Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand why technology that provides a modicum of privacy must be demonized. It must be for money laundering and criminals. It can't have a legitimate use case. Is it used for nefarious activities? Of course, but not exclusively so.
If 99% of BTC mixers' volume is helping laundering international drug trade money, arms or human trafficking, it's not exactly hard to demonize mixing itself. I have no data to base this on, but I assume that privacy absolutists are a tiny, tiny drop in the pool of blood and crime.
North Korean hackers stole a record $1.7B of crypto last year
81–90 of 203 posts
Re: North Korean hackers stole a record $1.7B of crypto last year
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
The biggest risk with North Korea is seeing the state of the country, and underestimating the regime itself.
Spot on. I once heard the Kims described as multimillionaires with one of the largest armies in the world [1] and nukes. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_...
Nuclear weapons and the fortified long-range artillery that can shell Seoul are the main point of concern, which are essentially a small-scale version of cold war era mutually assured destruction. The number of people in the army as such? I'm not so sure that's really something that's all that meaningful.
Re: North Korean hackers stole a record $1.7B of crypto last year
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
Scenario one. Individual (while working in a startup) is receiving some tokens as a compensation. Time passes. Their remuneration being on-chain and visible is a problem when negotiating salary in the next job. Scenario two. I want to have on-chain identity (e.g. exo762.eth domain name). To register it I need to have some ETH (gas, registration fee). If I sent this ETH directly from my "money" account, I will forever…
How are these scenarios "use cases" for a mixer and not critical flaws in the underlying system? We're in a thread about a rogue state using the tech to steal money to fund their operations (Chemical attacks in airports, nuclear warheads, intercontinental ballistic missiles, etc.) How many nuclear detonations would you consider acceptable in exchange for the cryptobros to have their toys?
Re: North Korean hackers stole a record $1.7B of crypto last year
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not bad for a supposedly backwards repressed regime What do you mean by supposedly? > It also exposes a wider problem the crypto community are not addressing. What wider problem? That money (in any form) can be stolen by a malevolent state?
I think crypto has made it easier for them to steal money. I would be curious to see how much money oppressive regimes were able to steal and use before crypto to after
Re: North Korean hackers stole a record $1.7B of crypto last year
#85As a blockchain security guy, it's really easy to spot the occasional North Korean heists on Ethereum. The big tells are: 1. They hack computers not code. Their normal plan is to steal keys by compromising users and computers. This is in contrast to the normal "hack" that works by finding and exploiting bugs in code. 2. They immediately exfiltrate the stolen money back to the real world via bazillions of mule account…
Their keys their coins.
Re: North Korean hackers stole a record $1.7B of crypto last year
#86Re: North Korean hackers stole a record $1.7B of crypto last year
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
If 99% of BTC mixers' volume is helping laundering international drug trade money, arms or human trafficking, it's not exactly hard to demonize mixing itself. I have no data to base this on, but I assume that privacy absolutists are a tiny, tiny drop in the pool of blood and crime.
do you feel the same way about Tor? If 99% of Tor's volume is helping laundering international drug trade money, distributing CSAM, etc, should it be demonized as well?