Live data from Hacker News

The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

bloomberg.com

11–20 of 409 posts

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#11

What’d he do that was illegal? Seems like he didn’t cheat and insider trading laws don’t seem to apply. Oops crypto is a unregulated market.

I'd tend to agree with you. People with money and power will push for laws that protect them though. But this situation is why I'm skeptical of these kinds of contracts - too much potential for problems.

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#12

What’d he do that was illegal? Seems like he didn’t cheat and insider trading laws don’t seem to apply. Oops crypto is a unregulated market.

Stop regulating crypto! (Unless I've been hacked, then we need to regulate it)

Or unless you've lost money! Lots of people saying "the fed could make crypto losers whole without putting up a sweat" the last few days.

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#13
> Medjedovic added that he'd taken on “substantial risk” in pursuing this strategy. If he'd failed he would have lost “a pretty large chunk of my portfolio.” (The 3 ETH he stood to lose in fees was worth about $11,000 at the time.)

This is misleading, either intentionally or due to Medjedovic's incompetence.

You can fork the current head of the mainnet blockchain to localhost and try infinite permutations for free to see what the next state of the blockchain will be. And then if you like that state, you can then pay to send the working transaction to the mainnet to make that same state occur, in a sure bet. (nearly sure fire bet as in some cases, someone could replace the mainnet transaction in route, but they wouldn't necessarily know what to look for or change if its a distinct kind of transaction)

Medjedovic either didn't know this, because his skills didn't translate as well as he thinks, or Medjedovic knows this and hasn't come up with a stronger argument to support his actions yet (of which there are plenty) and actually is relying on public sympathy to support his actions.

Either way, there is an opportunity for broader education on how these exploits can be cooked in something akin to a "hyperbolic time chamber" or quantum reality without anyone's knowledge, ready to hop back into our dimension fine tuned and ready to cause maximum effect, all within the ~15 seconds between blocks if necessary, as the state changes per block.

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#15

You love to see it. Love to see crypto taking Ls.

If only so it lessens some of the bad behavior I’ve witnessed. My cousin has been investing most of his paycheck in Bitcoin for several years.

He also thinks Tesla Wall Batteries will mine crypto soon and “broke into” a private event Elon was at and made a TikTok of it.

I want him to have a successful future is all.

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#17

This was an interesting read. The case is now in limbo until authorities can locate Medjedovic or he decides to appear. “I did not steal anyone's private keys. I interacted with the smart contract according to its very own publicly available rules. The people who lost internet tokens in this trade were other people seeking to use the smart contract to their own advantage and taking on risky trading positions that the…

Reminds me of the standard advice of "don't roll your own cryptography." There are a lot of subtle nuances that make it hard to get right. When you have well-funded teams of absolute novices writing rules for complex games with money on the line, this is what happens. Rather than just having user accounts taken over and having to do a mea culpa, the reward isn't lolz or dark web money, it's actual money, and a lot of it.

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#18

What’d he do that was illegal? Seems like he didn’t cheat and insider trading laws don’t seem to apply. Oops crypto is a unregulated market.

FTA:

> In their complaint, lawyers for Kellar and Day argued that two particular steps of the attack violated statutes against market manipulation and computer hacking. One was swapping almost all the UNI tokens out of the DEFI5 pool, the otherwise irrational trade that distorted the pricing such that Medjedovic could buy tokens out from under Indexed users, who were forced by the algorithm to sell. “The only purpose of that trade was to mislead token holders to part with tokens on terms they never would have agreed to,” says Stephen Aylward, a lawyer representing Kellar and Day. “We say that's a form of market manipulation.” The same argument applied to Medjedovic's interaction with the CC10 pool.

> The second illegal transaction, they argued, was when Medjedovic overwhelmed the pool with free Sushi, thereby tricking the algorithm into letting him bypass the size limit on certain trades. Aylward calls this “an intentional act by Andean to disable a security measure, like disabling the security system at a bank.” He argues that this falls under Canada's “extremely broad” legal definition of a hack, which can be interpreted as “subverting the intended purpose of a computer system.”

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#19

The people who genuinely believe "code is law" are stunned to learn that: a) humans won't act "rationally", b) regulations exist for a reason, and c) no, the law is law, code is brittle.

d) I genuinely believe that Medjedovic should show up in court to test that theory.

The only thing interesting about this case is how incompetent he was, while having his entire brand and identity be based on intellectual superiority. He should have used a virgin address and Tornado cash. He should have not needed to risk any funds for failure, as he should have tested the transaction in a localhost staging environment for free. Him getting doxxed is the only thing that allows this theory to be tested, whether he, or we, believe it was legal, it is now unnecessary liability. Instead, everyone knows who he is, that he's spiraling mentally, a judge in his hometown jurisdiction froze his addresses and the funds within it (which is a legal abstraction that does not freeze the funds but makes it illegal to move them until the order is lifted, in his favor or not). Just piling on the liability.

I think “code is law” is a decent crux of a more fleshed out defense, I think the Canadian attorney for the project founders is grasping but I’m not as familiar with the direction courts go there, I would prefer to see something similar play out in US federal appeals court (which is sadly after the drama of trials court and how opinions calcify throughout). It would be great and beneficial to see a transcript of how the “Sushi flooding” is argued the context of a broad computer access abuse law.

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#20

What is interesting to me is how it shines a light on the regulatory framework of the non-crypto economy. If you read up on edge cases, there is a lot of people deciding if something is "fair", and my notions of fair and a particular judges notions of fair are often at odds. To steal from Frank Zappa: Legal isn't the same as allowed, allowed isn't the same as fair, fair isn't the same as just, and just isn't music.

A judge is not deciding whether something is "fair" they are deciding whether it is illegal to the letter and/or spirit of the law. The reason this is at odds with us is that many things are legal that are not "fair".

The specific danger here legally is trying to apply general laws into an unregulated market. It's a bit like borrowing money from your mate and then trying to take him to court because he's asking for too much interest.

Post reply on HN