zlacker

[return to "Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds"]
1. Alexan+Ub[view] [source] 2022-02-08 17:35:40
>>mikeyo+(OP)
> “After the execution of court-authorized search warrants of online accounts controlled by Lichtenstein and Morgan, special agents obtained access to files within an online account controlled by Lichtenstein,” the press release said. “Those files contained the private keys required to access the digital wallet that directly received the funds stolen from Bitfinex, and allowed special agents to lawfully seize and recover more than 94,000 bitcoin that had been stolen from Bitfinex. The recovered bitcoin was valued at over $3.6 billion at the time of seizure.”

So most likely,

1) they didn't launder it properly, leading to police being able to trace it to their bank accounts. I wonder if tornado.cash was used.

2) then police had their names, leading to warrants for all online accounts - google account, apple account, etc.

3) they made the big blunder of keeping their private keys in their online account. Most likely a txt file in google drive. That is such a silly blunder. Without the private keys, the police has zero proof of anything. They could have made a hundred excuses for how they got money in their bank account, as long as the police didn't have the private keys. Who keeps their private keys in an online account?

Apparently the biggest criminals make too many silly mistakes. The old saying applies here: "you don't have to be smart, just don't be an idiot"

◧◩
2. zozbot+9f[view] [source] 2022-02-08 17:49:05
>>Alexan+Ub
A good guess is that "laundering" billions of dollars is inherently a non-trivial problem, and perhaps not feasible at all without cooperation from shady real-world actors outside the whole cryptocurrency ecosystem. This is actually good news for small-scale users who just want to keep their microtransactions reasonably private - the usual mechanisms might actually work well enough for that case.
◧◩◪
3. Alexan+9h[view] [source] 2022-02-08 17:55:53
>>zozbot+9f
I agree. But if not for privacy, why use crypto at all? Even bank accounts are reasonably private, if you are not doing anything considered suspicious by society.

Also, with mixers such as tornado_cash, laundering money is ,sadly, pretty trivial.

◧◩◪◨
4. wcoene+mk[view] [source] 2022-02-08 18:08:35
>>Alexan+9h
Mixing is not laundering.

The difference is that laundering provides you with an explanation for wealth and/or income. Example of laundering: buy a business (with clean or borrowed money), have fictional customers "spend" their cash money at your business every day, then report your income and pay taxes. Now if anybody asks about where you got your money, you have a seemingly legit explanation.

Mixing does none of that. So mixing may be trivial, but laundering is not.

edit: now that I think about it, is that why NFTs are so popular? Are people pretending to have gotten capital gains, while in reality they're buying these things from themselves? That would explain a lot.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. FabHK+173[view] [source] 2022-02-09 14:08:55
>>wcoene+mk
Regarding NFTs and money laundering, see the inimitable Matt Levine here (second story, Oh by the way):

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-01-19/washin...

> This is called “money laundering,” and the essential component of money laundering is generating fake taxable income. If you take $13,800 out of your (legitimate, previously taxed) bank account, and you use it to buy cryptocurrency in a wallet that you tell your accountant and the IRS about, and you then use that cryptocurrency to buy a Meebit, and then you take $50 million out of your sack of illegal money, and you use it to buy cryptocurrency in a wallet that you don’t tell your accountant about, and then you use that cryptocurrency to buy the Meebit from your declared wallet, and then you take the $50 million of cryptocurrency out of the declared wallet and put it back in your (legitimate) bank account, and then you write the IRS a check for $20 million saying “ah I’ve been selling NFTs, what fun I have had, but I have to pay the IRS my fair share,” then … I am obviously not going to give you advice on crime but it’s possible you’ve got something there? Like, nobody has any idea what a Meebit is worth, so this string of outlandish numbers is somewhat plausible? It’s possible that some number of NFT wash trades have a purpose other than pumping up volume on NFT platforms?

[go to top]