15 ms·
I'm not the most saavy BTC person, but isn't part of the allure of bitcoin the ability to evade this type of seizure?
by TheHypnotist 6y ago
I'm not the most saavy BTC person, but isn't part of the allure of bitcoin the ability to evade this type of seizure?
- Rebelgecko 6y agoYour BTC is only as secure as your wallet.dat file
- thdc 6y agoSeems like they somehow coerced the owner to transfer the bitcoins instead of targeting the wallet itself.
- ponker 6y agoThat’s certainly an aspect of its marketing, we can see that the reality is quite different. Individual X “agreed” to forfeit the wallet: https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/
- okareaman 6y agoThe Feds seized it from "Individual X" who hacked the account, they didn't hack and seize the account directly
- TedDoesntTalk 6y agoYou're assuming there actually is an Individual X. It is possible he was fabricated in order to hide that the Feds indeed did gain the password for the wallet.
- nullc 6y agoIf they did, they lied to the court. "On November 3, 2020, Individual X signed a Consent and Agreement to Forfeiture with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of California. In that agreement, Individual X, consented to the forfeiture of the Defendant Property to the United States government."
- aarong11 6y agoNothing there about "Individual X" being Ross Ulbritcht
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- nullc 6y agoIt wouldn't have been. They claim "Individual X" robbed silk road. My understanding based on the documents from Ross' arrest is that X exploited a bug in the site to get the user list then extorted the operator.
- monkpit 6y agoI don’t think that would exactly be the first time for that to happen.
- ilikecode 6y agoMaybe it took 8 years to crack the password?
- TedDoesntTalk 6y agoExactly. And there’s no reason to announce to the world that such cracking can be done when you can invent Individual X.
- macspoofing 6y ago>but isn't part of the allure of bitcoin the ability to evade this type of seizure The government didn't crack the wallet address. They 'compelled' the owner to give it to them. Bitcoin was not designed to evade that type of seizure.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- SOLAR_FIELDS 6y agoAs always, the extremely relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/
- icpmoles 6y agoThat number too.
- overkalix 6y agoEvent the url is relevant...
- hundchenkatze 6y agoI think the word you're looking for is coincidental.
- toyg 6y agowhy? Honest question, I don't know.
- coryfklein 6y ago> why? Honest question, I don't know. https://fivethirtyeight.com/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/
- NormenNomen 6y agoMore directly, this is the number of electors in the electoral college.
- cmauniada 6y agoYes, but they didn't hack into the wallet. They basically found the person who was in-charge of the wallet and forced their hand (read: civil forfeiture) in order to gain access to the bitcoin.
- TuringNYC 6y agothe article says: "In the civil forfeiture complaint, Anderson explained that the government took control of the wallet on Monday, after an unnamed hacker agreed to forfeit the cryptocurrency." It wasn't clear how the "agreement" was reached and what coersion was involved.
- colinmhayes 6y agoI'm not sure civil forfeiture is the right term for what happened here. I don't think the government can compel individual x to give them the wallet's key. Unless they found the key laying around I'd say they likely they built a case against them and used that to get them to trade the billion dollars in exchange for dropping the case.
- cmauniada 6y agoThanks for the correction.
- nullc 6y agoThat would be my assumption, but I'm confused: The statute of limitations would have expired already for the crimes they mention in their court filings.
- gamblor956 6y agoSome actions can extend the statute of limitations. In almost all states, fleeing the jurisdiction pauses the statute of limitations for the duration the suspect is not in the state. (Some states consider leaving the jurisdiction to be the same as fleeing, even if the intent was not to avoid criminal charges.) Concealment is also generally grounds for tolling the statute. And in some states, if criminal acts are related, the statute for the entire body of crimes doesn't begin until the last related criminal act. See for a breakdown by state: https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-law-basics/time-limits-for-charges-state-criminal-statutes-of-limitations.html https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-law-basics/time-limits...
- ballenf 6y agoThe regular reply to that strength is usually the rubber hose threat. Which is pretty much what happened here it seems with the person who had control of the private key in custody of the government.
- macksd 6y agoThis is the XKCD you're looking for: https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/
- prvc 6y agoWhat does that have to do with a rubber hose?
- jagged-chisel 6y agoRubber hose, hammer ... same usage, slightly different “impact”
- wtallis 6y agoThe proverbial rubber hose serves the same purpose as the $5 wrench mentioned in the comic.
- dabeeeenster 6y agoIt's a torture instrument
- LiquidSky 6y agoThe comic uses a wrench, "rubber hose" is the older way of phrasing it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber-hose_cryptanalysis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber-hose_cryptanalysis
- LgWoodenBadger 6y agoRubber hoses were used by police to beat confessions out of suspects without leaving visible evidence of a beating. At least according to the materials I've read.
- martindale 6y agoIt only provides this property when you've secured your keys, preferably in an offline wallet. These were hot wallet funds, so they're vulnerable to both physical and virtual seizure.
- vmception 6y agoYes and it took the US Gov 8 years to come up with a way to do so with mutual cooperation after knowing the identity of the owner and having a way to communicate with that owner. Very different than any random judge or municipal police freezing anything they want. Have a stash that people dont know about, no series of shell corporations and foundations required.
- LiquidSky 6y ago>mutual cooperation This is some quality spin, so kudos for that. You make it sound like the government and the individual in question came to a friendly agreement, when what happened was the government discovered the person's identity and used the powers available to them to get a consent to forfeiture out of them. >Very different than any random judge or municipal police freezing anything they want. Not at all. Just as the authorities have to know an identity to freeze an account in a criminal matter, if they know your identity then they can compel you to give up your Bitcoin stash. You can refuse, but then you'll go to jail. It's no different than some drug lord burying their money in the desert somewhere and refusing to give it up to the feds when they come. People keep pretending Bitcoin/cryptocurrency is magic and immune to real world pressures, and keep getting rude awakenings when they learn it's not.
- ramenmeal 6y agoDisclaimer, I know very little about bitcoin. If you owe the IRS tax money, they can take the money from your bank account without asking. They just do it. Can the same be done with bitcoin? As far as I know, they aren't able to. If that's the case, there's a difference.
- nannal 6y ago> Can the same be done with bitcoin? No, they don't have the keys, they can't sign a message as you.
- klodolph 6y agoThey can "ask" you for your Bitcoin, but the question is phrased, "Would you rather give us your Bitcoin now, or would you rather spend some time in jail first and give us the Bitcoin later?" It generally requires a court order to get money out of your bank. If it's a Bitcoin wallet, then they can just send the court order to you directly, and put you in jail until you comply (i.e. as many years as it takes). The differences seem a bit superficial to me.
- bufferoverflow 6y agoWith a bank they don't need your permission, they can just take your money straight from the bank. With cryptocurrencies they have to threaten you. And if you're ok with spending some time in jail (for court contempt), there's nothing they can do.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- gamblor956 6y agoYou can be held in contempt of court indefinitely.
- klodolph 6y agoYes, exactly true. You can be held in contempt of court indefinitely, if it's possible for you to comply with the court order. There is no conventional "due process" because you are free to leave once you comply.
- anonAndOn 6y agoThat depends on your circumstances. There may be an 18 month limit in some situations.[0] [0]https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/02/man-who-refused-to-decrypt-hard-drives-is-free-after-four-years-in-jail/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/02/man-who-refused-...
- GhostVII 6y agoIt's pretty impossible to beat the $5 wrench attack (or in the case of the government, 5 years in prison) unless you have anonymity, which Bitcoin does a very bad job of.
- seibelj 6y agoLuckily there is Monero https://www.getmonero.org/ https://www.getmonero.org/
- spurgu 6y agoNot sure why you're getting downvoted, to my knowledge you're correct.
- shitlord 6y agoThe IRS even has a $625k bounty for anyone who can break privacy coins like Monero! https://heraldsheets.com/irs-will-pay-625000-cracks-monero-network-privacy-wall/ https://heraldsheets.com/irs-will-pay-625000-cracks-monero-n...
- overkalix 6y agoI'd be extremely surprised if this bounty was anything else than misdirection and bait.
- gmadsen 6y agopeople don't realize this. If there is no flaw in the current implementation of Monaro, then it can't be traced. It is entirely possible that something has been figured out and allows tracing, but that is no different than using bitcoin. So I don't get the hate towards Monaro. \
- dorgo 6y agowould you sell the secret how to break privacy coints for $625k?
- 6y ago
- gruez 6y agoThe point of bitcoin is that you can drive across the country "carrying" $1B worth of assets, and if you get pulled over by the cops it won't be found. Try doing that with gold bars or stacks of cash.
- jonas21 6y agoI am glad we finally have a solution to this pressing issue.
- robotresearcher 6y agoThere are many places around the world where the government is not the good guys.
- fakedang 6y agoIncluding the US of A
- curiousllama 6y agoI know it sounds silly but it’s legit. Tons of stories of people driving out to buy a car, getting pulled over, having $10k seized without being charged with a crime, and then having to sue to get it back under a presumption of guilt. Bitcoin is harder to seize under civil asset forfeiture. ETA: in the US. Not sure about other countries.
- gamblor956 6y agoOr they could have just used a bank account. More people have lost money to Bitcoin scams and exchange fraud (see e.g. Mt Gox) than have lost their money to civil forfeiture. Depending on the price of Bitcoin, but (based on the current price of Bitcoin) more $$$ has been lost to crypto fraud as well.
- maerF0x0 6y agoproof of your claims?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- travmatt 6y agoThere’s no reason to think that Bitcoin is more resistant to rubber hose cryptanalysis than other financial instruments. If a US prosecutor can bring evidence showing that you are in control of a stolen asset, cryptography isn’t going to save you from being indicted.
- mam2 6y agoThe guy was a retard to put all his eggs in the same basket...