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

$14M in ETH stolen from Upbit were laundered in May through well-known exchanges

blog.clain.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 96 posts

Re: $14M in ETH stolen from Upbit were laundered in May through well-known exchanges

#81

Post by sprusemoose »

I met a woman last year who I'm pretty sure was cashing out for a hack of a New Zealand exchange..

she didn't say it explicitly but she was getting 10% to cash out on Huobi for a group of IT students in Guangzhou China. One of the guys was an american and I think it was his job to find people to cash out. They were doing about 150k USD a week, and she was pretty sure there were others doing the same thing.

he told her they found a way to get free ETH.

I sent a message to the exchange that got hacked Cryptopia or something but they never got back to me

Re: $14M in ETH stolen from Upbit were laundered in May through well-known exchanges

#82

Post by hnick »

valachio wrote: post #77
hnick wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same as when you put money in a bank, you're giving them money, no one's stealing anything. Until they don't give it back. That's the important part.

Banks, especially big established ones that have been around for hundreds of years, are well established businesses that work hand-in-hand with the government to ensure safety of both a country's economy as well as the bank account of individuals. Got your credit card stolen and someone makes fraudulent purchases? Go to the bank and let them know, and they can do a chargeback and perform an investigation for you. Som…

I was just saying that freely giving up an item does not necessarily mean theft cannot later occur if that item is not given back. The parent suggested the keys were not stolen because they were given. I say they were stolen as soon as they were used without consent, much like a bank spending your money and not giving it back.

I'd say the last point about crypto is a feature, not a bug. A lot of proponents absolutely cheer on the fact that no individual, business, or government can come along and sweep up coins/tokens and hand them back through force if appropriate cautions are taken. This is unfortunately the other side of that. The idea of people using exchanges as a value store and not as a pass-through or escrow service has always confused me for that reason.

Re: $14M in ETH stolen from Upbit were laundered in May through well-known exchanges

#83

Post by [deleted] »

hnick wrote: post #68
barkingcat wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well, when you place cryptocurrency with an exchange, you're giving them the keys, no one's stealing anything.

The same as when you put money in a bank, you're giving them money, no one's stealing anything. Until they don't give it back. That's the important part.

[deleted]

Re: $14M in ETH stolen from Upbit were laundered in May through well-known exchanges

#84

Post by ashtonkem »

nexuist wrote: post #80
ashtonkem wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that losses can only be reversed if you’re sufficiently well connected to the developers is a major problem.

The losses were reversed because the system was exploited, not because someone had a close connection with one of the devs. Had they not forked the network right then and there they would only be facing more of the same in the future, reducing the reliability of ETH down to 0. No forks have been made since the incident, and I would hazard to say none of the devs are planning on forking anytime soon either. I think on…

If I lose money because of a buggy contract, will the developers trigger a hard fork for me, or is it just the DAO who gets that consideration?

Re: $14M in ETH stolen from Upbit were laundered in May through well-known exchanges

#85

Post by nexuist »

ashtonkem wrote: post #84
nexuist wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The losses were reversed because the system was exploited, not because someone had a close connection with one of the devs. Had they not forked the network right then and there they would only be facing more of the same in the future, reducing the reliability of ETH down to 0. No forks have been made since the incident, and I would hazard to say none of the devs are planning on forking anytime soon either. I think on…

If I lose money because of a buggy contract, will the developers trigger a hard fork for me, or is it just the DAO who gets that consideration?

If you lost half a billion dollars like the DAO did, you would probably get that consideration, too.

Re: $14M in ETH stolen from Upbit were laundered in May through well-known exchanges

#86

Post by verdverm »

aspenmayer wrote: post #64
verdverm wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't solve the general problem of complying with legal orders. For example, how would escrow help with wage garnishment, suing a company and winning, or generally forced transactions by court order?

Not who you are replying to, but I answered and addressed those claims in a sister comment, here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23199291

You keep saying you answered but you have not. That is very unclear and just throwing around words.

You haven't understood the idea and instead hang on to narrow focus around cash, which had nothing to do with the argument, because most people have digital money that goes through institutions. Using fringe cases to justify the common is the wrong way around.

Re: $14M in ETH stolen from Upbit were laundered in May through well-known exchanges

#87

Post by ashtonkem »

nexuist wrote: post #85
ashtonkem wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I lose money because of a buggy contract, will the developers trigger a hard fork for me, or is it just the DAO who gets that consideration?

If you lost half a billion dollars like the DAO did, you would probably get that consideration, too.

That’s my point, if I lose a more paltry sum like my life savings, nobody will lift a finger to bail me out. It’s only if my losses are massive will the developers trigger a hard fork on my behalf.

“Code is law” only turns out to apply to those with small balances and poor connections.

Re: $14M in ETH stolen from Upbit were laundered in May through well-known exchanges

#88

Post by barkingcat »

aspenmayer wrote: post #51
barkingcat wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It turns out people want centralization :) I'm sure users mostly understand it but they give the keys away anyway. Core tenant of cryptocurrencies is purely anti-human

Can crypto be simultaneously anti-human [nature] and yet pro-user [intent]? Can the pain points of crypto be smoothed to make them pro-human [nature] without losing the qualities that make them pro-user [intent], supposing that they are pro-user [intent]?

I think you misunderstand, by thinking in terms of nature vs intent you are already anti-human.

Remember, Users are Humans. Unless you want to let your cat buy cat food using cryptocurrencies?

What I mean by anti-human, I am referring to the concept that to cryptocurrencies, people don't matter, their wishes, emotions, lives don't matter, the only thing that matters to cryptocurrencies is the algorithm and the principles.

Re: $14M in ETH stolen from Upbit were laundered in May through well-known exchanges

#89

Post by arcticbull »

aspenmayer wrote: post #73
arcticbull wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody gets paid their salary with cash for a reason...

Small businesses, strip clubs, public houses and bars, restaurants and their staff, handymen, private cleaning and janitorial staff, groundskeepers and lawnmowers, etc in every country in the world are innumerable counter-examples to that assumption.

Many of those are fringe cases, and many more are moving (or have already moved) to digital payments. Square took food trucks, restaurants, handymen, lawnmowers, etc, on to credit card payments. Janitorial staff probably get paid through payroll the majority of the time.

Sweden even got to the point nobody was accepting physical cash in the first place.

Re: $14M in ETH stolen from Upbit were laundered in May through well-known exchanges

#90

Post by aspenmayer »

barkingcat wrote: post #88
aspenmayer wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can crypto be simultaneously anti-human [nature] and yet pro-user [intent]? Can the pain points of crypto be smoothed to make them pro-human [nature] without losing the qualities that make them pro-user [intent], supposing that they are pro-user [intent]?

I think you misunderstand, by thinking in terms of nature vs intent you are already anti-human. Remember, Users are Humans. Unless you want to let your cat buy cat food using cryptocurrencies? What I mean by anti-human, I am referring to the concept that to cryptocurrencies, people don't matter, their wishes, emotions, lives don't matter, the only thing that matters to cryptocurrencies is the algorithm and the princi…

I would say that is more ahuman than anti-human, in the same way one can be an atheist rather than a theist. Cryptocurrencies don’t have any regard or deference to humanity, because they lack agency. How then could they rise to become anti-human rather than simply ahuman?
Post reply on HN