Crypto.com accounts had unauthorized withdrawals

Post by ipsin » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 4:14 PM UTC

CPLX wrote: post #123

zknill wrote: post #114

The Worldwide Account Protection Program seems to be a way for Crypto.com to limit their exposure, while marketing it as "protection" for the customers. Around $34million stolen, 483 users affected. If the funds were spread evenly, then each user would have lost about $71k. But the funds won't be evenly spread (average). It's likely some users will have lost much more, and some much less. From the announcement, it lo…

Didn't they say that 443 BTC was stolen? Isn't that around $200MM all by itself? Or did I miss a part of this?

Post by smokey_circles » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 4:15 PM UTC

davidwparker wrote: post #81

ricotico060 wrote: post #13

Reminder that cliches are cliche for a reason: not your keys, not your crypto

They also said they've reimbursed all funds. So if you were hacked personally, you would be out money here, vs keeping it on their exchange where you would be made whole again.

Post by gitfan86 » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 4:19 PM UTC

dogman144 wrote: post #124

gitfan86 wrote: post #46

I am a cyber security consultant for startups. The first thing that I communicate is that just by not being in crypto you have drastically lowered your risk profile. Attackers care a lot about what they can get to if they are able to breach your security.

I do a bit of the same and this seems to be a silly thing to communicate as part of a security audit. Ok, step 1 SMB insurance company paying me to audit - by not being in Afghanistan, you have a severely reduced risk of business invasion and extortion. Seems like a really wonky way to communicate a risk profile and first-exposure to security professionals by a SMB. Plenty of SMBs with janky POS systems get pretty na…

Post by wpietri » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 4:21 PM UTC

Shank wrote: post #106

EMM_386 wrote: post #96

> On Monday, 17 January 2022 at approximately 12:46 AM UTC Crypto.com’s risk monitoring systems detected unauthorized activity on a small number of user accounts where transactions were being approved without the 2FA authentication control being inputted by the user. This triggered an immediate response from multiple teams to assess the impact. I sometimes find it hard to believe these statements, but I guess I can o…

> Which seems more likely, that these "risk monitoring systems" actually caught this, or that they were inundated by sudden urgent calls from the 483 users saying "DUDE WTF WHERE'S MY MONEY?". For better or for worse, a lot of insight can be gained from a sudden influx of tickets from normally-quiet users, all with the same general story. This is definitely how many critical bugs in production are caught, because eve…

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 4:22 PM UTC

deegles wrote: post #99

EMM_386 wrote: post #96

> On Monday, 17 January 2022 at approximately 12:46 AM UTC Crypto.com’s risk monitoring systems detected unauthorized activity on a small number of user accounts where transactions were being approved without the 2FA authentication control being inputted by the user. This triggered an immediate response from multiple teams to assess the impact. I sometimes find it hard to believe these statements, but I guess I can o…

Responding to escalations from customer support is a risk monitoring system, just not a very good one.