7 ms·

Given illegal nature of Silk Road 2, I can't help but be suspicious of this explanation of the hack. If someone's sufficiently willing to flaunt laws as to oper

by jfasi 13y ago

Given illegal nature of Silk Road 2, I can't help but be suspicious of this explanation of the hack. If someone's sufficiently willing to flaunt laws as to operate a site devoted to selling contraband, what stops them from taking advantage of their position of power and stealing from their users?

short_circut 13y ago
That is roughly what I thought when I saw this. These people are dealing with criminal enterprises. What do they expect?
- redthrowaway 13y ago
  SR1 was a criminal enterprise as well, and there's no indication DPR was stealing from his users. Trust is at least as valuable in the criminal world as it is in legitimate enterprise, if not more so. A criminal who runs a trustworthy criminal enterprise is likelier to do well in the long run than one who rips off his customers.
  - EpicEng 13y ago
    A criminal who runs a trustworthy criminal enterprise is likelier to do well in the long run than one who rips off his customers. Sure, yet it happens all of the time. Not everyone is logical and forward thinking, and sometimes they just want a big score.
  - spinlock 13y ago
    did DPR do well in the long run?
    - redthrowaway 13y ago
      DPR's failure was opsec, not trustworthiness. Dishonest criminals get caught due to poor opsec, too.
  - sliverstorm 13y ago
    SR1 was a criminal enterprise as well, and there's no indication DPR was stealing from his users That reminds me of arguing along the lines of, I played Russian Roulette before, and I didn't lose. Therefore, I will not lose this time either.
    - Malician 13y ago
      Allegedly, SR2 was setup in ways which made it much, much easier to run off with larger quantities of money than with SR1. Given the circumstances, you could reasonably conclude this would happen.
      - ericb 13y ago
        Running off with the money is probably the smart move. The quicker you can get off the radar with something like this, the better your chance of not ending up in jail. It is entirely possible they are made for life, and with no more incoming transactions, if they haven't left a trail, they can have their cake and eat it too.
  - gtirloni 13y ago
    You can easily throw that trust away and profit some bitcoins if your face is unknown. In the real world someone would come after you sooner or later. In the world SR1/SR2, Bitcoins and Tor? Only if the NSA has an interest.
  - mpyne 13y ago
    But there was indications that DPR was murdering people who got in his way. Hardly an "ethical upcheck" here, and if he didn't steal from his users it was only because he didn't feel it necessary, not because he felt ethically bound for that. In fact ensuring the ideal of SR paying out fairly would allow his business to grow and therefore his lack of theft could easily be entirely and completely pragmatic without needing a shred of ethics to support it.
mscarborough 13y ago
This is also the guy that just talked a bunch of trash about the last Dread Pirate Roberts, and how he was so much better about security. Jinxed yourself, bro. Granted this was supposedly in the Bitcoin protocol itself, but for real, there's really never any need to stick your neck out to talk about how great your security is...
- haakon 13y ago
  I think you're confusing Silk Road 2 with Atlantis. They did talk trash and flapped their wings with fancy Youtube commercials etc before they suddenly closed down soon before Silk Road got busted. Silk Road 2 always claimed to be the rightful heir to the original Silk Road, and have their own Dread Pirate Roberts.
  - mscarborough 13y ago
    This is the interview I was referring to: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/dread-pirate-roberts-2-0-an-interview-with-silk-roads-new-boss/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/dread-pirate-robe... A lot of talk for something that just started, and had a massive fail one week after publication.
- yscale 13y ago
  * this was supposedly in the Bitcoin protocol itself* Cue a line of BTC-promoting ostriches claiming that the protocol is fan-fucking-tastic and in no need of improvement.
chrisBob 13y ago
I see your point, but stealing from drug dealers is usually a dangerous business.
- riquito 13y ago
  It's not like he can say "sorry, but it wasn't me. Still friends?". The risks are probably the same, so it's better to be hated AND a thief :-P
- catshirt 13y ago
  i'm assuming if dealers know who he is then dea, atf, or whoever would get to him first.
brubaker 13y ago
They are not criminals, they are "freedom fighters" Well atleast that is how they delusionaly see it.
twelvechairs 13y ago
The fact that they would be cutting their own revenue stream? I'm not saying its not possible but really this is just speculation. I could just as easily surmise that it was from a government or banks who feel threatened by bitcoin...
- jfasi 13y ago
  With any other business I would agree, but a $90k+ payout would probably be very attractive for someone running a clone of a drug site that got publicly busted just months before. I would imagine these guys have a countdown to when they get arrested ticking in their heads...
  - twelvechairs 13y ago
    until you have proof its all just speculation. there are many possibilities.
  - gwern 13y ago
    No, $90k is peanuts. Ross Ulbricht was making $19k a day on SR1, according to the complaint. Given that SR2, for all its problems and pissed off users, was still the biggest market, $90k is not worth killing it over. The estimates of >4500btc, on the other hand...
binocarlos 13y ago
lol and there was gullible little me thinking 'wow the hackers moved fast'
- gwern 13y ago
  Well, the hackers did move fast, from the Bitcoin discussions I've been following. That's why it's such a good excuse for the SR2 operators: because it's a real hack, it has a surface plausibility.
fleitz 13y ago
The sad thing is that not only will people trust people like this, but they'll advocate for them having more power over their lives. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program
vbuterin 13y ago
There is a huge moral difference between the sort of victimless-crime-contraband that is on SR (especially since SR1 at least, not sure about SR2, actively filtered out child porn, weapons, assassinations and all of the other truly scary things that you can potentially sell on an anonymous market), and stealing millions of dollars from people at least a few of whom are dependent on substances and desperately need the money to get them in time. Also, it hasn't really happened yet, but vigilantes.
- Touche 13y ago
  > especially since SR1 at least, not sure about SR2, actively filtered out child porn, weapons, assassinations Except for when they needed those things.
- jfasi 13y ago
  Notice that morality doesn't have to have anything to do with this argument. As a matter of pragmatism, the operator of a Silk Road-type site is almost certain to harbor a conviction that he can do so without getting caught (regardless of whether the authorities have morality on their side). The same same goes for stealing from your customers: of course you won't get caught, what are your victims going to do? File a police report that the money they gave to a contraband site to presumably purchase contraband was stolen? The same conviction that makes it possible for them to operate Silk Road 2 makes it possible for them to steal from their customers.
  - pikachu_is_cool 13y ago
    I think what he's trying to say that it's far less likely for a libertarian "legalize drugs" type of person to screw a bunch of people over. Like, when you facilitate selling drugs, there is no victim. Hell, you probably prevented having a victim. When you facilitate selling weapons/assassinations/child porn, there is a victim. The latter type of person would be more likely to victimize his/her customers than the former.
    - mbillie1 13y ago
aegiso 13y ago
It's entirely possible to be in support of a free and peaceful drug trade, while at the same time being morally against theft. I don't know why you're lumping the two.
- mbillie1 13y ago
  There's a difference between supporting a free and peaceful drug trade and participating in a very-much illegal drug trade. It's possible to be a hemp-wearing, tree-hugging hippie and be pro-death penalty - it also happens to be rare.
  - MarkPNeyer 13y ago
    the law has very little to do with supporting freedom and peace these days.
    - mbillie1 13y ago
      That is very true, but there's still an enormous chasm for your average person between being mostly-law-abiding (I'm not counting things like jaywalking or going 5mph over the limit) and participating in drug sales, which could land you life in prison. Hell, I think drug laws are incredibly unjust in the US, and that the government is overstepping its bounds left and right. By no means should you infer from this that I'm not careful of the legality of my actions. I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that someone participating in a life-in-prison-risking drug enterprise would also be willing to make other illegal/immoral decisions - in fact I think it would be foolish and naive NOT to assume that as a default, despite the fact that it will of course not be true in every case.
      - DerpDerpDerp 13y ago
        Having dealt passingly with a large number of marijuana dealers, I disagree strongly with your assessment. Do you have any statistics to back this up, or just the naive reasoning "Well, it's a /serious/ crime, so they'd probably commit others, because only bad people commit /serious/ crimes"?
kolbe 13y ago
How about self-interest? SR2 was not a very big site, and building a much larger business based on being a good operator of an underground market would earn him significantly more money than what he would have made by stealing the funds.
rurban 13y ago
Given the latest news it is also very likely that the FBI with the help of some other government cyber-crime unit raided Silk Road 2. You will see it only when the thieves will try to sell or exchange the bitcoins. The FBI won't do, and it will be in the news sooner and later.

by jfasi 13y ago

short_circut 13y ago

That is roughly what I thought when I saw this. These people are dealing with criminal enterprises. What do they expect?

redthrowaway 13y ago
SR1 was a criminal enterprise as well, and there's no indication DPR was stealing from his users. Trust is at least as valuable in the criminal world as it is in legitimate enterprise, if not more so. A criminal who runs a trustworthy criminal enterprise is likelier to do well in the long run than one who rips off his customers.
- EpicEng 13y ago
  A criminal who runs a trustworthy criminal enterprise is likelier to do well in the long run than one who rips off his customers. Sure, yet it happens all of the time. Not everyone is logical and forward thinking, and sometimes they just want a big score.
- spinlock 13y ago
  did DPR do well in the long run?
  - redthrowaway 13y ago
    DPR's failure was opsec, not trustworthiness. Dishonest criminals get caught due to poor opsec, too.
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  SR1 was a criminal enterprise as well, and there's no indication DPR was stealing from his users That reminds me of arguing along the lines of, I played Russian Roulette before, and I didn't lose. Therefore, I will not lose this time either.
  - Malician 13y ago
    Allegedly, SR2 was setup in ways which made it much, much easier to run off with larger quantities of money than with SR1. Given the circumstances, you could reasonably conclude this would happen.
    - ericb 13y ago
      Running off with the money is probably the smart move. The quicker you can get off the radar with something like this, the better your chance of not ending up in jail. It is entirely possible they are made for life, and with no more incoming transactions, if they haven't left a trail, they can have their cake and eat it too.
- gtirloni 13y ago
  You can easily throw that trust away and profit some bitcoins if your face is unknown. In the real world someone would come after you sooner or later. In the world SR1/SR2, Bitcoins and Tor? Only if the NSA has an interest.
- mpyne 13y ago
  But there was indications that DPR was murdering people who got in his way. Hardly an "ethical upcheck" here, and if he didn't steal from his users it was only because he didn't feel it necessary, not because he felt ethically bound for that. In fact ensuring the ideal of SR paying out fairly would allow his business to grow and therefore his lack of theft could easily be entirely and completely pragmatic without needing a shred of ethics to support it.

mscarborough 13y ago

This is also the guy that just talked a bunch of trash about the last Dread Pirate Roberts, and how he was so much better about security. Jinxed yourself, bro. Granted this was supposedly in the Bitcoin protocol itself, but for real, there's really never any need to stick your neck out to talk about how great your security is...

haakon 13y ago
I think you're confusing Silk Road 2 with Atlantis. They did talk trash and flapped their wings with fancy Youtube commercials etc before they suddenly closed down soon before Silk Road got busted. Silk Road 2 always claimed to be the rightful heir to the original Silk Road, and have their own Dread Pirate Roberts.
- mscarborough 13y ago
  This is the interview I was referring to: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/dread-pirate-roberts-2-0-an-interview-with-silk-roads-new-boss/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/dread-pirate-robe... A lot of talk for something that just started, and had a massive fail one week after publication.
yscale 13y ago
* this was supposedly in the Bitcoin protocol itself* Cue a line of BTC-promoting ostriches claiming that the protocol is fan-fucking-tastic and in no need of improvement.

chrisBob 13y ago

I see your point, but stealing from drug dealers is usually a dangerous business.

riquito 13y ago
It's not like he can say "sorry, but it wasn't me. Still friends?". The risks are probably the same, so it's better to be hated AND a thief :-P
catshirt 13y ago
i'm assuming if dealers know who he is then dea, atf, or whoever would get to him first.

brubaker 13y ago

They are not criminals, they are "freedom fighters" Well atleast that is how they delusionaly see it.

twelvechairs 13y ago

The fact that they would be cutting their own revenue stream? I'm not saying its not possible but really this is just speculation. I could just as easily surmise that it was from a government or banks who feel threatened by bitcoin...

jfasi 13y ago
With any other business I would agree, but a $90k+ payout would probably be very attractive for someone running a clone of a drug site that got publicly busted just months before. I would imagine these guys have a countdown to when they get arrested ticking in their heads...
- twelvechairs 13y ago
  until you have proof its all just speculation. there are many possibilities.
- gwern 13y ago
  No, $90k is peanuts. Ross Ulbricht was making $19k a day on SR1, according to the complaint. Given that SR2, for all its problems and pissed off users, was still the biggest market, $90k is not worth killing it over. The estimates of >4500btc, on the other hand...

binocarlos 13y ago

lol and there was gullible little me thinking 'wow the hackers moved fast'

gwern 13y ago
Well, the hackers did move fast, from the Bitcoin discussions I've been following. That's why it's such a good excuse for the SR2 operators: because it's a real hack, it has a surface plausibility.

fleitz 13y ago

The sad thing is that not only will people trust people like this, but they'll advocate for them having more power over their lives. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program

vbuterin 13y ago

There is a huge moral difference between the sort of victimless-crime-contraband that is on SR (especially since SR1 at least, not sure about SR2, actively filtered out child porn, weapons, assassinations and all of the other truly scary things that you can potentially sell on an anonymous market), and stealing millions of dollars from people at least a few of whom are dependent on substances and desperately need the money to get them in time. Also, it hasn't really happened yet, but vigilantes.

Touche 13y ago
> especially since SR1 at least, not sure about SR2, actively filtered out child porn, weapons, assassinations Except for when they needed those things.
jfasi 13y ago
Notice that morality doesn't have to have anything to do with this argument. As a matter of pragmatism, the operator of a Silk Road-type site is almost certain to harbor a conviction that he can do so without getting caught (regardless of whether the authorities have morality on their side). The same same goes for stealing from your customers: of course you won't get caught, what are your victims going to do? File a police report that the money they gave to a contraband site to presumably purchase contraband was stolen? The same conviction that makes it possible for them to operate Silk Road 2 makes it possible for them to steal from their customers.
- pikachu_is_cool 13y ago
  I think what he's trying to say that it's far less likely for a libertarian "legalize drugs" type of person to screw a bunch of people over. Like, when you facilitate selling drugs, there is no victim. Hell, you probably prevented having a victim. When you facilitate selling weapons/assassinations/child porn, there is a victim. The latter type of person would be more likely to victimize his/her customers than the former.
  - mbillie1 13y ago

aegiso 13y ago

It's entirely possible to be in support of a free and peaceful drug trade, while at the same time being morally against theft. I don't know why you're lumping the two.

mbillie1 13y ago
There's a difference between supporting a free and peaceful drug trade and participating in a very-much illegal drug trade. It's possible to be a hemp-wearing, tree-hugging hippie and be pro-death penalty - it also happens to be rare.
- MarkPNeyer 13y ago
  the law has very little to do with supporting freedom and peace these days.
  - mbillie1 13y ago
    That is very true, but there's still an enormous chasm for your average person between being mostly-law-abiding (I'm not counting things like jaywalking or going 5mph over the limit) and participating in drug sales, which could land you life in prison. Hell, I think drug laws are incredibly unjust in the US, and that the government is overstepping its bounds left and right. By no means should you infer from this that I'm not careful of the legality of my actions. I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that someone participating in a life-in-prison-risking drug enterprise would also be willing to make other illegal/immoral decisions - in fact I think it would be foolish and naive NOT to assume that as a default, despite the fact that it will of course not be true in every case.
    - DerpDerpDerp 13y ago
      Having dealt passingly with a large number of marijuana dealers, I disagree strongly with your assessment. Do you have any statistics to back this up, or just the naive reasoning "Well, it's a /serious/ crime, so they'd probably commit others, because only bad people commit /serious/ crimes"?

kolbe 13y ago

How about self-interest? SR2 was not a very big site, and building a much larger business based on being a good operator of an underground market would earn him significantly more money than what he would have made by stealing the funds.

rurban 13y ago

Given the latest news it is also very likely that the FBI with the help of some other government cyber-crime unit raided Silk Road 2. You will see it only when the thieves will try to sell or exchange the bitcoins. The FBI won't do, and it will be in the news sooner and later.