I don't see how one can say "the SEC is good at investigating stock market shenanigans, therefore you couldn't possibly profit that way, end of story." That was

I don't see how one can say "the SEC is good at investigating stock market shenanigans, therefore you couldn't possibly profit that way, end of story." That was a pretty common take in the other thread as well. This is not insider trading. When an insider tips off an associate, investigators have full information on the pool of insiders. "Who knew about this ahead of time?" is a strong filter. Assuming the attacker had perfect opsec and the attack itself doesn't leave evidence that exposes them, they live in a much larger and murkier pool. Additionally, the attacker might have known of this vector months ahead of time. This gives them time to lay groundwork, find accomplices, and prepare. Quick thought experiment: There is a bar I used to go to pretty often. It was cash only. Aside from cell tower pings, possible Google Maps location history, and N days worth of security footage, there is nothing tying me to that bar. I've known one of the bartenders there for five years now. We grew up in the same town. We're not Facebook friends, we don't talk on the phone, but we've now known each other in this context for quite a while. If you had a perfect "back home" social graph, we're probably ~3-4 degrees of separation. Linking us to one another locally starting from his perspective would involve very invasive investigation (i.e. putting names to faces for everybody on the N days of security footage that bar has archived, a subpeona for bulk subscriber data of people who have been to that bar, etc). If I try to involve him in my market manipulation scheme, there's the risk he turns me in outright or that he rips me off and keeps the money for himself. Basically, the criminal conspiracy version of counterparty risk. Set that risk aside for a moment. Assume that he's on board with the plan. Also assume that I, as the attacker, leave no digital evidence pointing back to me. Think about how egregious his trading behavior would have to be to bring enough scrutiny upon himself that the SEC has people reviewing this bar's security footage, building profiles of the randos who have been to that bar, all that. I don't claim that "tipping off the bartender" is the world's most original securities crime, but unearthing that connection is a much more involved process than the cases of "spouse/sibling/college roommate/tennis partner of CEO bought OTM options a week before acquisition was announced." X people make, say, 1-10 million dollars off of a zany bet on stocks. Imagine how obvious your trade would have to be such that Y years from now, one of those new millionaires moves back to East Bumblef and makes a money-losing real estate transaction with another East Bumblefian (say, moi), and the SEC jumps over a hedge like "ah-HA! We've been watching your accounts this whole time, that other East Bumblefian knows how computers work and lived in an apartment four blocks from your old workplace in 2015, nobody could possibly negotiate this poor of a land deal, checkmate!"