5 ms·

A $500M Central Bank Heist and How It Was Foiled

• deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
• neonate 8y ago
  http://archive.is/wpmBz http://archive.is/wpmBz
  • paulcole 8y ago
    If the paywall is so offensive, why not ban WSJ links instead of allowing and promoting copyright infringement on this site?
    • wolrah 8y ago
      I'm 100% behind banning WSJ and all other paywalled links, or at least having a highly visible (and preferablly filterable) flag, but it's a real stretch to call an archive.is link "copyright infringement" and make a moral judgement on it. It's not like someone saved and reposted a sign-in only page, this is in the same vein as the Wayback Machine and Google Cache. The content was publicly available to the point that a well known bot was able to reach it. edit: I looked at the history of the link and it has an older copy where more of the images work. http://archive.is/4S2IG http://archive.is/4S2IG
• neom 8y ago
  Highly recommend the HSBC episode of Netflix's Dirty Money (especially if you also bank there, explained a lot of why they've been a really weird bank).
• jiveturkey 8y ago
  the story tries its best to make it sound like some defect in the bank's handling of the transfers. although there were minor issues, they were correctly caught via "defense in depth" techniques, ie many many layers of process. the story focuses far too much on the bank's handling of the transfers and not enough on the obviousness of a standard con and gullibility of senior government finance ministers. where these guys really really went wrong was not having enough of a starter fund so as to plant moles (who would later be abandoned to the police with no useful info) within the bank that would have allowed the transfers to go through. amateur hour, really.