Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
Bitcoin in a hyperbolic bubble
- Thread starter Duke of Marmalade
- Start date
- Status
Is there such a giant leap from one category to the other? I doubt it. If hackers have wreaked havoc in the past without necessarily needing $ compensation, why should this be any different? Sure, it may not be as attractive in a case where there's no $ to exploit, but it wouldn't stop happening in that instance.
The other point is that a ban wouldn't prevent this sort of thing from happening - so why on earth would anyone go there (specifically for this reason)? Beyond that still, there are other tools - as the writer outlined. Sure, it may be more hassle - but you think that will stop them? I don't.
My understanding is that ransomware predates crypto. Can crypto be utilised as a tool in such an activity - making the process more seamless? It certainly seems so.
You're missing the point. Why not use that guise and throw them off the scent? There was speculation that the group in question was linked to the powers that be in Moscow - I'm not sure if there was anything concrete found to back that up.
One way or another, I don't see these attacks stopping - with a crypto ban or without. How about holding organisations accountable for their network security?
Another member of the anti-crypto quorum chimes in. I'm shocked at your findings Dukey - absolutely shocked.
You're right..
Is bitcoin money?
Or will these criminals convert their newly acquired bitcoin into $$.
How exactly will they do that? Maybe they have cash buyers willing to take the bitcoin at discount? All that means is that bitcoin and cash are as culpable in this ransomware scheme.
Alternatively they could sell their bitcoin on exchanges. But with increasing regulatory oversight on exchanges, a trail will be left.
For example CAB have strong powers to seize assets and property where unexplained accumulated wealth is detected.
I don't see why similar cannot be applied to any wealth accumulated from sale of bitcoin.
For sure - that's why the New York Times article focuses on network security. Perhaps the writer in that instance doesn't have a multiple year record of opposition to decentralised crypto as you two.
Imagine we have an organisation renowned for mismanagement (HSE) and they're not being held accountable in any way for this incident.
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
Of course they will, criminals ain't stupid.
Please Wolfie this is not about putting bitcoin in the sin bin. It is about recognising the "explosion in ransomware" facilitated by crypto.
The discussion is based on an article with a headline that says "Ban cryptocurrency..."
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
So your point is why aren't they asking for a ban on cash. After all they are both equally naughty girls in this pastime.The discussion is based on an article with a headline that says "Ban cryptocurrency..."
No, my point is that this "ban crypto..." stuff is silly nonsense.
I'm not au fait with the workings of the criminal underworld, so perhaps this is a naive question.
Can you tell me how criminals convert bitcoin into $$ without leaving a trail?
Bitcoin jumbler services exist where you send your coins, they get mixed with lots of others and you get out different coins which are no longer linked to the crime on the blockchain. Repeat that a few times then withdraw to cash on exchanges in countries that aren’t too bothered by any of this I guess.
So lack of oversight by nation states and their regulatory authorities on cash transfers from exchanges are facilitating this fraud?
(rhetorical question)
Should we ban nation states and lax regulatory authorities?
Having read this I'm fairly convinced that one of the key battlegrounds for Bitcoin and cryptos in the coming months and years will be the AML arena. You seem to frame this purely from the perspective of the powers that be having their control challenged but there is a strong societal interest in minimising criminal activity. It seems money laundering, and by extension terrorist financing, can be facilitated far easier via cryptos.
I don't think they'll really place much value on the innovation element if organs of the state are falling victim to ransomware attacks every other week or losing out on huge amounts of tax revenue. Regulation catering for crypto will lead to the Wild West.
I agree that there's going to be plenty of back and forth on regulation going forward. They'll flip flop this way and that.
We all have an interest in minimising criminal activity. However, AML policy has proven to be an epic failure - and one which comes with a societal cost in terms of trampling over peoples privacy, causing friction in finance to a point where it holds back innovation and it all comes with an incredible financial cost - that one way or another, we all pay for. The world functioned just fine without it - and it can do so again.
On the suggestion that crypto facilitates illicit trade much easier or to a greater extent than fiat cash or electronic fiat - that's incorrect. It may offer advantages to such activity in specific circumstances. However, likewise so too do cash and electronic fiat.
This specific organ of the state has fallen victim yet again to mismanagement. That's what needs to be tackled. Bitcoin leads by example as a network that over the course of 12 years has never fallen victim to any attack. As regards the innovative end of things, some will recognise it and some won't. The yanks benefited greatly by allowing the last wave of innovation to develop openly whilst the Europeans and others got it wrong. Some will embrace it and some wont. Many of them will change tack back and forth as they go along and as this unfolds.
As regards your dismissal of regulation needing to be shaped around crypto, there has to be a recognition that its entirely different. Existing regulation was designed for something entirely different.
DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,055
Don't coinbase adhere to AML rules?
Given that even if criminals receive their proceeds in BTC they need to convert it to BTC via an exchange. So AML is still always going to be involved in Crypto.
Given that even if criminals receive their proceeds in BTC they need to convert it to BTC via an exchange. So AML is still always going to be involved in Crypto.
You don’t my have to use an exchange though, and even if you do you can choose any exchange in any country regardless of whether those countries enforce AML.
You can create a Bitcoin ‘account’ (wallet) on your PC without any interaction (without even an Internet connection) with an exchange or other body that will do KYC/AML and people can send you Bitcoin. Send your bitcoin through a tumbler service (no AML being done by these folks!) and it pops out the other side clean and untraceable. You can now send it to an exchange in a country that does not care about AML and withdraw your cash.
DazedInPontoon
Registered User
- Messages
- 357
Are there any exchanges in countries that do not care about AML that also will let you withdraw to a european or american bank account? or how do you see the "withdraw your cash" part happening?
Yes.
But the vast majority of ransomware activity is happening from Russia etc, why would a Russian criminal want to withdraw to a US/European bank account?
Just 20% of the USA's meat production taken offline.........no information on payment mechanism
Wonder what payment instrument the criminal/terrorists group chose as their preferred choice.....I mean if they're all the same.....cash/bank/bitcoin crypto.......it should be just a game of chance what this ransomware is denominated in
What do you think @tecate @WolfeTone - what method of payment did they choose to use, probably the one that lets them more likely get away with it? No?
JBS: Cyber-attack hits world's largest meat supplier
The ransomware attack may mean delays for some customers in the US, Canada and Australia, the firm says.
www.bbc.com
Wonder what payment instrument the criminal/terrorists group chose as their preferred choice.....I mean if they're all the same.....cash/bank/bitcoin crypto.......it should be just a game of chance what this ransomware is denominated in
What do you think @tecate @WolfeTone - what method of payment did they choose to use, probably the one that lets them more likely get away with it? No?
- Status