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

U.S. sanctions cloud provider 'Funnull' as top source of 'pig butchering' scams

krebsonsecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 305 posts

Re: U.S. sanctions cloud provider 'Funnull' as top source of 'pig butchering' scams

#151

Post by whimsicalism »

dfxm12 wrote: post #100
alexey-salmin wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether you see international money transfers outside of the government control as a positive or negative force largely depends on how much you trust your government. How much it should limit things for your own safety? I suspect that for majority of the earth population the trust level is rather low, even though in some countries it could be different.

For the majority of the earth population, this is not a concern. Yes, things may get fuzzy around an inflection point, but for most people, their concerns fall way short of that.

lots of people live in countries with severe governance problems and a bad monetary regime.

Re: U.S. sanctions cloud provider 'Funnull' as top source of 'pig butchering' scams

#152

Post by skybrian »

latchkey wrote: post #146
fennecfoxy wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally agree, I think crypto is cool from a technological standpoint, but I don't think I've seen one common genuine use of BTC, etc. And before someone comes in with very specific, anecdotal examples - notice I said "common", ie not buying your indie music from a retro-Serb band that plays using the concept of instruments as instruments and from abandoned sewers; but only on Mondays. I definitely feel like the majo…

> I've seen one common genuine use of BTC One of my favorited comments/threads: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26238410

The most surprising part of that thread is the claim that they’re using Bitcoin rather than a stablecoin. But perhaps things have changed in four years?

Re: U.S. sanctions cloud provider 'Funnull' as top source of 'pig butchering' scams

#153

Post by latchkey »

eugene3306 wrote: post #124
naet wrote: post #25

Cryptocurrency enables a big part of this. Not saying that there weren't any wire scams before crypto, but crypto has made it much easier for average people to make anonymous international money transfers that can't be reversed. Not to start a big argument, but to my eyes the main usecases of cryptocurrency are to bet on them as a speculative asset or to use them for various forms of crime. Someone will probably tell…

I use crypto often. I am Russian, I left Russia when Putin started the war. For me, it is quite hard to open a bank account. So I use crypto. I work remotely for a Singaporian company. Now I'm in Vietnam, I can pay for my groceries with crypto using QR code. I can cash USDT crypto with a rate better than paper bills. I have two bank accounts in Kazakhstan. Both card credentials were stolen after I used a popular hote…

It is wild how Vietnam really transformed from a complete cash society to a mostly digital one in just a few years. Covid did it.

Nothing more annoying than having your largest bill be worth about $20 and having to carry stacks of them around for things like just paying rent.

Re: U.S. sanctions cloud provider 'Funnull' as top source of 'pig butchering' scams

#154

Post by bryceneal »

rs186 wrote: post #129
shoo wrote: post #28

Sue-Lin Wong has an excellent 8 part podcast series "Scam Inc" about pig butchering scams, the first three episodes are free to listen: https://www.economist.com/audio/podcasts/scam-inc

Listened to the whole show, and I am very disappointed that they don't put enough effort into stressing how much cryptocurrency facilitates all these. They talk about cryptocurrency as if it's just a way to transfer money, and it happens that bad people use it for scams. No, it's almost the sole reason pigbutchering works so effectively these days and works as the perfect tool for scammers in obscure corners in the w…

While I agree that cryptocurrency can make the process much easier for scammers, I am wondering what exactly is the proposed solution? Something like 28% of adults in the US own cryptocurrency, and that number increases every year. A few years ago I could see path to some kind of global crackdown on crypto by governments around the world, but it now seems to me that cryptocurrency has reached terminal velocity and it's now too late for something like that to happen. Coinbase is in the S&P500, Circle is floating an IPO, and there are dozens of ETFs for Bitcoin and Ethereum sitting in the 401ks of average Americans.

Perhaps the solution is trying to better understand how victims are acquiring and transferring their funds? Perhaps we need to regulate centralized exchanges to better protect their customers. In the U.S. it's necessary to pass some simple online questionnaire before trading advanced financial products like options/futures. Perhaps we need something like this for cryptocurrency? I'm just throwing out ideas, because I don't know the solution. But even if you think regulating it out of existence is the ideal outcome, that is simply not going to be possible at this point.

Re: U.S. sanctions cloud provider 'Funnull' as top source of 'pig butchering' scams

#155

Post by latchkey »

skybrian wrote: post #152
latchkey wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've seen one common genuine use of BTC One of my favorited comments/threads: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26238410

The most surprising part of that thread is the claim that they’re using Bitcoin rather than a stablecoin. But perhaps things have changed in four years?

To be fair, the article for the thread is about how Tether was forced to end in NY.

Re: U.S. sanctions cloud provider 'Funnull' as top source of 'pig butchering' scams

#156

Post by gradschool »

naet wrote: post #25

Cryptocurrency enables a big part of this. Not saying that there weren't any wire scams before crypto, but crypto has made it much easier for average people to make anonymous international money transfers that can't be reversed. Not to start a big argument, but to my eyes the main usecases of cryptocurrency are to bet on them as a speculative asset or to use them for various forms of crime. Someone will probably tell…

> Someone will probably tell me about some theoretical situation where it is a positive force

Challenge accepted. My positive use case for cryptocurrency pertains to someone like me being over sixty and worried about being swept up into the guardianship system. With most of my assets in crypto and assuming decent opsec, they would be inaccessible to the guardian. If a judge ordered me to grant access, could I be cited for contempt by refusing to comply given that I had already been legally ruled incompetent? If I were cited regardless, would the threat of incarceration carry any weight given that I would be already incarcerated in an old age home? Unless there's some principle the guardian is trying to uphold, the rational course would be to choose a different victim.

Re: U.S. sanctions cloud provider 'Funnull' as top source of 'pig butchering' scams

#157

Post by BLKNSLVR »

nottorp wrote: post #149
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #139

I kind of wonder why ISPs haven't already started offering value-add security services that have various levels of filtering to provide a cleaner-feed internet experience. From my limited research there seem to be a surprisingly large number of bad actors that own moderate swathes of ip address ranges and even Autonomous Systems (AS) that are known and can therefore be blocked. I use OPNSense, which seems to allow AS…

Sounds like begging for censorship…

I've divided my stuff into four layers: basic, recommended, aggressive, and paranoid.

Choose your own level of "censorship" or choose none at all.

All such things can descend into the political mudpit, it just takes effort to keep the pigs noses out of the technical experts trough.

Re: U.S. sanctions cloud provider 'Funnull' as top source of 'pig butchering' scams

#158

Post by whimsicalism »

gavagai691 wrote: post #37
whimsicalism wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i bet heavily using crypto against AI progress on coding to hedge my career

Is your job developing AI coding tools?

no, but i do work in ML - i think there are two channels through which this derisking makes sense, but people on here get aggressive if you mention the other one.

Re: U.S. sanctions cloud provider 'Funnull' as top source of 'pig butchering' scams

#159

Post by JTbane »

aziaziazi wrote: post #76

Related: Interpol urges to stop using "Pig Butchering": > INTERPOL argues that the term ‘pig butchering’ dehumanizes and shames victims of such frauds, deterring people from coming forward to seek help and provide information to the authorities. "Romance baiting" is proposed instead. https://www.interpol.int/News-and-Events/News/2024/INTERPOL-...

It's not always romance related, sometimes it's just a promise of massive crypto investment returns.

"Pig butchering" is more apt as the long con is like fattening up an animal before slaughter.

Re: U.S. sanctions cloud provider 'Funnull' as top source of 'pig butchering' scams

#160

Post by SoftTalker »

lesuorac wrote: post #88
TeMPOraL wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is, crypto makes irreversibility a fundamental part of the system, making it impossible for any party to unilaterally reverse a payment without having to first take over the entire chain. With regular fiat money and banks, such reversals are perfectly possible on a technical level. The banks are usually unwilling to do them, and an individual may not be able to force them to in practice, but it's still…

> The banks are usually unwilling to do them, and an individual may not be able to force them to in practice, but it's still possible in a way it's not possible with crypto. Generally they're unwilling to do that because it involves losing money for them. Transfers work in a multi-step process to ensure money isn't created. You tell Bank A to transfer money to person X at Bank B. Bank A tells an intermediary bank C t…

But you know who customer X is and if he obtained the money fraudulently then the bank (or police, courts, etc) can go after him to recover it. It might not happen but it's possible.
Post reply on HN