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

The Ransomware Problem Is a Bitcoin Problem

lawfareblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 183 posts

Re: The Ransomware Problem Is a Bitcoin Problem

#51

Post by mcphage »

blhack wrote: post #40

I think that what you're seeing is HNers, and techies in general not really understanding that there is a world that exists well outside of their bubble of technology. Bitcoin did not create the concept of ransom. It didn't even create the concept of ransom as a business model for organized crime. See for instance our neighbor to the south: https://www.vox.com/2018/5/11/17276638/mexico-kidnappings-cr... This is such…

> Should we ban shipping?

Shipping is pretty useful, though. What are the other major uses for Bitcoin?

Re: The Ransomware Problem Is a Bitcoin Problem

#53

Post by px43 »

SavantIdiot wrote: post #3

I'd like to hear how cryptocurrency advocates address this without deploying a fallacy. Cryptocurrency makes ransomware possible, without the former, the latter cannot thrive. The defenses I usually hear come in the form of "current banking facilitates bad stuff, too," which is a fact, but doesn't absolve cryptocurrencies central role in ransomware. As the article states, there is simply no way to pay a ransom withou…

Heh, what? Ransomware existed long before cryptocurrencies.

Money laundering via ACH, SWIFT, stolen credit cards, gift cards, and all sorts of online payment systems like PayPal are still huge, no cryptocurrencies required.

Cryptocurrencies are used today because they're the most efficient way to make online payments, which is a net positive for everyone. It's just as easy to hunt down criminals using cryptocurrencies as it was to hunt online criminals before cryptocurrencies got popular.

https://www.knowbe4.com/ransomware

Re: The Ransomware Problem Is a Bitcoin Problem

#55

Post by toxik »

tptacek wrote: post #14
toxik wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cash enables muggings so we must ban cash?

We don't have a huge mugging problem. We have muggings (I've been mugged), but they occur infrequently enough that society isn't disrupted. You can't say that about ransomware. Not only that, but we have done things to defang muggings; for instance, it's been made less lucrative (and more dangerous for the mugger) to steal a modern phone.

But that’s not what decides if cash is viable. If we had a huge mugging problem, we would call for better law enforcement, not less cash.

Re: The Ransomware Problem Is a Bitcoin Problem

#56

Post by SavantIdiot »

px43 wrote: post #53
SavantIdiot wrote: post #3

I'd like to hear how cryptocurrency advocates address this without deploying a fallacy. Cryptocurrency makes ransomware possible, without the former, the latter cannot thrive. The defenses I usually hear come in the form of "current banking facilitates bad stuff, too," which is a fact, but doesn't absolve cryptocurrencies central role in ransomware. As the article states, there is simply no way to pay a ransom withou…

Heh, what? Ransomware existed long before cryptocurrencies. Money laundering via ACH, SWIFT, stolen credit cards, gift cards, and all sorts of online payment systems like PayPal are still huge, no cryptocurrencies required. Cryptocurrencies are used today because they're the most efficient way to make online payments, which is a net positive for everyone. It's just as easy to hunt down criminals using cryptocurrencie…

This is enlightening. The 1989 ransomware that had a PO Box in Panama is hilarious. Really? Panama?

Good point, thanks.

However, opaque ledgers may make it difficult to hunt them down (Zcash, monero) in the future.

Re: The Ransomware Problem Is a Bitcoin Problem

#57

Post by px43 »

spoonjim wrote: post #49

Ransomware is a gift — people are exposing insecure systems only for a few million dollars of payout. A more nefarious actor would do more nefarious things than just collect what is at the nation-state scale a very small amount of money. More ransomware will accelerate security improvements and protect systems from CCP, Five Eyes, etc.

Agreed, same for crypto miners IMO. These consequences are significantly more benign than if real criminals had gotten into the system. It's essentially a decentralized bug bounty program that every large company who connects to the internet has to opt in to.

Re: The Ransomware Problem Is a Bitcoin Problem

#58

Post by saurik »

emodendroket wrote: post #35
saurik wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

""" While we're at it, maybe those same people can defend the Internet, right? Clearly, this experiment in anyone in the world being able to nigh unto anonymously communicate with anyone else was a mistake... at best, every packet should be tracked back to some regulated endpoint that can be tracked in the real world. The Internet, after all, makes the dark web--and its myriad crimes, including ransomware, drug traff…

The obvious difference to me is that the Internet has a lot of benefits outweighing the negatives beyond just enabling people to do speculation.

What, pray tell, are those benefits that are so obvious to you, and why should they only apply to photos of your lunch and not money? Most of the more "banal" uses of the Internet would still work fine with a tightly regulated system that required you to sign up for services with an ID and have every packet signed and tracked. The reality is that many in the US believe we had an insurrection attempt in January due to 8chan of all things. To me, sure: it is certainly "obvious" that the ability to have speech that isn't centrally controlled is a good thing... but I can't come up with a single argument for it that wouldn't also apply to being able to send money between two parties (and, notably, in the Western world we tend to purposefully conflate "speech" with the ability to transfer and lend resources, as without capital nothing can be accomplished).

Re: The Ransomware Problem Is a Bitcoin Problem

#59

Post by quanticle »

SavantIdiot wrote: post #3

I'd like to hear how cryptocurrency advocates address this without deploying a fallacy. Cryptocurrency makes ransomware possible, without the former, the latter cannot thrive. The defenses I usually hear come in the form of "current banking facilitates bad stuff, too," which is a fact, but doesn't absolve cryptocurrencies central role in ransomware. As the article states, there is simply no way to pay a ransom withou…

The problem isn't that Bitcoin enables hacking. The problem is, pardon my language, that our cybersecurity is absolute, utter unremediated shit. Every time a corporate PR press release uses the word "sophisticated" to refer to hackers, I roll my eyes. These hackers aren't using processor-level side channel attacks to read secrets out of memory. They're not using Rowhammer to alter encryption keys. They're doing basic things like, exploiting SQL injection. They're getting people with phishing. They're taking advantage of the fact that these giant corporations have willfully ignored every cybersecurity best practice for the past twenty years because it might cost them a few days worth of revenue to implement things like least-privilege access and two-factor authentication.

Imagine a world where banks and businesses just kept their cash out on the counter, in unlocked boxes. One day, a bunch of "sophisticated" thieves come in and start grabbing the boxes and driving off. What is the logical response?

1. Ban cars

2. Ask banks and businesses to please use lockboxes and safes

Both are solutions to the problem of thieves jumping in and grabbing cash. But I would submit that option 2 makes far more sense that option 1.

Re: The Ransomware Problem Is a Bitcoin Problem

#60

Post by px43 »

mediaman wrote: post #10
alecst wrote: post #4

Is it possible to ban cryptocurrency traffic in general? How would that even work?

You can make it illegal to transact crypto. That would devastate the price and ruin it as a currency. The network would still exist, but it'd be useless as a medium for criminal payments due to the low value.

That is exactly as dumb as trying to make the internet illegal. It would financially ruin any country who tried it and give a significant advantage to everyone else on the planet.
Post reply on HN