Live data from Hacker News

Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

washingtonpost.com

441–450 of 901 posts

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#441
post #215

Ilya Lichtenstein (YC S11) is the co-founder of YC-backed MixRank. Heather Morgan, his wife, is apparently a serial entrepreneur, investor, and "contributor" to Forbes.

She's also a rapper, and not a very good one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DIuPPmY9mw

Her delivery reminds me of a CEO being forced by their HR department to "do a rap" in the 2000's to "relate" to their employees.

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A fancy (or even basic) dictionary attack has a very high chance of working.

It doesn't unless you chose something stupid like "correct horse battery staple" or "word + word + number". 7 words chosen from 1000 word dictionary password encrypted AES 256 cannot be cracked with existing technology, 8 words impossible with future tech.

This depends on the key derivation function used. PBKDF2 or BCrypt with strong enough difficulty factor makes even fairly short passwords difficult to crack. On the other hand, a straight SHA-256 hash method can be broken insanely quick with fairly long passwords.

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a reason why the criminal justice system operates like that though. The system has been designed like that because it turned that it is a very good idea not to go on witch hunts or to assume guilt if you want a functional society. I'm not defending the person involved here, but it's important to remember that the presumption of innocence isn't just an abstract legal concept instead of a very important part of…

Do you think it is wrong for a person to believe OJ was guilty of the murder he was accused of? If a person decides to keep their distance from their new neighbour OJ and not treat them with neighbourly kindness and open arms because of that murder, would you admonish them for treating OJ differently for something he was never found guilty of in the court of law?

This is why I like the Scottish "not proven" acquittal verdict as an intermediate third option between "not guilty" and "guilty."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_proven

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#444
post #402

I'm sitting here trying to understand their mindset. They had to know what kind of scrutiny would be on those coins forever. At the time of the theft, the coins are worth $100M+ and they can't touch them. Even worse, anything they do with them will be monitored, researched, dug into, and everything else from law enforcement, amateur detectives, and every major tech+crime group. Fast forward to now and the coins are w…

One trip to Russia would have solved all their problems. Just saying

How or why is that? Why would it be easy to cash in or sale 4 billion dollar worth of crypto in Russia? Russia probably doesn't extradite a person to Americans (not sure about non citizens) but there are plenty of sharks who would want to get their hands on these coins if that came to public anyway.

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#445

The wife could plead not guilty by reason of insanity: https://twitter.com/matthewesp/status/1491116443207094272?s=...

have you seen her rap video? https://razzlekhan.com/ She should be arrested purely for subjecting people to its existence.

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#446

Shouldn't all true crypto believers hate this news? It's the government trying to enforce their opinion of who should own those Bitcoins, thereby taking power away from the owner that the network has decided on, which would be "whoever has the cryptographic keys".

Obvious no-true-scotsman. Believing that the goal of crypto is to circumvent laws regarding possession and theft is at most a fringe belief. The fact that this is at the top of HN demonstrates how devoid of merit crypto discussion here is.

There isn’t a worthy discussion left to be had about crypto that isn’t discussing its role in fraud.

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#447
post #13
post #3

The statement of facts is linked to from the press release, and describes generally how the Feds were able to trace the stolen funds (they found a file listing private keys, after gaining access to the suspect's cloud storage) https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1470186/downl... > The 2017 transfers notwithstanding, the majority of the stolen funds remained in Wallet 1CGA4s from August 2016 until January 3…

> ...Lichtenstein Email 2 was held at a U.S.-based provider that offered email as well as cloud storage services, among other products. Reads suspiciously like Gmail. Oh no. You stored your keys weakly encrypted on Google Drive?!

It wasn't necessarily weakly encrypted. The key may have been compromised, which I find more likely.

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#448

fwiw, it appears one of the named here is a YC Alum: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=il https://www.linkedin.com/in/unrealdutch/

Let's be fair to these individuals and not presume guilt. In the US, it's "innocent until proven guilty". Media is so quick to assume the person is guilty just because of an allegation.

The person you are responding to does not seem to have taken a position on the guilt or innocence of these individuals and has only noted an affiliation.

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty normal for people to look at the evidence and be able to decide if someone was guilty or not. If someone is on video shooting someone, it is a bit silly to say "Why are you editorializing their presumed guilt in this matter."

Kyle Rittenhouse would like a word with you.

[deleted]

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty normal for people to look at the evidence and be able to decide if someone was guilty or not. If someone is on video shooting someone, it is a bit silly to say "Why are you editorializing their presumed guilt in this matter."

Kyle Rittenhouse would like a word with you.

My experience was that people did not look at the evidence- they jumped to a conclusion.
Post reply on HN