Binance Hackers Bombard Chipmixer to Launder at Least 4,836 BTC

TryNinja

legendary

Activity: 2758

Merit: 6830

Quote from: jerry0 on September 01, 2019, 05:40:19 PM

I always wondered this. But when hackers hack wallets for btc or other coins, how do they make it legitimate so they could sell it for real money? So they use mixers but if they sell the btc to coinbase or bitstamp etc, aren't there going to be tax issues such as where did they get the btc from as how they earned it?

I mean if have btc and sell it for cash in person, well they can get cash.

But how do these hackers who hack this much money make it legit? I mean if they don't have much money, well they can't create a business etc. Always wondered how these hackers do these kind of things.

Maybe they laundry the money through a (fake) legit business (just like real-world drug dealers), or live normally without worrying about money (but also not going around purchasing Lamborghinis). They surely can't withdrawal all at once without drawing a lot of attention, but there are many ways of getting the money. After all, people do that in the real life with illegally obtained money.

jerry0

full member

Activity: 1750

Merit: 186

I always wondered this. But when hackers hack wallets for btc or other coins, how do they make it legitimate so they could sell it for real money? So they use mixers but if they sell the btc to coinbase or bitstamp etc, aren't there going to be tax issues such as where did they get the btc from as how they earned it?

I mean if have btc and sell it for cash in person, well they can get cash.

But how do these hackers who hack this much money make it legit? I mean if they don't have much money, well they can't create a business etc. Always wondered how these hackers do these kind of things.

CoinClarity

member

Activity: 281

Merit: 77

You got questions? We got answers. coinclarity.com

Quote from: squatter on August 31, 2019, 02:51:02 PM

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 31, 2019, 04:18:41 AM

The author of the article is making inferences of their own.

I'm trying to discuss the actual numbers with you. Bitcoin Magazine is a red herring, so please stop distracting people. I am asserting that according to the published Chainalysis data, only 10.8% of mixed funds could be linked to illicit sources -- and that should be obvious to anyone willing to look at the source.

Finally you presented the results in an appropriate context. "Only 10.8% of the mixed funds could be linked to illicit sources" -- yes, this is correct. This is not what you were saying earlier.

Quote from: squatter on August 31, 2019, 02:51:02 PM

That generic slide that's an ELI5 for how mixers work, which contains no supporting data? You're grasping at straws.

Not really. I'm pointing out that Chainalysis' opinion of mixers isn't as rosy as you think it is.

Quote from: squatter on August 31, 2019, 02:51:02 PM

You said, "Chainalysis [doesn't] publish guesswork, and whenever something is uncertain, they state so." And Chainalysis has reported exactly how mixers are used, down to the percentage of each use case. So, why are you ignoring that data? Because it's completely at odds with your beliefs?

We were talking about a different blockchain analytics firm when I said that, although the same thing indeed applies to Chainalysis. Nobody is ignoring the data, I just ask that you not draw false conclusions from it.

squatter

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1196

STOP SNITCHIN'

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 31, 2019, 04:18:41 AM

The author of the article is making inferences of their own.

I'm trying to discuss the actual numbers with you. Bitcoin Magazine is a red herring, so please stop distracting people. I am asserting that according to the published Chainalysis data, only 10.8% of mixed funds could be linked to illicit sources -- and that should be obvious to anyone willing to look at the source.

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 31, 2019, 04:18:41 AM

Quote from: squatter on August 30, 2019, 02:01:12 PM

Moving the goal posts, are we? This is what you were trying to prove:

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 23, 2019, 08:45:35 AM

I'm sure a few people use it for non-criminal purposes, but they are in the minority.

Can you at least concede that you were utterly wrong about that?

What does it say next to the words "Possible exploit" in this slide?

That generic slide that's an ELI5 for how mixers work, which contains no supporting data? You're grasping at straws.

You said, "Chainalysis [doesn't] publish guesswork, and whenever something is uncertain, they state so." And Chainalysis has reported exactly how mixers are used, down to the percentage of each use case. So, why are you ignoring that data? Because it's completely at odds with your beliefs?

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 31, 2019, 04:18:41 AM

The data doesn't disprove what I'm saying. Just because funds came from exchanges or other sources it does not mean they weren't gained from illicit or illegal activity.

Let's put it this way: There is zero data supporting your assertions that mixers are predominantly used for criminal activity. The data from Chainalysis -- the only data we have on the subject -- does not support your claims in any way.

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 31, 2019, 04:18:41 AM

Its not a "more relevant slide." They are all relevant. You prefer this slide because you can use it to draw conclusions that favor your own economic interests, even if they are ultimately biased or incorrect.

No, it's more relevant because it reports actual data rather than baseless opinions. This discussion was about actual usage but you seem uninterested in that now that the data doesn't support your outlandish claims.

Ucy

sr. member

Activity: 2576

Merit: 402

Bisq is a Bitcoin Fiat Dex. Use responsibly

Quote from: Mpamaegbu on August 30, 2019, 10:52:26 AM

Quote from: serjent05 on August 11, 2019, 07:30:13 AM

This is bad for Chipmixer. If the authority decided to investigate on this and targeted Chipmixer to shutdown regardless of the investigation, they can easily do it since they have a proof in their hand that a mixing service had been used to launder a hacked BTC. I wonder why Chipmixer did not suspend those transactions.., Did they failed to track that those BTC were hacked?

I don't see how this is really bad for Chipmixer because I believe laundering is part of what tumblers do, except the management will want to act Hollier-Than-Thou now by feigning ignorance. Otherwise it is a legitimate business for the anonymity they provide for clients. Criminals will from time to time get in the mix and patronize such services.

Nice one.
If hiding ones identity with VPN is not considered a crime then this shouldn't be a problem also. I mean, even criminal hide behind VPN or tor to commit crimes, does that make VPN/tor users criminals? Of course not!
Most of us use VPN to protect our identities same way we use mixers.
Imagine a world without VPN, TOR, shelter, privacy or mixers

CoinClarity

member

Activity: 281

Merit: 77

You got questions? We got answers. coinclarity.com

Quote from: squatter on August 30, 2019, 02:01:12 PM

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 30, 2019, 10:18:49 AM

Quote

Specifically, Chainalysis believes that 8.1 percent of all mixed coins were stolen, while only 2.7 percent of coins had been used on darknet markets. As such, less than one in every 11 coins sent to mixers could be identified as having been used for illicit purposes. Additionally, 1.9 percent of mixed coins came from gambling or betting sites, which could be illegal depending on the jurisdiction of the users and the sites.

In contrast, almost half of all mixed coins were sent from exchanges. This includes 40 percent from traditional exchanges and 7.7 percent from peer-to-peer exchanges. Over a quarter of mixed coins came from other mixers.

I listened to the entire Chainalysis webinar and nowhere did they say "most mixed bitcoin is not used for illicit purposes."

Those words are quoted from a news article. Who cares if Chainalysis didn't say the words verbatim? They published data that speaks for itself.

The author of the article is making inferences of their own. You just happen to agree with them because they align with your own economic interest. Deciding because its a "news article" it must be 100% factually accurate also falls into this category.

Quote from: squatter on August 30, 2019, 02:01:12 PM

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 30, 2019, 10:18:49 AM

What they did say was this:

Quote

While stolen funds only represent about 8% of the funds received by mixers, mixers are by far the biggest destination of funds after they've been stolen.

Moving the goal posts, are we? This is what you were trying to prove:

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 23, 2019, 08:45:35 AM

I'm sure a few people use it for non-criminal purposes, but they are in the minority.

Can you at least concede that you were utterly wrong about that?

What does it say next to the words "Possible exploit" in this slide?

Quote from: squatter on August 30, 2019, 02:01:12 PM

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 23, 2019, 08:45:35 AM

They also had these slides in their presentation:

It's interesting that you chose completely generic slides summarizing how mixers work, when Chainalysis gave us actual data that disproves what you're saying. And you already know this. It's almost as if you're being disingenuous. Roll Eyes

The data doesn't disprove what I'm saying. Just because funds came from exchanges or other sources it does not mean they weren't gained from illicit or illegal activity.

Quote from: squatter on August 30, 2019, 02:01:12 PM

Here's a more relevant slide:

Its not a "more relevant slide." They are all relevant. You prefer this slide because you can use it to draw conclusions that favor your own economic interests, even if they are ultimately biased or incorrect.

squatter

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1196

STOP SNITCHIN'

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 30, 2019, 10:18:49 AM

Quote

Specifically, Chainalysis believes that 8.1 percent of all mixed coins were stolen, while only 2.7 percent of coins had been used on darknet markets. As such, less than one in every 11 coins sent to mixers could be identified as having been used for illicit purposes. Additionally, 1.9 percent of mixed coins came from gambling or betting sites, which could be illegal depending on the jurisdiction of the users and the sites.

In contrast, almost half of all mixed coins were sent from exchanges. This includes 40 percent from traditional exchanges and 7.7 percent from peer-to-peer exchanges. Over a quarter of mixed coins came from other mixers.

I listened to the entire Chainalysis webinar and nowhere did they say "most mixed bitcoin is not used for illicit purposes."

Those words are quoted from a news article. Who cares if Chainalysis didn't say the words verbatim? They published data that speaks for itself.

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 30, 2019, 10:18:49 AM

What they did say was this:

Quote

While stolen funds only represent about 8% of the funds received by mixers, mixers are by far the biggest destination of funds after they've been stolen.

Moving the goal posts, are we? This is what you were trying to prove:

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 23, 2019, 08:45:35 AM

I'm sure a few people use it for non-criminal purposes, but they are in the minority.

Can you at least concede that you were utterly wrong about that?

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 23, 2019, 08:45:35 AM

They also had these slides in their presentation:

It's interesting that you chose completely generic slides summarizing how mixers work, when Chainalysis gave us actual data that disproves what you're saying. And you already know this. It's almost as if you're being disingenuous. Roll Eyes

Here's a more relevant slide:

LeGaulois

copper member

Activity: 2940

Merit: 4101

Top Crypto Casino

@CoinClarity Thank you for the clarifying information.

Quote from: Vishnu.Reang on August 30, 2019, 11:23:20 AM

...I can't think about any other safe destination for stolen coins. It is not practical to transfer the stolen coins directly to exchanges.

It is... Certainly less in 2019 but it's always been, more or less. For years it was almost usual. There was no 'control' or 'analysis'. There were hardly any experts. And the exchanges either didn't care or didn't have the needed resources.

After a few years, it began to change It's not something that's openly announced but I can tell you that the biggest exchanges (Kraken, Bitstamp and others) work together to fight against funds coming from a hack or other. For example, to block coins received, etc.

After that, it started to be public when some exchanges proudly announced: "We blocked the coins of this hack".
It has become an opportunity to promote themselves. But they really work together when necessary. Unfortunately, there are still a lot of exchanges that still don't care where the coins come from, or don't have the resources (like back in the earlier days)

Someone else (@CoinClarity?) was posting a pic about coinjoin transactions. It's possible to make your bitcoins looking not used with CJ

Vishnu.Reang

sr. member

Activity: 1974

Merit: 453

Quote from: CoinClarity on August 30, 2019, 10:18:49 AM

I listened to the entire Chainalysis webinar and nowhere did they say "most mixed bitcoin is not used for illicit purposes."

https://register.gotowebinar.com/recording/8980410054773689612

What they did say was this:

Quote

While stolen funds only represent about 8% of the funds received by mixers, mixers are by far the biggest destination of funds after they've been stolen.

Hmm... so it is worrying. The total illicit usage may be much higher than 8%, because stolen coins are only one of the illicit usage types. The majority of the coins may be linked with dark markets and the vendors would use mixers to "clean" their coins before converting to fiat cash. And I can't think about any other safe destination for stolen coins. It is not practical to transfer the stolen coins directly to exchanges.

Mpamaegbu

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 1225

Once a man, twice a child!

Quote from: serjent05 on August 11, 2019, 07:30:13 AM

This is bad for Chipmixer. If the authority decided to investigate on this and targeted Chipmixer to shutdown regardless of the investigation, they can easily do it since they have a proof in their hand that a mixing service had been used to launder a hacked BTC. I wonder why Chipmixer did not suspend those transactions.., Did they failed to track that those BTC were hacked?

I don't see how this is really bad for Chipmixer because I believe laundering is part of what tumblers do, except the management will want to act Hollier-Than-Thou now by feigning ignorance. Otherwise it is a legitimate business for the anonymity they provide for clients. Criminals will from time to time get in the mix and patronize such services.

veleten

legendary

Activity: 2016

Merit: 1106

if this is true , then the hacker is pretty dumb
using one mixer to launder his coins leads to nothing good , it is wrong on so many levels
first of all , the more coins you have at a mixing service , the more chances that your coins will be mixed ...with your own coins
this defeats the purpose of using such a service , I highly doubt Chipmixer has 5000 btc to provide at least a 50% mix
secondly , this allows tracking agencie like Chainalysis follow the coins easily and governments to take action and arrest of freeze them as they please
and it could endanger the mixing services in general , since they can be accused of assisting criminals, sponsoring terrorism etc. and shut down

CoinClarity

member

Activity: 281

Merit: 77

You got questions? We got answers. coinclarity.com

Quote from: figmentofmyass on August 26, 2019, 03:15:00 PM

Quote from: finaleshot2016 on August 25, 2019, 07:59:36 PM

Are there any sources of articles that can prove mixers are for negative things only?

this just in---some opposing evidence. Wink

chainalysis said earlier this year that 90% of mixed coins are not used for illicit purposes: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/chainalysis-most-mixed-bitcoin-not-used-for-illicit-purposes

Quote

Specifically, Chainalysis believes that 8.1 percent of all mixed coins were stolen, while only 2.7 percent of coins had been used on darknet markets. As such, less than one in every 11 coins sent to mixers could be identified as having been used for illicit purposes. Additionally, 1.9 percent of mixed coins came from gambling or betting sites, which could be illegal depending on the jurisdiction of the users and the sites.

In contrast, almost half of all mixed coins were sent from exchanges. This includes 40 percent from traditional exchanges and 7.7 percent from peer-to-peer exchanges. Over a quarter of mixed coins came from other mixers.

I listened to the entire Chainalysis webinar and nowhere did they say "most mixed bitcoin is not used for illicit purposes."

https://register.gotowebinar.com/recording/8980410054773689612

What they did say was this:

Quote

While stolen funds only represent about 8% of the funds received by mixers, mixers are by far the biggest destination of funds after they've been stolen.

They also had these slides in their presentation:

So, however you want to interpret their findings is up to you; my conclusion is they don't have a very high regard for bitcoin mixers.

figmentofmyass

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1483

Quote from: finaleshot2016 on August 25, 2019, 07:59:36 PM

Are there any sources of articles that can prove mixers are for negative things only?

this just in---some opposing evidence. Wink

chainalysis said earlier this year that 90% of mixed coins are not used for illicit purposes: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/chainalysis-most-mixed-bitcoin-not-used-for-illicit-purposes

Quote

Specifically, Chainalysis believes that 8.1 percent of all mixed coins were stolen, while only 2.7 percent of coins had been used on darknet markets. As such, less than one in every 11 coins sent to mixers could be identified as having been used for illicit purposes. Additionally, 1.9 percent of mixed coins came from gambling or betting sites, which could be illegal depending on the jurisdiction of the users and the sites.

In contrast, almost half of all mixed coins were sent from exchanges. This includes 40 percent from traditional exchanges and 7.7 percent from peer-to-peer exchanges. Over a quarter of mixed coins came from other mixers.

there goes the theory that mixers are only used by criminals! the biggest users of mixers are exchange customers.

finaleshot2016

legendary

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1007

Degen in the Space

Quote from: BitBustah on August 25, 2019, 03:17:58 PM

Quote from: nicecrypto on August 25, 2019, 06:38:58 AM

Why is the chipmixer services need? i don't see the relevant of their service if it can be mostly use for criminal activities, who knows this is what many hackers use so that those stolen coins will be hard to trace, funny how their signature is been paraded by top members of this forum.

People claim that honest users may want to use their services for privacy reasons but lets be real, most people using their services have gotten their coins in a shady matter. Usually theft, drugs, or other crime.

How can you easily say that?
All of the things in here that are being made by a man can be used in good and bad things because we all differ on the perspective on how we will use that specifically. Let's be real here also, did you ever search about the advantages of Bitcoin mixing? Huh

Are there any sources of articles that can prove mixers are for negative things only?
Did you ever think about Bitcoin that is being used for bad things also? Scamming, buying drugs, illegal guns and other crime. They're the same thing, the only differences are, a mixer is a platform and Bitcoin is the currency but both can be used in bad or good things.

figmentofmyass

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1483

Quote from: BitBustah on August 25, 2019, 03:17:58 PM

Quote from: nicecrypto on August 25, 2019, 06:38:58 AM

Why is the chipmixer services need? i don't see the relevant of their service if it can be mostly use for criminal activities, who knows this is what many hackers use so that those stolen coins will be hard to trace, funny how their signature is been paraded by top members of this forum.

People claim that honest users may want to use their services for privacy reasons but lets be real, most people using their services have gotten their coins in a shady matter. Usually theft, drugs, or other crime.

anecdotally, i have one sports betting friend who got his coinbase account shut down a few years ago for gambling activity. ever since then, he always runs his sportsbook withdrawals through a mixer before sending coins to an exchange.

i'm not sure what percentage of mixer usage this demographic occupies, but food for thought: all gamblers in the USA withdrawing bitcoins from casinos/books/poker sites need to somehow disguise the source of their funds before cashing out through licensed exchanges, who generally comply with the UIGEA and interstate wire act.

malevolent

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 1722

Quote from: BitBustah on August 25, 2019, 03:17:58 PM

People claim that honest users may want to use their services for privacy reasons but lets be real, most people using their services have gotten their coins in a shady matter. Usually theft, drugs, or other crime.

shield132

hero member

Activity: 2310

Merit: 886

Wow, it's historical high of fund inflows through chipmixer, this news isn't really good because legal funds from legal and most famous exchange was laundered through chipmixer, red light shines there.
Btw I think they may share the history of bitmixer but however this mixer has serious ambitions, they were launched before bitmixer closed, interesting to know what will happen around them.

BitBustah

hero member

Activity: 1218

Merit: 534

Quote from: nicecrypto on August 25, 2019, 06:38:58 AM

Why is the chipmixer services need? i don't see the relevant of their service if it can be mostly use for criminal activities, who knows this is what many hackers use so that those stolen coins will be hard to trace, funny how their signature is been paraded by top members of this forum.

People claim that honest users may want to use their services for privacy reasons but lets be real, most people using their services have gotten their coins in a shady matter. Usually theft, drugs, or other crime.

Zemomtum

full member

Activity: 1316

Merit: 104

CitizenFinance.io

This will indeed bring bad reputation to Chipmixer, but I am of the opinion that this will not be the first time they will be dealing with this kind of unwarranted event. If they are able to manage it, they will come back stronger and if it is otherwise, it might lead to the end of their operation.

erikalui

legendary

Activity: 2632

Merit: 1094

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: figmentofmyass on August 23, 2019, 02:14:34 PM

(casts doubt about authenticity of article's findings)

Anybody not wearing a ChipMixer signature have doubts about Clain's findings?

When I said the same thing about Chipmixer, the signature bearers started stalking me (yes, earlier I worked in another mixer campaign but even back then I did not use one to protect my privacy nor did I go about defending them) as they just don't want anyone even point a single finger at Chipmixer (in case this allegation is proven true). They said that even if it's proven, nobody can do anything to Chipmixer which I highly doubt so expecting them to even address it is of no use. I'll only wait to see what happens to mixers in future as Government should definitely not let criminals go free because "some" people want to use mixers for their privacy. When Cryptopia was hacked, nobody even found out any information about the hacker but here atleast they are trying to find out information about the stolen coins.

A service that helps hackers (even if it's useful to some who use it for a genuine purpose) shouldn't continue to support such criminal activities.

Topic: Binance Hackers Bombard Chipmixer to Launder at Least 4,836 BTC (Read 6404 times)