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

New Jersey slaps MIT Bitcoin hackers with subpoena

venturebeat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 59 posts

Re: New Jersey slaps MIT Bitcoin hackers with subpoena

#21

Post by sneak »

carbocation wrote: post #10
sneak wrote: post #9

Can someone with a background in law tell me if or why it wouldn't be legal to turn over bitcoin private keys, complying exactly with a request, while also using your own retained copies of those keys to sign transfer transactions sending all those bitcoins held by the previous (now compromised) keys to your new ones that are not covered by the subpoena? It seems to me that you'd be complying exactly with their reque…

Subverting the intent of a ruling or law is not viewed favorably, and can easily be fixed, if need be, by tighter wording.

Is it the intent of this subpoena to confiscate their bitcoins? It doesn't seem to be.

Re: New Jersey slaps MIT Bitcoin hackers with subpoena

#22

Post by lukifer »

quackerhacker wrote: post #11

This is the first I've heard of Tidbit and I have to say that it is absolutely ingenious!!! If they do open source the code, I strongly hope that webmasters would actually replace obtrusive ads with the mining protocol and not just add it in addition to ad revenue.

It should be noted that their intent was to be purely opt-in. Stealing a user's CPU/GPU cycles is extremely bad form. (It's bad enough when ads/tracking code does it by accident.)

Re: New Jersey slaps MIT Bitcoin hackers with subpoena

#23

Post by protomyth »

I'm all for state's rights, but, given what the article says, I cannot understand how NJ has any ability to issue the subpoena. It isn't an active product that has been used in production so no NJ resident has been "harmed". Its like the NJ prosecutor read some tech article and decided to act.

Re: New Jersey slaps MIT Bitcoin hackers with subpoena

#24

Post by lukifer »

jpwright wrote: post #13
dreamdu5t wrote: post #7

Umm.... what were they issued the subpoena FOR!? I read the entire article waiting for this to be explained. Or can you just be subpoena'd without any case?

The article explains the case pretty well: > ...the language in the subpoena reads much like the state’s computer fraud act, which carries some stiff penalties. Last year, New Jersey alleged that E-Sports Entertainment (ESEA) hijacked their [subscribers'] computing power to mine Bitcoins... the state believes Tidbit may similarly violate consumers’ rights. According to the EFF: > the New Jersey Division of Consumer A…

It reads "much like" the computer fraud act, but that doesn't mean a case was brought forward. Can a subpoena really be issued without a corresponding case?

Re: New Jersey slaps MIT Bitcoin hackers with subpoena

#25

Post by ck2 »

Follow the lobbyists.

Figure out who was threatened enough by a bitcoin model to want the government to step in.

Because there is no way they have this kind of time on their hands to pursue this and have such in depth technical knowledge to know what to look for, without some corporate lobbyists spoon feeding it to the prosecutor.

Not that I believe tidbit could ever be profitable or useful, but still.

Re: New Jersey slaps MIT Bitcoin hackers with subpoena

#26

Post by tptacek »

sneak wrote: post #9

Can someone with a background in law tell me if or why it wouldn't be legal to turn over bitcoin private keys, complying exactly with a request, while also using your own retained copies of those keys to sign transfer transactions sending all those bitcoins held by the previous (now compromised) keys to your new ones that are not covered by the subpoena? It seems to me that you'd be complying exactly with their reque…

Isn't this like suggesting that when the image of an HDD is subpoenaed, you might first copy all the data off it, then wipe it, then image that? Because that trick doesn't work.

Relevant statute: 18 U.S.C. § 401. It's pretty broad.

Re: New Jersey slaps MIT Bitcoin hackers with subpoena

#27

Post by diminoten »

dmix wrote: post #12
diminoten wrote: post #8

Hysteria aside, what happens when a court subpoena demands someone hand over something they don't have? Does the person just say, "I don't have it." and that's that? What if they lie about not having it?

Contempt of court faces up to 5yrs in jail.

A judge can and will hold someone in contempt of court for not producing documents they haven't even been shown to possess?

That doesn't sound right...

Re: New Jersey slaps MIT Bitcoin hackers with subpoena

#28

Post by diminoten »

quackerhacker wrote: post #11

This is the first I've heard of Tidbit and I have to say that it is absolutely ingenious!!! If they do open source the code, I strongly hope that webmasters would actually replace obtrusive ads with the mining protocol and not just add it in addition to ad revenue.

CPU bitcoin mining doesn't really do much. The idea is nice, but it would take way too long to be competitive as a form of revenue generation if all it had access to was the CPU.
Post reply on HN