14 ms·

According to the original complaint, a few months after being interviewed by an FBI agent on returning from his trip to North Korea, Griffith had the following

According to the original complaint, a few months after being interviewed by an FBI agent on returning from his trip to North Korea, Griffith had the following conversation over text messages: Griffith: I need to send 1 [REDACTED UNIT OF CRYPTOCURRENCY] between North and South Korea. Other Guy: "Isn't that in violations of sanctions?" Griffith: It is. A few day later, also in text messages to someone else: Someone: What interest does North Korea have in cryptocurrency? Griffith: Probably avoiding sanctions... who knows." It looks like it wasn't just speaking at a conference after being denied permission from the US that got him in trouble, it looks like both before and after the trip he was working on a variety of ways to get the North Korean government more onboard with cryptocurrency, including discussions about mining ventures, moving funds in and out of the country, and offering connections with other cryptocurrency people.

wnevets 4y ago
So the title is incredibly misleading?
- tommek4077 4y ago
  I've read it as a time reference. He got trialed after the conference.
  - wnevets 4y ago
    there are certainly others commenting on this post who didn't read that way. They're posting as if he was literally sent to prison for just talking about crypto.
    - toomanyrichies 4y ago
      Yeah, the author of the article could have just as easily titled it "US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after multiple conversations on evading sanctions". You can draw your own conclusions as to why they went with the title they did.
  - bhelkey 4y ago
    I think the title implies a causal relationship between the two events. Edit: In this thread: > I wonder how the arrest went down, why he took a plea, what the details of his presentation were >What if he did the exact same presentation in youtube, and in NK they saw that presentation?
    - formerly_proven 4y ago
      Well yes, the executive summary of the article obviously tries to make this look like the US is punishing a freedom researcher for saying things a ten-year old knows: > The US sentenced a crypto researcher to five years in prison after he presented at a blockchain conference in North Korea. > Prosecutors say Virgil Griffith, 39, undermined US sanctions imposed on North Korea. > "The most important feature of blockchains is that they are open" Griffith said in his presentation, according to prosecutors.
xtracto 4y ago
> I need to send 1 [REDACTED UNIT OF CRYPTOCURRENCY] between North and South Korea I find this fascinating. How can you send any crypto between one country and the other? In reality, everyone who is using crypto is doing the transaction in every country where a validator/node is running. There is no concept of "sending BTC between Mexico and the USA". There may be a concept of someone paying USD money to somebody else to write something in the blockchain (i.e. write a transaction that says to move some BTC from Wallet A to Wallet B).
- jaywalk 4y ago
  You're probably reading too deeply into it. Remember, North Korea is mostly firewalled off from the worldwide Internet, so that's most likely where the problem begins.
  - thomastjeffery 4y ago
    In order for crypto to exist, it has to be on the global Blockchain. There is no isolation via firewall possible.
    - jaywalk 4y ago
      The Blockchain isn't just some magical thing that exists. If you can't access the global Internet, you can't access the Blockchain.
- arcticbull 4y ago
  You're sending cryptocurrency from a wallet belonging to an individual physically present in country A to one belonging to an individual physically present in country B. It's not so much where the wallet is, obviously, but where the people using it are.
- genidoi 4y ago
  You don't even need a validator/node running in your country -- another standard node merely needs to hear about it, run the standard bitcoin-core code for tx propagation to its connected peers (happens automatically ofc.) and it will be included in the next block if network congestion conditions permit miners to do so. Interestingly, this leads to a startling scenario if you use an 'advanced' client such as Electrum, where you have the ability to create & sign a valid transaction, before broadcasting it. During that time, which is ofc defined entirely by your decision to hold off broadcasting the TXO, the transaction 'exists' but isn't recorded in the blockchain. In fact anyone who can get ahold of that transaction data (not to be confused with your private key) can send it off to the network, and it will be registered in the next block. So a valid transaction, once signed by the corresponding private key, is almost entirely removed from the signor, and the decision to broadcast it can be viewed as a seperate one altogether from signing.
levi-turner 4y ago
Source for those curious about this: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646/download https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646...
- outworlder 4y ago
  It is interesting that the cryptocurrency in question is not named (simply referred to as "Cryptocurrency-1"). Possibly because there are ongoing investigations about it? If this was bitcoin, they would likely state that.
  - yakak 4y ago
    It being eth would seem to match their narrative he was an expert. Maybe it was eth hence their narrative or maybe they redacted it for not being eth.
  - gruez 4y ago
    probably USDT?
mzs 4y ago
Yep starts on page 6 - sure DPRK I'll do this crime for you so that you can blackmail me into further service for the rest of my life. https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646/download https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646...
bell-cot 4y ago
How far down the "flew 8,000 miles to get there, climbed over the barbed wire fence, licked both his thumbs, and pressed them against the shiny parts labeled 'DANGER! 25,000 VOLTS!'..." rabbit-hole-of-stupid should one have to go, before it's 100% okay for me to stop caring whether or not his sentence was just?
- adfhdfhdryheryh 4y ago
  This might qualify as high treason, as defined in the Constitution rather as used as an insult. The U.S. and North Korea are still technically at war, and this act was definitely aiding the North Korean government.
  - SllX 4y ago
    I’m not sure we really are. The perpetual warfare in the absence of a treaty doesn’t really seem to hold water in a world where South Korea has opened factories in North Korea or the PRC and ROC openly trade. That said, even if it does qualify, that doesn’t seem to be the charge pursued by the Prosecutors so moot.
- victor9000 4y ago
  I'm not sure about the exact threshold, but in this case we have definitely crossed it.
- mywittyname 4y ago
  Five years seems pretty mild when you consider the chief purpose of sanctions is to provide an alternative to war as a means of settling disputes. And this man is willfully undermining the ability of his country to levy sanctions. Surely actively undermining the security of ones country is a serious offense.
  - rbanffy 4y ago
    > as a means of settling disputes As a means of forcing someone to unwillingly settle a dispute in your favor that is. I have no sympathy for North Korea, but sanctions are not an alternative to war. Sanctions are an alternative to bullets.
pwdisswordfish9 4y ago
> [REDACTED UNIT OF CRYPTOCURRENCY] ???
DavidVoid 4y ago
Yeah, it doesn't exactly seem like a William Worthy[1] type of scenario. If you actively aid a country in avoiding financial sanctions† then you pretty much only have yourself to blame when you eventually get thrown in prison for a few years. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Worthy#Right_to_travel_controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Worthy#Right_to_travel... †: Medical and food sanctions are a different question imo.
- yesbut 4y ago
  I think it is well understood that with the way political hierarchies are structured, economic sanctions always impact the people with the least amount of power before anyone of the insulated power wielding people at the top lose any sleep. I'm not even sure historically that economic sanctions have ever resulted in the proclaimed goals of the sanctions. How long have we had economic sanctions on NK? Has the result been our stated goals of the economic sanction?
xnx 4y ago
Sounds like some light treason.
haltingproblem 4y ago
I speculate, that there are plenty of North Koreans living in South Korea and perhaps even the US who send funds to the family members in N. Korea. Are they all guilty of evading sanctions regime and can be sentenced to prison? Does this extend to any country that does trade with North Korea? North Korea has a pretty advanced missile program and actively trades in them with many countries including those which are not un-friendly to the US. I don't know how this makes sense for just making an presentation. On the other hand, I don't know how the Feds will let him get away with sending 1 [REDACTED UNIT OF CRYPTO] between N and S Korea. You cant stop Pakistan or Iran from trading with N. Korea but you can stop an ordinary American. We live in a weird world.
jwarden 4y ago
I have learned to expect almost any mainstream media headline with the word “after” to be misleading. “After” does not literally mean “because”, so it’s not a lie. But people read it that way. “Putin condemned by west after attending anti-Nazi rally.” “Ted Bundy sentenced to life in prison after misogynistic comment.”

wnevets 4y ago

So the title is incredibly misleading?

tommek4077 4y ago
I've read it as a time reference. He got trialed after the conference.
- wnevets 4y ago
  there are certainly others commenting on this post who didn't read that way. They're posting as if he was literally sent to prison for just talking about crypto.
  - toomanyrichies 4y ago
    Yeah, the author of the article could have just as easily titled it "US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after multiple conversations on evading sanctions". You can draw your own conclusions as to why they went with the title they did.
- bhelkey 4y ago
  I think the title implies a causal relationship between the two events. Edit: In this thread: > I wonder how the arrest went down, why he took a plea, what the details of his presentation were >What if he did the exact same presentation in youtube, and in NK they saw that presentation?
  - formerly_proven 4y ago
    Well yes, the executive summary of the article obviously tries to make this look like the US is punishing a freedom researcher for saying things a ten-year old knows: > The US sentenced a crypto researcher to five years in prison after he presented at a blockchain conference in North Korea. > Prosecutors say Virgil Griffith, 39, undermined US sanctions imposed on North Korea. > "The most important feature of blockchains is that they are open" Griffith said in his presentation, according to prosecutors.

xtracto 4y ago

> I need to send 1 [REDACTED UNIT OF CRYPTOCURRENCY] between North and South Korea I find this fascinating. How can you send any crypto between one country and the other? In reality, everyone who is using crypto is doing the transaction in every country where a validator/node is running. There is no concept of "sending BTC between Mexico and the USA". There may be a concept of someone paying USD money to somebody else to write something in the blockchain (i.e. write a transaction that says to move some BTC from Wallet A to Wallet B).

jaywalk 4y ago
You're probably reading too deeply into it. Remember, North Korea is mostly firewalled off from the worldwide Internet, so that's most likely where the problem begins.
- thomastjeffery 4y ago
  In order for crypto to exist, it has to be on the global Blockchain. There is no isolation via firewall possible.
  - jaywalk 4y ago
    The Blockchain isn't just some magical thing that exists. If you can't access the global Internet, you can't access the Blockchain.
arcticbull 4y ago
You're sending cryptocurrency from a wallet belonging to an individual physically present in country A to one belonging to an individual physically present in country B. It's not so much where the wallet is, obviously, but where the people using it are.
genidoi 4y ago
You don't even need a validator/node running in your country -- another standard node merely needs to hear about it, run the standard bitcoin-core code for tx propagation to its connected peers (happens automatically ofc.) and it will be included in the next block if network congestion conditions permit miners to do so. Interestingly, this leads to a startling scenario if you use an 'advanced' client such as Electrum, where you have the ability to create & sign a valid transaction, before broadcasting it. During that time, which is ofc defined entirely by your decision to hold off broadcasting the TXO, the transaction 'exists' but isn't recorded in the blockchain. In fact anyone who can get ahold of that transaction data (not to be confused with your private key) can send it off to the network, and it will be registered in the next block. So a valid transaction, once signed by the corresponding private key, is almost entirely removed from the signor, and the decision to broadcast it can be viewed as a seperate one altogether from signing.

levi-turner 4y ago

Source for those curious about this: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646/download https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646...

outworlder 4y ago
It is interesting that the cryptocurrency in question is not named (simply referred to as "Cryptocurrency-1"). Possibly because there are ongoing investigations about it? If this was bitcoin, they would likely state that.
- yakak 4y ago
  It being eth would seem to match their narrative he was an expert. Maybe it was eth hence their narrative or maybe they redacted it for not being eth.
- gruez 4y ago
  probably USDT?

mzs 4y ago

Yep starts on page 6 - sure DPRK I'll do this crime for you so that you can blackmail me into further service for the rest of my life. https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646/download https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646...

bell-cot 4y ago

How far down the "flew 8,000 miles to get there, climbed over the barbed wire fence, licked both his thumbs, and pressed them against the shiny parts labeled 'DANGER! 25,000 VOLTS!'..." rabbit-hole-of-stupid should one have to go, before it's 100% okay for me to stop caring whether or not his sentence was just?

adfhdfhdryheryh 4y ago
This might qualify as high treason, as defined in the Constitution rather as used as an insult. The U.S. and North Korea are still technically at war, and this act was definitely aiding the North Korean government.
- SllX 4y ago
  I’m not sure we really are. The perpetual warfare in the absence of a treaty doesn’t really seem to hold water in a world where South Korea has opened factories in North Korea or the PRC and ROC openly trade. That said, even if it does qualify, that doesn’t seem to be the charge pursued by the Prosecutors so moot.
victor9000 4y ago
I'm not sure about the exact threshold, but in this case we have definitely crossed it.
mywittyname 4y ago
Five years seems pretty mild when you consider the chief purpose of sanctions is to provide an alternative to war as a means of settling disputes. And this man is willfully undermining the ability of his country to levy sanctions. Surely actively undermining the security of ones country is a serious offense.
- rbanffy 4y ago
  > as a means of settling disputes As a means of forcing someone to unwillingly settle a dispute in your favor that is. I have no sympathy for North Korea, but sanctions are not an alternative to war. Sanctions are an alternative to bullets.

pwdisswordfish9 4y ago

> [REDACTED UNIT OF CRYPTOCURRENCY] ???

DavidVoid 4y ago

Yeah, it doesn't exactly seem like a William Worthy[1] type of scenario. If you actively aid a country in avoiding financial sanctions† then you pretty much only have yourself to blame when you eventually get thrown in prison for a few years. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Worthy#Right_to_travel_controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Worthy#Right_to_travel... †: Medical and food sanctions are a different question imo.

yesbut 4y ago
I think it is well understood that with the way political hierarchies are structured, economic sanctions always impact the people with the least amount of power before anyone of the insulated power wielding people at the top lose any sleep. I'm not even sure historically that economic sanctions have ever resulted in the proclaimed goals of the sanctions. How long have we had economic sanctions on NK? Has the result been our stated goals of the economic sanction?

xnx 4y ago

Sounds like some light treason.

haltingproblem 4y ago

I speculate, that there are plenty of North Koreans living in South Korea and perhaps even the US who send funds to the family members in N. Korea. Are they all guilty of evading sanctions regime and can be sentenced to prison? Does this extend to any country that does trade with North Korea? North Korea has a pretty advanced missile program and actively trades in them with many countries including those which are not un-friendly to the US. I don't know how this makes sense for just making an presentation. On the other hand, I don't know how the Feds will let him get away with sending 1 [REDACTED UNIT OF CRYPTO] between N and S Korea. You cant stop Pakistan or Iran from trading with N. Korea but you can stop an ordinary American. We live in a weird world.

jwarden 4y ago

I have learned to expect almost any mainstream media headline with the word “after” to be misleading. “After” does not literally mean “because”, so it’s not a lie. But people read it that way. “Putin condemned by west after attending anti-Nazi rally.” “Ted Bundy sentenced to life in prison after misogynistic comment.”