BTC-e hacked ?? - page 47. | Bitcointalksearch.org

stingray454

member

Activity: 86

Merit: 10

Quote from: figmentofmyass on August 11, 2017, 02:28:11 AM

but yes, they served US customers. no IP block, no checkbox to confirm residency and of course no actual KYC. so that's the reasoning used by law enforcement. that's what the unlicensed MSB charge is all about.

Not to mention their servers were located in a US datacenter, which means they can quite easily demand to seize the hardware. Not the brightest idea to host it there to be honest.

figmentofmyass

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1483

Quote from: Karpeles on August 11, 2017, 01:13:03 AM

By the way, I think they said about an update by the end of this week( I think Friday is the end of week already, don't?). So anything new?

i guess you missed this. take a seat and grab some popcorn. from socialized losses to ICOs to vague reference to KYC, this update's got it all: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/update5-09082017-2075551

Quote from: cryptomole on August 11, 2017, 02:16:44 AM

Not sure why the US consider they have jurisdiction - maybe because some of the customers or wire transfers were from US? Or they traded $?

well in general, the US government does whatever it wants. whether that's raiding whoever it wants anywhere in the world and pocketing all their money, or invading other countries and installing dictators.

but yes, they served US customers. no IP block, no checkbox to confirm residency and of course no actual KYC. so that's the reasoning used by law enforcement. that's what the unlicensed MSB charge is all about.

Error 522

full member

Activity: 216

Merit: 100

But if they ban the stupid Americans from trading, how will we make easy money? Grin

cryptomole

newbie

Activity: 53

Merit: 0

Quote from: erk on August 11, 2017, 12:14:39 AM

Do you know the money service licensing requirements of the country BTC-e was operating in?

They say there operation was governed by Cyprus law, I think the data centre was in Bulgaria and it was run by Russians

Not sure why the US consider they have jurisdiction - maybe because some of the customers or wire transfers were from US? Or they traded $?

erk

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 500

Quote from: Karpeles on August 11, 2017, 01:13:03 AM

Quote from: erk on August 11, 2017, 12:14:39 AM

Quote from: bananax on August 11, 2017, 12:12:09 AM

Huh? The charge BTCE had was operating a money service without a license.

Do you know the money service licensing requirements of the country BTC-e was operating in?

Does it matter? The United States consider the whole world as its jurisdiction, if it is convenient for them.

What you just described is called tyranny, and caused the collapse of countless civilizations over the centuries.

This is one of the main reasons crypto exists.

Karpeles

legendary

Activity: 1162

Merit: 1000

Quote from: erk on August 11, 2017, 12:14:39 AM

Quote from: bananax on August 11, 2017, 12:12:09 AM

Huh? The charge BTCE had was operating a money service without a license.

Do you know the money service licensing requirements of the country BTC-e was operating in?

Does it matter? The United States consider the whole world as its jurisdiction, if it is convenient for them.

By the way, I think they said about an update by the end of this week( I think Friday is the end of week already, don't?). So anything new?

illyiller

hero member

Activity: 697

Merit: 520

Quote from: bananax on August 11, 2017, 12:12:09 AM

Quote from: illyiller on August 10, 2017, 11:42:43 PM

Quote from: gnurta on August 10, 2017, 11:15:16 PM

I verified my btc-e account via xbtce a month ago. So they already have my ID documents. For me, it doesn't hurt anymore to re-verify with them again.

There might be a difference now that charges were unsealed against them. It's unlikely (certainly for small fish), but given that the indictment alleges that the exchange itself is a criminal money laundering operation, the federal authorities can argue that the money you are withdrawing constitutes criminal proceeds. I'm sure they could seize it with civil forfeiture, if they can ever get their hands on it. I doubt they'd charge regular customers with conspiracy to launder money, but I also wouldn't want to be caught with the proceeds and my passport linked to the transactions via the exchange's database.

That's the thing here.... it's one thing to relaunch an altcoin exchange safely outside of the US sphere of influence. But that doesn't require documents. There is some speculation on the Russian forum about what exactly "verification" means. Some think it means tiered verification like other altcoin exchanges (e.g. name, address, phone number to enable withdrawals or something).

Huh? The charge BTCE had was operating a money service without a license.

There were two charges. 1) Operating a money services business without a license. 2) Conspiracy to commit money laundering.

There were additionally a bunch of other money laundering charges filed against Alexander Vinnik, supposed owner or admin of the exchange. He is getting charged with one count for each bitcoin transfer made into BTC-e's wallets, from the looks of it. They are just getting a blanket conspiracy charge.

If this were only about operating unlicensed, I'd be even more worried about Poloniex and Bitfinex right now.

larkinvain

member

Activity: 1120

Merit: 13

FBI Says ISIS Used eBay to Send Terror Cash to U.S.
Affidavit alleges American citizen Mohamed Elshinawy was part of a global network stretching from Britain to Bangladesh

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/islamic-state-ebay-funnel-money-u-s-fbi-article-1.3401556

So will the FBI be raiding the offices of eBay as well?

erk

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 500

Quote from: bananax on August 11, 2017, 12:12:09 AM

Huh? The charge BTCE had was operating a money service without a license.

Do you know the money service licensing requirements of the country BTC-e was operating in?

bananax

newbie

Activity: 22

Merit: 0

Quote from: illyiller on August 10, 2017, 11:42:43 PM

Quote from: gnurta on August 10, 2017, 11:15:16 PM

I verified my btc-e account via xbtce a month ago. So they already have my ID documents. For me, it doesn't hurt anymore to re-verify with them again.

There might be a difference now that charges were unsealed against them. It's unlikely (certainly for small fish), but given that the indictment alleges that the exchange itself is a criminal money laundering operation, the federal authorities can argue that the money you are withdrawing constitutes criminal proceeds. I'm sure they could seize it with civil forfeiture, if they can ever get their hands on it. I doubt they'd charge regular customers with conspiracy to launder money, but I also wouldn't want to be caught with the proceeds and my passport linked to the transactions via the exchange's database.

That's the thing here.... it's one thing to relaunch an altcoin exchange safely outside of the US sphere of influence. But that doesn't require documents. There is some speculation on the Russian forum about what exactly "verification" means. Some think it means tiered verification like other altcoin exchanges (e.g. name, address, phone number to enable withdrawals or something).

Huh? The charge BTCE had was operating a money service without a license.

illyiller

hero member

Activity: 697

Merit: 520

Quote from: gnurta on August 10, 2017, 11:15:16 PM

I verified my btc-e account via xbtce a month ago. So they already have my ID documents. For me, it doesn't hurt anymore to re-verify with them again.

There might be a difference now that charges were unsealed against them. It's unlikely (certainly for small fish), but given that the indictment alleges that the exchange itself is a criminal money laundering operation, the federal authorities can argue that the money you are withdrawing constitutes criminal proceeds. I'm sure they could seize it with civil forfeiture, if they can ever get their hands on it. I doubt they'd charge regular customers with conspiracy to launder money, but I also wouldn't want to be caught with the proceeds and my passport linked to the transactions via the exchange's database.

That's the thing here.... it's one thing to relaunch an altcoin exchange safely outside of the US sphere of influence. But that doesn't require documents. There is some speculation on the Russian forum about what exactly "verification" means. Some think it means tiered verification like other altcoin exchanges (e.g. name, address, phone number to enable withdrawals or something).

gnurta

member

Activity: 76

Merit: 10

I verified my btc-e account via xbtce a month ago. So they already have my ID documents. For me, it doesn't hurt anymore to re-verify with them again.

figmentofmyass

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1483

Quote from: bj9k on August 10, 2017, 07:14:45 PM

I almost forgot about BTC-e Cheesy

So what you guys think who's going to be new mysterious investor: xbtce, fxopen, exmo or ________ ?

exmo has some btc-e domains redirecting to it, but i think they are just trying to profit from btc-e's downfall. xbtce is purging US customers and distancing itself from btc-e, so that seems unlikely. fxopen is too reputable by now to get involved. really, any existing service shouldn't touch btc-e from an investment perspective. it makes no sense to touch tainted assets, unless you get blessing from the US government (like pokerstars did in paying back their own and full tilt's customers). if it happens, it'll be a new site that gets launched, but it'll be the same owners behind it.

jojo69

legendary

Activity: 3374

Merit: 4738

diamond-handed zealot

Quote from: bj9k on August 10, 2017, 07:14:45 PM

I almost forgot about BTC-e Cheesy

So what you guys think who's going to be new mysterious investor: xbtce, fxopen, exmo or ________ ?

Goat

bj9k

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

I almost forgot about BTC-e Cheesy

So what you guys think who's going to be new mysterious investor: xbtce, fxopen, exmo or ________ ?

jubalix

legendary

Activity: 2632

Merit: 1023

only in crypto could it get this confusing who has what and is doing what this fast .... I mean most organisations get FBI'd then end off, but whole new layers of into the looking glass is going on here ....

honey pots
ICO's
legal actions
etc etc

i suspect that if any cold wallets are seized and coins available a good portion of it goes to the first agent to be able to do this I mean how would you stop them really?

In fact I am sure this is a personal enrichment scheme the alphabet soup panoply of abc agencies.

Some agent/officer high enough up figures they can order a bust and be first on the scene or one of thier more loyeal agents to get the coins (maybe they split the profits) and then they quietly send themselves the coins.

In this case one can just imagine the discussion that happened over a Boston Boys dinner time.

figmentofmyass

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1483

Quote from: vapourminer on August 10, 2017, 03:02:50 PM

also, this database backup btc-e still has and will use for bringing the exchange back up.. how old is it. hours, days, weeks old?. what about trades/deposits/withdrawals that happened between when the live servers were seized and the last db backup? they ceast to exist? limbo maybe? how would one prove a deposit was made on the live (now seized) database that is not reflected in the (possible hours/days old) backup as btc-e backups will not show that?

maybe they did real time backups?

no skin in this game, just curious.

nobody knows the details at this point. i suspect that the seized servers dumped to remote servers, but how often is anyone's guess. i would think every 2-6 hours, not more, but it's a complete guess. the deposit issue you mention is a problem if a user generated a new deposit address after the last server dump and before the seizure. but an old deposit address would already be linked to your account (btc-e allowed address re-use). but for all we know, maybe back-ups were in real-time.

MAbtc

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 508

Quote from: aaron25177 on August 10, 2017, 09:40:37 AM

Any chance their "verification" is just simply to validate active accounts? If the account doesnt get verified after a period of time, they re-claim/re-distribute any funds to cover losses?

I think there's a good chance this is why verification would be enforced. But that doesn't address the fundamental problem: who wants to send their ID to this exchange now and be linked to funds that the US government considers to be illicit proceeds? KYC in this situation raises the odds of a honeypot by a good percentage, too.

vapourminer

legendary

Activity: 4354

Merit: 3614

what is this "brake pedal" you speak of?

this whole thing seems odd.. seems criminals would have left no assets on btc-e, they would deposit, withdraw and be done with it. they would not leave coins/money on the site to trade (i wouldnt think so anyway). isnt the object is to take the money and run as fast as possible?

so the bulk of the money/coin that was seized may belong to legit (non criminal) people. as they would be the ones leaving assets in for trading. maybe some money that was in the process of being laundered at that exact moment would be seized too, but only btc-e (or LE) would know that amount.

so seems the bulk of the money/coins could belong to honest people.

but hey maybe im wrong, guess i dont have the criminal mentality.

also, this database backup btc-e still has and will use for bringing the exchange back up.. how old is it. hours, days, weeks old?. what about trades/deposits/withdrawals that happened between when the live servers were seized and the last db backup? they ceast to exist? limbo maybe? how would one prove a deposit was made on the live (now seized) database that is not reflected in the (possible hours/days old) backup as btc-e backups will not show that?

maybe they did real time backups?

no skin in this game, just curious.

TheKoziTwo

legendary

Activity: 1552

Merit: 1047

Quote from: A.Zimmerer on August 10, 2017, 02:02:11 PM

So, here is how things will turn out (most likely) The pyramid scheme will be like this:[/size]
Since everybody has to verify (long proccess). Nobody will be able to dump tokens at start. So BTC-E will have time to dump their own BTE assets first. Token soon will be worth a fraction of 1$. Soon many verified user will dump their tokens to get at least some btc back. Since BTC-E dumped first they can rebuy coins later at a fraction of 1$ and give them to the new verified users way cheaper Wink

...at one point when most of the users dumped their tokens btc-e can rebuy all coins cheap and pump it back to 1$.

Business as usual until G.I. Joe shows up and busts them again. This time with all the accounts linked to your personal or "faked" docs whatever...

The whole thing looks fishy.

This makes no sense. First of all BTC-E is not getting any BTE tokens to dump, it's their users who get BTE token. Secondly there won't be anything to dump "into". There will be no buyers from the beginning. Third, "pumping it to $1" would be stupidity of the most insane degree as btc-e clearly stated that they will buy BTE tokens at the lowest market price back. Pumping it would only be a disservice in that sense as they would need to pay more to settle debt, BTC-E wants, if anything, the price to be as low as possible to have to pay less for the debt.

Topic: BTC-e hacked ?? - page 47. (Read 199770 times)