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

Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

fiod.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 827 posts

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#691

Post by unboxingelf »

enlyth wrote: post #629
unboxingelf wrote: post #619

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False. Here is the definition of money laundering: 1. The act of engaging in transactions designed to obscure the origin of money that has been obtained illegally. 2. concealing the source of illegally gotten money Anyone can use a cryptocurrency mixer with legally obtained cryptocurrency. Tornado Cash has legitimate, non-criminal use cases.

Anyone can, but realistically, it has probably been used almost exclusively for either laundering money or concealing the source of money used to purchase illegal goods. I can think of pretty much no cases where you would _need_ to convert your money to cryptocurrency, then conceal where it came from using a mixer, and then use it for something legal. I'm not advocating for the developer to be prosecuted, I'm just sa…

  I can think of pretty much no cases where you would _need_ to convert your money to cryptocurrency, then conceal where it came from using a mixer, and then use it for something legal.
See my other comment for a concrete, legal use case: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32443842

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#692

Post by Anunayj »

paulsutter wrote: post #87
Anunayj wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup exactly, the mistake these guys did here is, instead of creating a token that you have to buy to use the service, then giving yourself 50% of the token supply, and having 50 of your keys control a "DAO" for governance, they decided to flatly price.

You've inadvertently explained why a transparent ruse like that wouldn't work. If you want to develop serious privacy technology, make it open source and don't benefit from it financially

Oh that was sarcasm directed at the state of cryptocurrencies today :P

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#693

Post by yomkippur »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #462
mr_beans wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NL government org that arrested him specifically mentions the US sanctions in their press release https://www.fiod.nl/arrest-of-suspected-developer-of-tornado...

> org that arrested him specifically mentions the US sanctions in their press release I'm not arguing it's irrelevant. Just that this doesn't look like a sanctions arrest. Tornado Cash was sanctioned on 8 August. There hasn't been enough time for someone to violate the sanctions and produce enough evidence to get arrested. More likely: the same alleged crimes that got Tornado sanctioned prompted this arrest.

it sure looks like US sanctioned, just going by the article here

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#694

Post by whatisweb3 »

ShamelessC wrote: post #685
whatisweb3 wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is: the protocol encrypts a private key, a private key is an integer, or text hash. Saying that it is OK to build tools that encrypt text, like Matrix protocol, but it is not OK to build tools that encrypt private-keys-as-text is a slippery slope. Which one is it? - privacy is a right, and people should be allowed to share knowledge privately or, - privacy is not a right, and people should only be allowed t…

Repeating an argument _verbatim_ this many times just comes across as patronizing. We get it. You think numbers can’t be outlawed. You’re wrong and in general, pedantry/technicalities about theoretical computer science is _not_ going to help you when considering human power structures. Someone else has told you this already, but you seem intent on ignoring it.

You did not answer my simple question. :) Sorry to be a broken record by comparing this to E2EE privacy protocols, but many commenters on HN only seem to think privacy is worthwhile when in the form of a chat app.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#695

Post by fisf »

Vespasian wrote: post #557
diogenes1 wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you fired the gun, not the manufacturer. why would they arrest the manufacturer/inventor/etc for something that was done by you?

Manufacturers carry liabilities for the products the make all the time. That's true for consumer products and even more significant for things like guns. In most places you're a not even allowed to manufacture guns not to speak of Marketing and selling them. Offering a service like tornado cash (e.g. getting financial benefits from transaction fees) would be just as illegal if they used potatoes instead of cryptocurr…

Should we arrest the author of Nmap?

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#696

Post by acdha »

leppr wrote: post #643
acdha wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a better argument for using a system which is correctly designed. A public ledger is a bad fit for currency and layering kludges on top isn’t as good as a better design, especially when that exposes you to being an accessory to criminal activity.

Given how arbitrary the Tornado enforcement seems, fully private ledger cryptocurrencies will probably be declared criminal too. While this won't deter criminals from using them, it will deter normal people, as publicly offering goods or services in that currency would be illegal. It's not hard to imagine that the end goal is CBDCs having a monopoly on legal privacy. (Privacy from your neighbor, not your government.)

It doesn’t seem that arbitrary if it’s true that he was directly profiting from money laundering as described.

It also doesn’t follow that a private ledger would be banned any more than, say, credit cards or PayPal are banned. The thing which would get them banned would be refusing to comply with KYC laws, which is a political choice rather than a requirement.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#697

Post by closeparen »

saurik wrote: post #622
JeremyNT wrote: post #611

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cryptocurrency mixers exist solely to launder money. This is literally all they are useful for. WhatsApp has legitimate, non-criminal use cases.

I feel like this can only be true because you must have defined "launder money" to be any private usage of money (which isn't a sufficient definition of money laundering, to be clear). If you claim otherwise, then you need to be more specific with your reasoning. To start: why would anyone need privacy--of communication or of shared resources (payment)--but for something illegal? If you have an answer for that for co…

Providing infrastructure that money launders could use, or actually do use, is not categorically illegal. But the law establishes certain obligations to try to mitigate money laundering. There are controls you need to implement, expertise you need to have on staff, a level of sophistication that your AML program needs to demonstrate. And there are enforcement regimes with audits and licensing to backstop all that. It is not a free for all.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#698

Post by pksebben »

colinmhayes wrote: post #661
pitaj wrote: post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's like saying the developer of ransomware shouldn't get in trouble for making it if they just made it public instead of using it themselves They really shouldn't. Neither should any other security researcher who publishes exploits. Neither should any other developer of cryptographic technology.

Big difference between writing a report on a vulnerability and writing malware that exploits it.

is there? what's the difference?

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#699

Post by closeparen »

carlosdp wrote: post #264
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Am i alone in thinking this is not going to fly if all he did was write some software that helps with your financial anonymity? Probably. That said, he is arrested under Dutch law. We have no evidence this is tied to U.S. sanctions. As others mention, Dutch law restricts cash transactions in ways U.S. law does not. Also, in June—when the link says they began the investigation—it was publicly known Tornado was being…

> Also, in June—when the link says they began the investigation—it was publicly known Tornado was being used to launder money. If the developer kept working on it, they knew what they were doing. People keep saying this in this thread. Is everyone at WhatsApp also guilty of a crime for continuing to work on WhatsApp even though they know the Taliban uses it for communication?

If the law required communication providers to obtain licenses, and as a condition of those licenses to have credible controls against use by terrorists, and Whatsapp just scoffed at all that & went on being trivially used by terrorists, then why not?

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#700

Post by pksebben »

colechristensen wrote: post #680
conductr wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that reasoning, gun manufacturers are mass murderers? What about automobile manufacturers? They kill almost as many people as guns (in the US, quick google search)

Guns and cars have legitimate uses. Money laundering, especially running a money laundering business which does not follow certain rules, is illegal regardless if some of the usage is legitimate.

frankly, I'd prefer more money laundering and less guns in the world if I had to pick one. fewer dead kids that way.
Post reply on HN