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

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

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 409 posts

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

#61

Post by TremendousJudge »

DangitBobby wrote: post #30
jakear wrote: post #5

> His profile on one social network included a quote from Kurt Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle about the futility of humanity's quest for knowledge: “Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly; Man got to sit and wonder ‘why, why, why?' Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land; Man got to tell himself he understand.” Hey! He’s just like me. > But did Medjedovic do this, or did the algorithm? Barry Sookman, a lawyer in Toronto specializi…

If I write code that can be exploited with a buffer overflow and you exploit it, who is the law going to punish more harshly?

If code is law, you.

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

#63

Post by kmlx »

miltondts wrote: post #56
SamBam wrote: post #50

> But in our email exchanges, he argued that he'd executed a perfectly legal series of trades. In real finance, there is an understanding that technical loopholes can exist, since not every outcome can be foreseen when writing laws, but the legal system can frequently prosecute against a series of actions which are, individually, legal, but which together are taken in order to achieve something illegal. That is, mode…

> That is, modern finance and the law also attempt to deal with intent. It does? Maybe for the poor, but certainly not for the rich/corporations.[1] [1] - https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2019/09/tackling-...

so called “tax havens” actually have a role to play in the world economy.

but on your main point regarding “modern finance and law”:

2021: https://member.fintech.global/2022/01/05/the-top-five-compli...

https://www.kyckr.com/aml-fines-2021/

tldr fines amount to billions in total and sometimes criminal proceedings are brought forward.

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

#64

Post by TameAntelope »

For all the people shouting "Way to go!" and "The money is his!" I think you should remember he's currently a fugitive, and would need to spend the rest of his life living this way.

If that's what it takes to live the "code is law" dream, count me out.

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

#65

Post by Ajedi32 »

SamBam wrote: post #50

> But in our email exchanges, he argued that he'd executed a perfectly legal series of trades. In real finance, there is an understanding that technical loopholes can exist, since not every outcome can be foreseen when writing laws, but the legal system can frequently prosecute against a series of actions which are, individually, legal, but which together are taken in order to achieve something illegal. That is, mode…

I've seen this argument regarding smart contracts several times now, and I don't think it makes any sense. It's like robbing someone in real life, then claiming you did nothing wrong because you didn't violate the "laws" of physics. Those are two entirely separate things.

In the world of smart contracts code is indeed law, but that doesn't change the fact that in the real world law is law, and the fact that you used a smart contract to commit a crime doesn't make it any less a crime.

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

#66

Post by shockeychap »

"But passivity also created risk. If there was a problem with the code, someone could exploit it directly, without needing to bypass any human safeguards. And limiting blockchain interactions to cut costs entailed a trade-off: When a smart contract—a script that executes automatically when certain criteria are met—has fewer steps, it can leave more room for security vulnerabilities."

So much of this reminds me of Chesterton's Fence, where "innovative" solutions are deployed by people who never put forth the time and effort to fully understand how the existing system came to be the way that it was - and the problems that it had to deal with and solve along the way.

I'm not trying to sing the praises of finance and banking; there's much there that is broken. (I'm also not a fan of crypto or NFTs.) But I am saying that many of the "old" ways came about in response to a litany of problems that are neither obvious nor intuitive, and you need to understand why it works the way it does before putting out a new solution.

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

#67

Post by throw_m239339 »

kmlx wrote: post #63
miltondts wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is, modern finance and the law also attempt to deal with intent. It does? Maybe for the poor, but certainly not for the rich/corporations.[1] [1] - https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2019/09/tackling-...

so called “tax havens” actually have a role to play in the world economy. but on your main point regarding “modern finance and law”: 2021: https://member.fintech.global/2022/01/05/the-top-five-compli... https://www.kyckr.com/aml-fines-2021/ tldr fines amount to billions in total and sometimes criminal proceedings are brought forward.

> so called “tax havens” actually have a role to play in the world economy.

So does the mafia and the child slaves corporations like Nestlé profit from, they all have "a role to play in the world economy". But it's about the morals and ethics and the hypocrisy of western institutions that allow these loopholes for the super rich in order for them to protect their wealth from taxation.

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

#68

Post by meowface »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #65
SamBam wrote: post #50

> But in our email exchanges, he argued that he'd executed a perfectly legal series of trades. In real finance, there is an understanding that technical loopholes can exist, since not every outcome can be foreseen when writing laws, but the legal system can frequently prosecute against a series of actions which are, individually, legal, but which together are taken in order to achieve something illegal. That is, mode…

I've seen this argument regarding smart contracts several times now, and I don't think it makes any sense. It's like robbing someone in real life, then claiming you did nothing wrong because you didn't violate the "laws" of physics. Those are two entirely separate things. In the world of smart contracts code is indeed law, but that doesn't change the fact that in the real world law is law, and the fact that you used…

In the real world law is law, but I think it's still not entirely clear whether smart contracts can be considered legal contracts and how to judge if any particular smart contract is one.

If this smart contract is considered a legally binding contract, then, yes, this would likely be illegal despite the proverbial "letter" of the smart contract not being broken. If it isn't, then it may not necessarily be illegal (but possibly still could be).

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

#69

Post by vmception »

SamBam wrote: post #52
vmception wrote: post #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…

If anyone could perfectly predict what was going to happen in the next state then those with this ability would only ever make money and never lose it. Yet this can't happen. In the real world there are sniper bots and all sorts of other things that another agent could do in parallel with your own script, which would lead the outcome to be uncertain.

The main issue is constructing a valid transaction.

An exploiter conducting a big heist and disappearing never has to prove that they can't do it again, because they're rich immediately.

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

#70

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC »

I have a compromise. Allow hacks of cryptocurrency to be prosecuted, but when they are, the also prosecute the creators of the cryptocurrency for making unregistered securities and for any fraudulent marketing of the cryptocurrency, or any failure to disclose risks, or for not following financial regulations.

This is another example of make risks public and reward private. They are arbitraging the financial system and trying to have the freedom of cryptocurrency, but when things go bad, want law enforcement to come fix it.

Post reply on HN