2 ms·

Any such crime involves a transfer of money, and the destination country is easily determined. The point is not to figure out where the criminals are, but to pl

by ajb 3y ago

Any such crime involves a transfer of money, and the destination country is easily determined. The point is not to figure out where the criminals are, but to place responsibility on the country that can act on it. That's why I said the refund should come from the destination country, not the country where the criminals are located. If the criminals are not located there, then that country will have a claim on the next country that the money is transferred to, etc.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
Money isn't any easier to trace than data packets. Dollars get converted into bullion or Monero some other fungible commodity with no tracking attached, then back into money. The country where the conversion happens isn't inherently the country where the criminals are, and you can't plausibly make it illegal to buy <fungible commodity> for every value of <fungible commodity>.
- grotorea 3y ago
  Is it completely implausible to tell the country where that exchange took place that it's their problem if they failed to enforce KYC/AML laws and check who is exchanging those fungible commodities and its origins?
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    Yes? The transaction you know how to track is the unlawful one. Some ransomware requires you to pay them, so you do, and they take possession of whatever untraceable commodity and then give you the decryption keys (or don't). Or they buy a commodity on a stolen credit card and have possession of it before the fraud is reported. Then the victim goes to the police or files a dispute with the credit card company. The KYC/AML data is just going to give you the name of the account holder, i.e. the victim. The criminal didn't receive government currency, they received something they can anonymously resell for government currency, which could be anything with a market value.

2 ms·

Any such crime involves a transfer of money, and the destination country is easily determined. The point is not to figure out where the criminals are, but to pl

by ajb 3y ago

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
Money isn't any easier to trace than data packets. Dollars get converted into bullion or Monero some other fungible commodity with no tracking attached, then back into money. The country where the conversion happens isn't inherently the country where the criminals are, and you can't plausibly make it illegal to buy <fungible commodity> for every value of <fungible commodity>.
- grotorea 3y ago
  Is it completely implausible to tell the country where that exchange took place that it's their problem if they failed to enforce KYC/AML laws and check who is exchanging those fungible commodities and its origins?
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    Yes? The transaction you know how to track is the unlawful one. Some ransomware requires you to pay them, so you do, and they take possession of whatever untraceable commodity and then give you the decryption keys (or don't). Or they buy a commodity on a stolen credit card and have possession of it before the fraud is reported. Then the victim goes to the police or files a dispute with the credit card company. The KYC/AML data is just going to give you the name of the account holder, i.e. the victim. The criminal didn't receive government currency, they received something they can anonymously resell for government currency, which could be anything with a market value.