@A.Zimmerer
Don't do it = Don't get your coins
As far as i understood they require you to send your docs before you can withdraw. FIAT or coins doesn't matter
If you have only coins you can try sending a fake ID i guess, but how can you get a fake ID??
Topic: BTC-e hacked ?? - page 49. (Read 199718 times)
It's good for us, more of you don't verify, process will go faster 
I don't care for fbi, I'm in Serbia (NOT Siberia in Russia, but Serbia - central Europe. I always get same answer when traveling - oh Siberia, it is cold there
)
I don't care for fbi, I'm in Serbia (NOT Siberia in Russia, but Serbia - central Europe. I always get same answer when traveling - oh Siberia, it is cold there
) It doesn't matter what they were doing in May 2017. The money laundering charges stem from 2012, and the unlicensed MSB charge likely stems from inception of the exchange.
I believe they are trying to salvage funds by deterring some people from making a claim on their funds. I can't think of any other rational explanation. The new exchange refunding balances tied to BTC-E (along with the token scheme) will clearly tie them to the original exchange. Mandatory KYC at this point (especially with no fiat processing) doesn't further their compliance efforts; they are already tainted. It's just to scare people away from asking for refunds.
They clearly stated "ALL users need to verify" and @illinest is right.
There is no fiat processing involved.
You will get coins + token and you don't need to verify
for them in other exchanges who are following AML laws
like Kraken, Bittrex, GDAX, etc. There is no reason at this
point to send over high resolution scans of my personal documents
to criminals. This is a big security risk for all customers.
So to speak, the child has already fallen down the well.
At this point KYC/AML laws are BTC-E's and all it's
employees smallest problem. They are tainted as money
launders and now will be hunted and prosecuted.
The US law is very clear about this matter, especially if
it comes to business partners, and customers:
Participation in any capacity such as an accomplice, assistant
or instigator in an offence established in accordance with
this Convention.
All participating in the infringement or attempted infringement,
should be declared responsible, according to the particular
country's internal law, as accomplices or instigators.
Meaning if you are doing business with BTC-E or what ever they
call themselves now will be liable to prosecution.
That applies particularly to the new "investor company".
If they strictly follow KYC/AML laws and do business with
BTC-E they break the law and would be a criminal offence.
Conclusion: The whole thing looks fishy.
Bees that have honey in their mouths have stings in their tails.
Don't do it. You have been warned!
maybe they can use other exchanges if it would take such a long time. A lot of countries accept this also between banks. So if you are verified within e.g. bitstamp or Polo (offcourse you need to be at verified level) and you send 0.00x coin to the new BTC-e then in a way you are verified and verifiable by law if they would have a case to check. In that case you would also stay anonymous for the new BTC-e.
Or maybe we should invent/use an ident blockchain for that. Sending out ID photos seem somewhat outdated in these days.
Or maybe we should invent/use an ident blockchain for that. Sending out ID photos seem somewhat outdated in these days.
What's the purpose of acting like a 12 year old, they will not read that 
As I understand, they have (or had) more then one million users? If they verify 1000 per day (which is impossible) it will take almost 3 years
As I understand, they have (or had) more then one million users? If they verify 1000 per day (which is impossible) it will take almost 3 years
GIVE BACK 100% OF ME COINS, I DO NOT NEED YOUR SHITTY TOKENS. I AM A FAIR USER, NOT A FOOKING CRIMINAL, I AM NOT GON PAY FOR SOME FOOKING CRIMINAL LOSSESS! FOOK UR SOCIALISED LOSSES PLAN, I AM ANTI-SOCIAL, I CARE ONLY ABOUT ME COINS. GIVE DEM BACK RIGHT NOW U FOOKING COW TIT SOOKING HORES!!!!!!!1!!
WHERE ARE MY COINS FUCKING BASTARDS!!!!
It is not exactly a fact that they will need an ID verification in case of the 55% withdrawal.
The verification would only be if that suspicious "investor company" (probably btce again on another mule) takes over, which is, in their words, bound to KYC/AML laws.
However, even though it says "all users need to verfiy" it is not entirely clear if they mean the btce token holders or the first 55% withdraws.
Indeed it looks really weird at this point.
The verification would only be if that suspicious "investor company" (probably btce again on another mule) takes over, which is, in their words, bound to KYC/AML laws.
However, even though it says "all users need to verfiy" it is not entirely clear if they mean the btce token holders or the first 55% withdraws.
Indeed it looks really weird at this point.
It took me almost 1 month to get fully verified on bitstamp while they had more employees than btc-e and they didn't have to verify all users at once.
How much will take btc-e to verify all users? At least 1 year!
In this time fbi will follow crypto trace and will shut down the new exchange.The only ones that will get their coins will be btc-e owners and few lucky users.
Why would they choose to verify all users when for people that do not use fiat and for people that have small amounts of cash verification is not needed to stay legal?
It is not exactly a fact that they will need an ID verification in case of the 55% withdrawal.
The verification would only be if that suspicious "investor company" (probably btce again on another mule) takes over, which is, in their words, bound to KYC/AML laws.
However, even though it says "all users need to verfiy" it is not entirely clear if they mean the btce token holders or the first 55% withdraws.
Indeed it looks really weird at this point.
The verification would only be if that suspicious "investor company" (probably btce again on another mule) takes over, which is, in their words, bound to KYC/AML laws.
However, even though it says "all users need to verfiy" it is not entirely clear if they mean the btce token holders or the first 55% withdraws.
Indeed it looks really weird at this point.
I absolutely agree with you @figmentofmyass
Finally someone asking the right questions!
Verification doesn't make sense at this point of
time and with a busted exchange like BTC-E
this is a security risk for every customer.
BTC-E didn't care 7 years about any AML
laws now they get busted and want to verifiy
every customer. People wake up this is fishy!
Not true, BTC-e introduced verification on May 30th. 2017.
Here is a copy of the announcement.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170603055634/https://btc-e.com/news/241
One of the reasons was:
Quote
In the near future verified users will be able to deposit via such popular payment systems as WebMoney, Visa/MasterCard, China UnionPay, Payza.
So obviously they were interested in trying to comply with AML laws.
It doesn't matter what they were doing in May 2017. The money laundering charges stem from 2012, and the unlicensed MSB charge likely stems from inception of the exchange.
I believe they are trying to salvage funds by deterring some people from making a claim on their funds. I can't think of any other rational explanation. The new exchange refunding balances tied to BTC-E (along with the token scheme) will clearly tie them to the original exchange. Mandatory KYC at this point (especially with no fiat processing) doesn't further their compliance efforts; they are already tainted. It's just to scare people away from asking for refunds.
I really don't like the ID requirements. They should allow people to withdraw without ID imo. I've seen the argument here that ID requirements will result in people not claiming their funds. Maybe some small fish, but let's be real, criminals with serious money will simply submit fake or stolen docs.
I absolutely agree with you @figmentofmyass
Finally someone asking the right questions!
Verification doesn't make sense at this point of
time and with a busted exchange like BTC-E
this is a security risk for every customer.
BTC-E didn't care 7 years about any AML
laws now they get busted and want to verifiy
every customer. People wake up this is fishy!
Not true, BTC-e introduced verification on May 30th. 2017.
Here is a copy of the announcement.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170603055634/https://btc-e.com/news/241
One of the reasons was:
Quote
In the near future verified users will be able to deposit via such popular payment systems as WebMoney, Visa/MasterCard, China UnionPay, Payza.
So obviously they were interested in trying to comply with AML laws.
Well guys, looks like its all turning out well. All the haters and ghoulish gloaters have been proved wrong and are now eating shit. All that remains to resolve is if there will be a trollbox amnesty
well, there is the small matter of sending ID docs to the exchange. not a fan and certainly not the btc-e i know. i hope it's not a honeypot. i'm not particularly fond of sending my docs to them at this point. it's not that i'm worried about identity theft, as some have pointed to..... it's that i think those servers might get seized again someday and i don't want my docs on them. seems like non-US citizens are in a better position in that respect, if you know what i mean.....
I absolutely agree with you @figmentofmyass
Finally someone asking the right questions!
Verification doesn't make sense at this point of
time and with a busted exchange like BTC-E
this is a security risk for every customer.
BTC-E didn't care 7 years about any AML
laws now they get busted and want to verifiy
every customer. People wake up this is fishy!
BTC-E and all it's employees are wanted fugitives and
hunted by FBI criminal division.
Why would I send over high resolutions scans of my personal
documents to criminals? (Yes, yes I know they
are not criminals but for the US government
and all their allies they are)
So again, I ask why send over personal documents
to criminals? Makes no sense to me and I can only
discourage everybody doing this! Especially if
you are from US!
I can guarantee you the FBI will hunt them (whatever they call themselves) down
and bust their servers. But this time with ALL your
documents tied to your accounts and you as accomplice!
Meaning you will be liable to prosecution. The fact that
BTC-E will change their name doesn't change anything
and doesn't matter at all.
People wake up and don't do it!
Well guys, looks like its all turning out well. All the haters and ghoulish gloaters have been proved wrong and are now eating shit. All that remains to resolve is if there will be a trollbox amnesty
Things definitely look a lot brighter, but as always - actions speak louder than words. Till that time, it wouldn't hurt to remain conservative regarding a good end in this whole drama situation. I however don't like the fact that in order to gain the funds back, one needs to 'fully' verify himself. In normal circumstances it wouldn't be all that bad, but the thing is that this information might end up in the hands of a bunch of criminals, and the authorities at the same time. In that regard, I have to figure out something. I am definitely not going to verify there with my own information, so I think I will pay someone else to use his ID details to complete the verification. That being said, it's indeed pathetic how certain idiots here make fun out of the losses of innocent people. But after all, this is bitcointalk - things like that can be expected since weak minded people, trolls, fud spreaders, shills, etc, account for the majority of this forum.
Well guys, looks like its all turning out well. All the haters and ghoulish gloaters have been proved wrong and are now eating shit. All that remains to resolve is if there will be a trollbox amnesty
well, there is the small matter of sending ID docs to the exchange. not a fan and certainly not the btc-e i know. i hope it's not a honeypot. i'm not particularly fond of sending my docs to them at this point. it's not that i'm worried about identity theft, as some have pointed to..... it's that i think those servers might get seized again someday and i don't want my docs on them. seems like non-US citizens are in a better position in that respect, if you know what i mean.....
Well guys, looks like its all turning out well. All the haters and ghoulish gloaters have been proved wrong and are now eating shit. All that remains to resolve is if there will be a trollbox amnesty
First we had the people talking about btce will never return and how happy they are about that, now we have the people held coins do not want to share the losses of the FBI heist with fiat holders.
I want to discuss it in detail, but I doubt it will help, so here in short terms:
FUCK YOU.
I want to discuss it in detail, but I doubt it will help, so here in short terms:
FUCK YOU.
"From the BTC-e team we officially inform that all the funds that were in the reserve fund (including all our income) were transferred to pay off the debts."
what is this reserve fund, and who are they paying debts to, do they mean to us the users...?
what is this reserve fund, and who are they paying debts to, do they mean to us the users...?
I think they are talking about reconciling the balance sheets / transferring the assets to this supposed investment company. They are insolvent with regard to customer balances due to frozen bank accounts (and possibly some seized crypto). I believe they are saying that their reserves (past profits) are being used to improve the balance sheets.
I think those who sleep in fiat, should bare the loss of having their funds frozen, those who had coins that should have been or were on encrypted storage should not have to bear fiat holders choices
What if you were holding all bitcoin, and they had 45% of their bitcoins hacked? Would you prefer that they treat customers equally, or debit your account for 45% of the bitcoins? Exchange hacks are much more common than seizures, too.
Where does this "identity theft" gossip come from?
It's probably reference to the indictment, which said that BTC-e was used as a base for laundering the proceeds of e.g. tax return identity theft (something to that effect). That's why the IRS criminal division was involved. I don't think there's any evidence that the exchange itself engaged in identity theft. I imagine the KYC is a way to deter some people from claiming funds. It's shady, but understandable.
I wouldn't want to send them my documents. Not because I think they would necessarily sell them or steal my identity, but because I don't think I want my documents on their servers when they are seized again by the FBI.
What investment company will want to associate their name to BTC-E right now? There is no investor! The new company will be registered on some homeless guy name and total assets will be 100$.
If they are innocent and they will fight in court of law for justice why do they drop BTC-E brand for another one?
They need us to wash their dirty money and we will not only help them wash their money but we will also pay 45% of our money for this.
Anonymous fugitive owners, accused of money laundering and identity theft asking for people personal documents seems legit.
If they are innocent and they will fight in court of law for justice why do they drop BTC-E brand for another one?
They need us to wash their dirty money and we will not only help them wash their money but we will also pay 45% of our money for this.
Anonymous fugitive owners, accused of money laundering and identity theft asking for people personal documents seems legit.
Where does this "identity theft" gossip come from?
Jump to: