Topic: Bitcoin Bouny Hunter: Bitalo DDOS attacker discussion - page 2. (Read 11565 times)

Scammer trying to scam the scammers.

This thread is awesome!

He's referring to the Roger Verr hacker. He's implying they are the same person.

It's entirely unreasonable to expect that WE would know this, so you're just confusing everyone.


The directions on the WEBSITE say to not submit it to Blockchain.info. The directions are generic and not applying to the specific bounty.

Martin isn't blockchain.info. There's nothing wrong with submitting the evidence to Martin, you have already posted it on Proof of Existence.

and which separate bounty for 37 BTC are you talking about

The only thing that does not make sense is this discussion.

-It is OUR bounty (paid by me) that is hosted on Bitcoinbountyhunter as a neutral and objective host.

-When he is in the US, I really dont see any problem that conviction would fail. I dont require that he is persecuted in Europe, if he gets a 50 dollar fine in the US thats already a conviction.

-In case any conviction is not possible for OBVIOUS reasons (like he is a minor child or the highly immune president himself) then I am sure Roger will acknlowledge that.

-All questions should please go to Roger Ver directly, since he will ultimatively decide if the proof is sufficient.

-Third party escrow is the fairest method ever. Coins are locked for us and you have a neutral escrow for all kind of questions. And no, there will be no bounty splitups or outside payments from our side outside of the official bounty programme.

I've clearly said numerous times. Your hacker is in the united states. I think I've said that to you least 10 times.
That is not theoretical. And I HAVE uploaded to the blockchain. Why do you keep referring to "if's"?
You know I submitted it because we talked about that in our PM and I sent you this link:
http://www.proofofexistence.com/detail/b2427aa196f7b9ceefa30f200ed84830e5e1c37ce3062e659e8b6aa3605fe500

You have not really addressed anything in my post above about the bounty. You are not even clarifying the things you have said in relationship to the bitcoinbounty instructions.

I still don't understand why you are escrowing your own bounty - this defeats the actual purpose of an escrow. Basically you are saying there is no actual escrow because Roger Ver is funding the bounty and escrowing it...You also did not clarify why these bounties are listed separately on the bitcoin bounty hunter page. You can clearly see here that your bounty for 100btc, and a separate bounty for 37btc via Roger Ver. I told you a couple days ago that I had proof that these two cases were related to the same hacker, anyway - but you don't even want to talk about what that would mean in terms of the bounty. Would the informant get both bounties when they prove it's the same guy in both instances?

You also never clarified why the directions on the bounty say clearly NOT TO SUBMIT the info to you,
and then why you asked me to send you a direct copy of it to your email, despite these directions.

You are not really being clear about anything at all. And to tell ya the truth, I've seen at least one other poster maybe two, also ask about the reliability of how the bounty is set up. let me break this down for you. no american agency is going to extradite your hacker to Europe to face charges in a foreign country for a small timer ddos attack on you. the conviction requirement on your bounty is nearly impossible to attain.

"what have you got to loose".... um, let's not be condescending here. You are asking for help, not vice versa. This is not the bitalo lottery. Any informant risks retribution from this hacker after he is snitched on. Obviously that sucks & is probable. Let's be real here.

Plus you are starting to appear a little bit like you are intending to be unclear when you speak.
I apologize if I am misjudging you right now, but honestly I've asked you numerous times to be clear about specific things and you don't seem to make any effort to meet me half way in that conversation - and I actually find that quite odd.


Didn't I see some email somewhere that dd4bc only requested 1 whole bitcoin from you? But you turn around with a combined bounty of 100 bitcoin?
MAYBE, you assumed that the only person who would respond to your bounty would be the criminal himself or the criminals accomplice or friend. Perhaps you assumed you could TRICK the hacker/hackers into snitching on each other - and this is why you set the bounty so dramatically high in comparison to what the hacker tried to hijack you for.

Perhaps you thought under those circumstances, you would never have to pay the bounty to the informant. Maybe this is why you seem so reluctant to want to work with me on understanding your bounty and how we can make a fair effective trade. I have no idea what to think. I would hate to think that but you do seem to evade direct concerns about things.

NOTHING about this bounty makes sense to me.

"US" is Roger Ver who runs Bitcoin Bounty Hunter. They don't want to receive evidence because they won't do anything with it.

Martin wants the evidence, and if you read the bounty page you'll see: "Bounty for full and proven identity of DD4BC"

So the instructions on the page are generic instructions, whereas in this case it seems only proving the identity is required to get the bounty. Roger Ver is the person that will decide bounty payouts (probably in consultation with martin).

arrghg..

No, it is OUR bounty. Roger Ver is just doing the escrow service, because he is a well respected and neutral member of the bitcoin community and as a proof that the coins will really be paid.

I also recommend everybody to please contact Roger directly for technicalities like bounty payouts.


But why are you all talking so theoretically. In case you really have some useful information about his identity, then you should also know in which jurisdiction he is located and you can easily see via google if this would be convicted or not. The blockchain timestamp is just to prove that you had the evidence first.

In case you dont even know the jurisdiction, then I would assume that you have anything.

But seriously, what do you have to lose. The important part is just to prove the identity. If you HAVE it why should you not make it public in the blockchain and see what happens, why should he not be convicted? In case he is a minor or whatever I am sure Roger would still count this as a full finding. Someone else will take care of him in a different way, I am sure about that, if not his mum. :-)

^ This has been mentioned.
(side bar, I don't think the burden of proof should be placed on the third party escrow to verify the tips "acceptability" or validity. Verification needs to be more concrete than that.  )

The trouble is that it's still tricky to verify if bounty was changed to just an ID.
I personally mentioned to lower the bounty in exchange for verified identity.
It's just still tricky to do.

Martin needs to protect his bounty from scammers and inaccurate tips.
But the informant also needs to be able to protect their tip.
It's kind of hard to verify this kind of tip and keep both parties protected.
To verify it in public here, the informant is risking posting inaccurate info on an innocent person, publicly.
To verify it privately between informant and Martin would in turn protect the accused identity till it was verified,
but there would be no third party witness to observe the interaction and the validity of the communication that took place - or the status of the case as it relates back to the informant.
I'm sure there is some method of trade and verification that I have not considered yet,
but so far I keep spinning in circles with the options of how that would all go down.

Now, if both parties were on American soil, a conviction would be much more likely - and the probability that Law Enforcement would pursue it is high. But this is not the case, which yes, leaves the conviction requirement almost impossible to obtain on many counts - while also leaving the informant in a situation where their work is publicly noted and utilized - but they don't ever get paid for it due to extraneous circumstances.

I understand both sides of this coin. I can put myself in Martins shoes and see his side, and I can see the side of the informant.
I am getting the impression that Martin does not fully understand the situation himself and his limitations.

On the other hand,
When I asked about the Id of hacker vs Conviction, Martin replied: "when his identity is proven he will be convicted 100%"
- I don't know what to make of this comment beyond possibly that it reveals Martin never actually spoke with any lawyers before he placed this bounty, and is misjudging the situation a great deal based upon a simple report he made with his local law enforcement.

I am also a little conflicted on the official terms of the bounty because when I have asked about them, I get conflicting responses.

Per the bitcoinbounty page, the steps include:

1. upload to block chain,
2. Report to law enforcement (DO NOT SUBMIT INFO TO US).
3. Wait for law enforcement to make an arrest that leads to a conviction in the case.
4. Contact us with the original document submitted to Proof of Existence, proving you provided the correct information to law enforcement.
5. Get Bounty

But when I submitted my info to blockchain, and told Martin it was done, he replied for me to email him a copy of this information directly - which contradicts step 2.

"hi,
thanks

yes please send me a copy to [email protected]"

I was kind of considering just sending this to him on good faith - but I was still unclear about it. Plus it was the first time I had ever used blockchain so I was trying to understand how it worked. I assumed it would be publicly viewable on blockchain at first than I realized it wasn't, so i asked him If he needed a copy and that was his response. Afterwards, I looked at the bounty steps and it hit me that in bold letters it instructs me NOT to submit to martin directly. So that's where I got confused.

When I started to discuss exchanging ID vs a Conviction, he kind of implied that I would not actually need a conviction saying:

"If you can PROVE identity and you have info, you will get the full bounty, if you dont have anything, you dont get anything"
So I'm not sure if I'm just misunderstanding our dialogue or what...but I'm not clear on it.

I have a chain of evidence that was obtained legally.
I could literally type out the steps I took in acquiring this information, and it could be mirrored and verified.
I can prove his other online identities too and even connect those names to other crimes he did under different names.
Which all tie back to his real life identity. All obtained legally.

I've also spoken to a couple Attorneys about this situation to get a better understanding of all the limitations and possibilities.
(I'm am lucky to have a few close friends in my circle)

To approach this hacker internationally from the get-go will only result frustration and walls in terms of prosecution and conviction. Although, his case would be helped by getting this hacker for a crime he committed in the country he lives first - than shifting over to Europe.

Even if Martin video screen capped hacker confessing in video on skype - he would most likely never get a conviction internationally because the crime is relatively minimal and he would most likely have to rely on the American police to find a way to convict him for something here. Under those circumstances, at most, Hacker would just have to avoid traveling to Bialos home country to avoid those charges.

TBH, this whole case would hold more weight if a ransom had actually been paid. Not paying the ransom actually minimized the damage done to him as the victim, and minimized the actual criminal act which was committed. This minimizes the potential for law enforcement to see value in pursing the case internationally. The end results in Martin paying a drastically higher amount of bitcoin than he would have been victimized for, while dramatically decreasing the probability of his desired end results. Instead, he could have paid the smaller amount of ransom one time and in turn increased the probability to effectively pursue the crime. He could have offered the difference amount in bounty afterwards for the tips.

[I'm not in any way suggesting to pay out ransoms to hackers, I'm just repeating what was explained to me in context of the situation - and chances are I would have done the same thing refusing to pay the ransom]


SO!  One thing I could potentially do is work from inside the boundaries of the US and attempt to have him arrested for unrelated crimes he participated in while in using the other alts. Once he is actually arrested and in custody for the other crimes it will verify that I have the correct person. This is because I can prove a link between those other alts and him here as dd4bc.

At that point, I can share my tip publicly and the proof linking this criminal who was arrested for "unrelated crimes" to "dd4bc" hacker (and the proof of existence I uploaded to blockchain previously). At this point, I can choose to reveal to Martin the link between this "unrelated case" and his own hacker...he can verify the legitimacy of my information - and be free to use it for his own case and hopefully pay out a bounty maybe. 

The US would also be more sympathetic to his case at this point because they would have already caught the hacker for similar crimes here.

This is the best I can come up with at this point.
If Martin wants the ID sooner rather than later - and without the conviction requirement,
he already knows that I'd be willing to work with him on a safe exchange for a lesser reward.
I just don't think he's interested in it, nor have I been able to think of a legit way for it to go down.

One extra thing I just noticed:
Before I continue, I just suddenly realized something. God I'm so sleep deprived here.
The bounty is in third party escrow - but the escrow is Roger Ver. Martin told me that the 100btc bounty was a combined reward from both Roger and Martin in my PM here. But they are actually listed seperatly on the bitcoinbounty page - so that confuses me. His is listed for 37btc, while Martins is listed for 100btc. Earlier, I had asked martin about the two bounties and Martin said to me via PM "No, it is one bounty. Roger Ver is doing the escrow for our bounty and acts as referee and also guarantuees that we have the coins for the bounty etc etc." - I stand here a little confused with that too atop of everything else above.
Also a little unclear why Roger Ver would be escrowing his own bounty. Am I misunderstanding this?

There is a major problem with these bounties, and it is that in order for the bounty to be paid out the person needs to be convicted.

In most developed countries, there needs to be a clear chain of evidence in order to secure a conviction, essentially, law enforcement need to prove that all of the evidence was obtained legally and through the proper channels. It's quite likely any evidence obtained by a bounty hunter would be inadmissable as it would be difficult for LE to prove all of it was obtained legally, and for that reason its highly unlikely prosecutors would move ahead on a case like this.

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree

It would be much better if the bounty was paid for providing the identity of the person along with proof that is acceptable enough for the escrower.

Follow up:

we contacted our server farm and after short time they enabled their anti-DDOS filter.

Now our services are up and running!

Hi, same here, target: ruggedinbox.com

Original text:

Hi, we just received this message:

You are going under DDoS attack unless you pay me 1 BTC in next 30 minutes to 1MRFFgSexGzyWgbLEhX1Bi3YXR6FaaebV8

Do not ignore me, as it will just increase the price. Smiley

 

Once you pay me you are free from me for lifetime of your site.

If you think that I'm bluffing, Google my name. Smiley


Thank you.


(sender: [email protected])

Our answer:
this is a volunteer based project, which provides an anonymous, Tor friendly email service, 100% free and ad free.
You may want to direct your energies somewhere else, since you'll not see a penny from us.

Have you ever looked into the site? ;-)

Bitalo is the most secure bitcoin service with most secure technlogy fully implemented. We use multi-signature wallets where private keys are fully encrypted on user-side and coins are fully protected by backup tansactions so that you get the coins out, even when the site is completely offline. On top of that coins are covered up to 50.000 EUR for losses. As to mandatory two-factor authentication you can even setup a wallet on a fully compromised computer and you will never lose a single coin.

But, as we said multiple times, the site is not finished yet, we will release the full User interface and the various services (product market, airbnb module etc) only end of the year.

Got you

Depending on the jurisdiction, there might be a more thorough response if a citizen/resident contacts law enforcement. Do you feel comfortable disclosing the jurisdiction of DD4BC privately?

I've only uploaded info to blockchain. I have not even sent it to Martin yet.

I asked him if he would be willing to negotiate on lowering bounty for the actual ID...instead of using the conviction as the end determinant of collecting the bounty. So many factors influence that outcome, many beyond my control and his - even with a correct ID the criminal process cant guarantee a conviction, especially internationally. He had reservations about this type of negotiation, and I understand them completely.

I think my only option here really is to contact law enforcement myself and provide them with the same info i uploaded to blockchain; and hope that the end results in the required conviction for Martin. Martin has given me info on the LE entity he originally reported to.


If someone really finds you?
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

wait hold on....


LOLOLLOOOLLLLLOOOOOOOL

And here comes the admin of ponzi scheme "interested in justice".

I have a better idea: By the end of 2015 (even before) you will stop paying your members, so with 10 BTC (of your members money) let's create another bounty - to find you.

He would have to pay it if somebody really finds me, but he knew from the beginning that it will not happen, so he created this bounty just to get some publicity for his useless site without members. I hope that he got a few from all those articles on the web.

We'll contribute 10 BTC to this bounty.

Should we send it to 1MmoevQactzxkTLvsgrKccZcHUiXLHqLXR ?

In the event that the bounty is not claimed in by the end of 2015, please donate the BTC to a Bitcoin accepting charity.

@Snitch: Can you forward us ([email protected]) what you have found? We might be able to 'get more' out of it Your bounty is safe and we won't claim anything, we're interested in justice.

Interested in following this

I've already expressed this to Martin earlier. You can spoof an IP but you can't spoof stupid.

@dd4bc, I'm pretty sure you are wrong and that he will pay the bounty. If he didn't, his reputation would be completely ruined and that would defeat the original purpose of his bounty. If he didn't want to protect his entity and reputation, he would not give a rats ass about you, nor care to pay someone else to find you.

You are a little cocky dd4bc, as if you thought of yourself to be some type of invisible virtual god, or something. Weird.

Indeed I agree with DD4BC, the bounty will probably never have to be paid, since DD4BC has probably really no friends to talk with,
BUT, and that is our hope, in some other scenario he told a "friend" about his super cool action and the "friend" can now decide if his friendship to cover up a petty criminal is worth 100 BTC ;-)