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

The U.S. cracked a $3.4B crypto heist and Bitcoin’s anonymity

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 243 posts

Re: The U.S. cracked a $3.4B crypto heist and Bitcoin’s anonymity

#141

Post by noduerme »

funstuff007 wrote: post #66
noduerme wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you trade in and out for cash, in person with a counterparty, from a self-hosted wallet that you never use to send or receive from any other wallet that's connected to an exchange... then yes. The use case for this is mainly moving money over borders.

except that person(s) you gave and received the cash from know who you are.

in reality, no, they don't know who I am. Back when LocalBitcoins.com facilitated face to face trades for cash around the world, you just had to have a high rating from previous transactions. Now... how safe do you feel showing up to meet an anonymous guy in a bar with thousands of dollars in Benjamins? That's the downside of being anonymous. /edit: The downside of operating completely outside the system.

/edit 2: I should also clarify that I never cashed out my casino's BTC in this manner. That obviously wouldn't make sense because anything that touched a casino wallet would be traceable to that nexus. I only used it to bring extra spending cash and rent money to countries where it was hard or expensive to transfer USD through banks.

Re: The U.S. cracked a $3.4B crypto heist and Bitcoin’s anonymity

#142

Post by jen729w »

rippercushions wrote: post #74
msantama wrote: post #64

What is the crime he committed, exactly? Wasn't he simply using a "feature" of Silk Road, ie. if you double-click "withdraw" it prints you money?

If you have $5000 in a bank account, and a bug in the bank UI lets you withdraw $10000, the bank can and will come after you to get their money back. And if you intentionally exploit this bug to create 100 accounts with $5000 and withdraw a million, you've definitely committed a crime.

I once had money deposited in to my account, repeatedly, that wasn't mine. It was a pain in the ass. I didn't want it.

I asked my gf's dad, a lawyer, if I could spend it. He said no: it's like someone parking their car on your driveway. It's annoying, sure. But it doesn't make it your car.

Re: The U.S. cracked a $3.4B crypto heist and Bitcoin’s anonymity

#143

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

NotYourLawyer wrote: post #16
paulpauper wrote: post #4

Zhong was caught because he made basic operational security errors, like address reuse (which is how he was caught by linking fraud wallet to exchange wallet) , static IP, using a KYC exchange in 2017 to convert BCH into BTC, etc. Not because Bitcoin was cracked. After being caught, Zhong voluntarily relinquished his passwords to encrypted wallets and other bitcoin, not that the crypto was cracked. I wonder how the f…

> he was caught by linking fraud wallet to exchange wallet How are you supposed to turn fraudulently obtained btc into dollars without doing that?

Many ways. Dark valley exchanges. Flying to Dubai and exchanging any amount with draft fleeing Russians. Sending to a Lightning Network wallet, doing a few rounds within the LN and then depositing to an exchange.

Re: The U.S. cracked a $3.4B crypto heist and Bitcoin’s anonymity

#144

Post by TrapLord_Rhodo »

noduerme wrote: post #36
SahAssar wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But used as intended (not via a KYC exchange) it is pseudonymous, right?

If you trade in and out for cash, in person with a counterparty, from a self-hosted wallet that you never use to send or receive from any other wallet that's connected to an exchange... then yes. The use case for this is mainly moving money over borders.

... lol. Going to a site to exchange bitcoin for cold cash seems like the worst idea ever if you want to stay anonomyous. Did everyone just forget about snowden?

Re: The U.S. cracked a $3.4B crypto heist and Bitcoin’s anonymity

#146

Post by DangitBobby »

mbreese wrote: post #94
rvba wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> THE COURT: All right. I find that Mr. Zhong has knowingly and voluntarily waived both venue as well as any argument here that the crime charged in the information is time barred. How does this even work? So can the defendant "knowingly and voluntarily" give up their right to defend via Constitution?

It's part of a plea agreement. In a plea agreement the defendant gives up certain rights in exchange for other sentencing considerations. They were worried they'd get a worse sentence at trial, so they plead to get a better deal. They didn't just give up their rights...

It sounds like they did give up their rights! Or else!

Sorry, but there's no reading of it where a plea deal isn't threatening unreasonable punishment if you refuse to forfeit your rights.

Re: The U.S. cracked a $3.4B crypto heist and Bitcoin’s anonymity

#147

Post by wombatpm »

acdha wrote: post #134
ETH_start wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The First Amendment.

That covers you publishing software. It doesn’t cover providing a service to criminals and personally profiting from it, and the constitution definitely gives the government authority to police that so it’s going to come down to how well they can prove that those guys were going more than just releasing code.

Interstate commerce clause

Re: The U.S. cracked a $3.4B crypto heist and Bitcoin’s anonymity

#148

Post by DangitBobby »

paulpauper wrote: post #4

Zhong was caught because he made basic operational security errors, like address reuse (which is how he was caught by linking fraud wallet to exchange wallet) , static IP, using a KYC exchange in 2017 to convert BCH into BTC, etc. Not because Bitcoin was cracked. After being caught, Zhong voluntarily relinquished his passwords to encrypted wallets and other bitcoin, not that the crypto was cracked. I wonder how the f…

According to info from another comment, he waved the statute of limitations as part of a plea deal. Not really sure how a plea deal was on the table after the statute of limitations, but there you are.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35549013

Re: The U.S. cracked a $3.4B crypto heist and Bitcoin’s anonymity

#149

Post by lokar »

rippercushions wrote: post #74
msantama wrote: post #64

What is the crime he committed, exactly? Wasn't he simply using a "feature" of Silk Road, ie. if you double-click "withdraw" it prints you money?

If you have $5000 in a bank account, and a bug in the bank UI lets you withdraw $10000, the bank can and will come after you to get their money back. And if you intentionally exploit this bug to create 100 accounts with $5000 and withdraw a million, you've definitely committed a crime.

And if the bank says “how did you do that?”, you explain and they thank you, let you keep the money and also give you a reward, then what?

Re: The U.S. cracked a $3.4B crypto heist and Bitcoin’s anonymity

#150

Post by kurthr »

mkhpalm wrote: post #131
Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that helpful? Get Bitcoin from crime Wash into monero? Pray the tumbler is legit? Wash back into Bitcoin Now what? Bitcoins from tumblers are suspect everywhere with kyc requirements. Sell off books to a Russian oligarch or North Korea I guess?

Mint some pixel art into NFTs and then purchase them with your anonymous filthy lucre wallet(s). Cash out after selling your subjective value art.

That's deniable, but it's not really anonymous, is it?
Post reply on HN