz4#selection-1021.1-1025.3

Re: A Blockchain Analysis of the July 13th Mueller Indictment

#116

Post by downandout »

oldgradstudent wrote: post #110
civilitty wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what grand juries, juries, and transparent trials are all about. The first set of Russians indicted months ago have had lawyers representing them in front of a judge this entire time, despite the fact that there is no Russia-US extradition treaty and zero chance of then facing trial. The Office of Special Counsel is fully aware of that fact and yet they keep going, despite the risk that a judge could force the…

Indictments are not evidence. It is my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) that no actual evidence has been presented (yet) in the trial of the first batch of Russians. I'll maintain skepticism until after discovery and cross examination. > This isn't Iraq WMDs 2.0 where an administration pressured career civil servants until they found one who was partisan enough to back them up. This is an international counter…

Indictments are not evidence. It is my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) that no actual evidence has been presented (yet) in the trial of the first batch of Russians.

Nor will any evidence be presented because there will not be a trial. Mueller purposely indicted all Russians who are physically in Russia, knowing that they could not and would not be extradited.

Re: A Blockchain Analysis of the July 13th Mueller Indictment

#117

Post by mccarthyism2 »

downandout wrote: post #113
duxup wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude's profile: >HN used to be a place where thoughtful conversation could take place; now it's nothing more than a den of bullies attempting to spread misinformation that supports their political views. It's a hyper-liberal echo chamber. >I am going continue posting because I hate bullies and won't allow them to tell me what to do, but each and every one of my comments now gets auto-downvoted by GDPR zealots. I don'…

> I guess this means you lost. How, exactly? And what is that you're saying signifies that I have "lost"? That yet another random HN poster (@guelo in this case) intentionally mischaracterized hard facts - the fact that all of the people indicted were Russian citizens, and that Russia does not extradite its citizens - as "unsubstantiated conspiracy theory propaganda" hardly surprises me, but it in no way makes me "lo…

Where exactly are these “cold hard facts”?

Re: A Blockchain Analysis of the July 13th Mueller Indictment

#118

Post by mccarthyism2 »

civilitty wrote: post #39
downandout wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are random pictures of people not in this indictment just FYI. Your comment is completely off topic.

Indicted. You know, the first step before someone can get convicted?

Too bad there’s still that pesky trial part which comes after the indictment. You know, the part where the defendant is innocent till proven guilty and the prosecution actually needs to make a case.

Re: A Blockchain Analysis of the July 13th Mueller Indictment

#119

Post by igivanov »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #29
igivanov wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, maybe something is damning, but if you believe that these "operatives" signed their e-mails with their full names including patronymics and ranks like "GRU captain" I have a cheap sunny beach in Greenland for sale. Or if you believe that the US spies had somehow full access to this info and are not afraid to compromise their sources by these revelations. Or, finally, if you believe that the US security agencies…

What is your explanation of those ledger entries? Was Mueller setting up Russia before he was named Special Counsel? Also, I read the indictment ( https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2018/07/Mueller... ) but I missed the part about, "these "operatives" signed their e-mails with their full names including patronymics and ranks like "GRU captain"" . Please point me to it? I assumed they used stolen identities,…

>I missed the part about, "these "operatives" signed their e-mails with their full names including patronymics and ranks like "GRU captain"". Please point me to it?

that was sarcasm, sorry, I forgot it doesn't go well here. there is nothing in the indictment about how they were able to identify particular perpetrators including their full names.

>I assumed they used stolen identities,

No one in Russia uses their full names with patronymics spelled out in paper mail or e-mail or in official paperwork, except in e.g. a job application or similar i.e. where one must be fully identified. So unless it's a bad case of a Hollywood movie script, those could have come only from hacked internal databases. I am not sure a spy agency would thus reveal it has hacked those internal databases or had a mole in GRU. And on top of that they would be somehow able to match a record in that database with a hacker out there - a truly miraculous feat. On the other hand if those are stolen identities, there are no hints of that in the indictment. They are presented as true identities. And still, full patronymics just don't compute.

>Why are you providing me a wikipedia link?

What do you want me to provide to prove that he is not to be trusted? My own investigation?

Re: A Blockchain Analysis of the July 13th Mueller Indictment

#120

Post by JumpCrisscross »

downandout wrote: post #52
craigc wrote: post #19

The only problem is there is no way to prove that that address actually belongs to the GRU. The transaction referenced in the indictment clearly happened, but Mueller and his team could have easily searched through the Bitcoin blockchain to find any transaction that paid for a VPN, hosting, or domain registration using Bitcoin on or around the date of the hack. The indictment makes it sound like the request for 0.026…

The only problem is there is no way to prove that that address actually belongs to the GRU. They don't have to. This case isn't going to trial; it was basically a PR stunt. It wouldn't survive a trial. The strategy is simple: Indict a bunch of people that you cannot extradite, and you get a PR win with just some broad strokes and have to prove nothing. You get to keep your unlimited budget to continue the investigati…

Assets can be frozen. Their travel to countries who do extradite will be restricted. And evidence for levying sanctions has been produced by the executive and judicial branches, providing the legislative branch cover. These charges are far from pointless.
Post reply on HN