Topic: building a crypto criminal database - page 4. (Read 977 times)
I don't think it is possible to commit any crime without proof. Those who have been engaged in this line must have a good knowledge about it. And they can catch them by looking at the invisible footprints online if they want. The government of every country should identify cyber criminals and bring them under the law and punish them.
I guess it's just a criminal database with the filter of crypto related cyber crimes 
Well it's not bad if someone is trying to maintain a databse just for crypto related cryber crimes but I don't know what benefits will it bring to the crypto community. All I can think of right now is that once a criminal is identified for crypto crime and if the same person tries to do a crypto crime again then he will be easily identified for the crime. Though it won't benefit much, it is definitely a good step for crypto crimes taking place in the crypto community.
Well it's not bad if someone is trying to maintain a databse just for crypto related cryber crimes but I don't know what benefits will it bring to the crypto community. All I can think of right now is that once a criminal is identified for crypto crime and if the same person tries to do a crypto crime again then he will be easily identified for the crime. Though it won't benefit much, it is definitely a good step for crypto crimes taking place in the crypto community.
It only looks like the "let's find a way to identify BTC users" plot thickens every day.
Unfortunately, this is what the current government policy on crypto will lead to. This is unavoidable. 
Scamming is taking place every day using cryptocurrency as a tool. It is not going to be completely eradicated in any way. If a government wants to stop scams for its country, it must take strong action. The first step is to identify the crypto criminals. The way the South Korean company is looking for cyber criminals. Actually a good move.
Would they unlock your coins after you contact their support and try to explain the situation? Probably no, knowing how bad the customer support of exchanges usually is.
Not unless you could provide solid proof that you sold or traded the coins to another party, which would be very hard to come by and would require handing over some ridiculously invasive KYC and personal information. And even then, the chances would be slim.If all mixers has the integrity to serve their clients honestly, they must use the database to block and freeze a scammer addresses.
I can't disagree with this any more strongly. The day a mixer starts trying to identify me, look me up on a blacklist, and generally try to monitor how I use my own money, is the day I stop using that mixer and call them out for being a scam.I am still struggling to understand why people who are supposed to be bitcoin advocates are talking about handing control over to a centralized third party. This is the complete antithesis of bitcoin. If you want to use a currency that can be arbitrarily frozen or seized, then there are hundreds of fiat currencies and thousands of centralized shitcoins you can choose from. Keep that nonsense away from bitcoin.
There's no way they'll actually block wallets because if even possible that would require the consensus and serious changes. What they can do is make a database of Bitcoin addresses that are known to belong to scammers and make sure that, say, exchanges don't allow deposits from these addresses. I think this would be an okay move, and it doesn't even mean that the identities of many people will be revealed. It will just be a kind of blacklist for addresses. However, I am not sure how efficient this solution is because scammers can use mixers to ensure that their money is not traced. So then the authorities should make mixers check through the database as well, but all this is resourceful and there will still be ways of getting around it. And yeah, some people might suffer from the system without actually being scammers. So there's more bad in this than good.
A centralized data base which allows all exchanges, mixers, and other trading platforms/services to automatically freeze a suspicious addresses is the most possible solution to this.
If the crypto enthusiast won't work to get rid or at least track these activities, I'm afraid that the governments will be the one to take actions to this since Bitcoin has been tagged into so many criminal activities in the digital world.
Now, I understand how so many of us are concerned about the mixers as the most useful tool for scammers to ran away without getting tracked. If all mixers has the integrity to serve their clients honestly, they must use the database to block and freeze a scammer addresses.
I honestly don't know how I feel about this. While I obviously do want these cybercriminals to be found and arrested, I have a bad feeling whenever I see the words "Bitcoin" and "tracking" in the same sentence. It only looks like the "let's find a way to identify BTC users" plot thickens every day.
As others have told me in a previous thread of mine about mixers, at one point we will most likely all own Bitcoins that came from addresses that have been used in criminal activity or in mixers. So are we going to flag all these addresses? How do you censor a censorship-free system?
There's no way they'll actually block wallets because if even possible that would require the consensus and serious changes. What they can do is make a database of Bitcoin addresses that are known to belong to scammers and make sure that, say, exchanges don't allow deposits from these addresses. I think this would be an okay move, and it doesn't even mean that the identities of many people will be revealed. It will just be a kind of blacklist for addresses. However, I am not sure how efficient this solution is because scammers can use mixers to ensure that their money is not traced. So then the authorities should make mixers check through the database as well, but all this is resourceful and there will still be ways of getting around it. And yeah, some people might suffer from the system without actually being scammers. So there's more bad in this than good. Quote
Hyungwoo Kim, CEO of Uppsala Security explained how domestic South Korean money laundering and cyber crime experts still roam free in the country using cryptocurrency.
(..)
Second, he explained that as he helped law enforcement discover the identities of some of the nth-room degenerates through their ETH, BTC, and Monero transactions, (..)
Kim made a straightforward plea to the audience that as cases of cyber crimes via cryptocurrency proliferate and are exposed, countermeasures against them should evolve. (..) His suggestion was to identify criminal wallets and flag them so that they cannot be used in the future.
Fortunately for law enforcement, cryptocurrency cyber crimes are easy to track.
Reading through the lines, my previous statement is further confirmed. So how are we going to flag criminal wallets so that they cannot be used in the future? Because that's censorship, and Bitcoin is a censorship-free cryptocurrency.(..)
Second, he explained that as he helped law enforcement discover the identities of some of the nth-room degenerates through their ETH, BTC, and Monero transactions, (..)
Kim made a straightforward plea to the audience that as cases of cyber crimes via cryptocurrency proliferate and are exposed, countermeasures against them should evolve. (..) His suggestion was to identify criminal wallets and flag them so that they cannot be used in the future.
Fortunately for law enforcement, cryptocurrency cyber crimes are easy to track.
As others have told me in a previous thread of mine about mixers, at one point we will most likely all own Bitcoins that came from addresses that have been used in criminal activity or in mixers. So are we going to flag all these addresses? How do you censor a censorship-free system?
Quote
On that, he noted that crowdsourcing is one of the main ways that these crimes are being committed these days. His suggestion was to identify criminal wallets and flag them so that they cannot be used in the future.
What this means that in the future people will get their coins frozen when they send them to exchange if there's some link to criminal activity.
Probably, if the trackers seen activities with criminals wallet, expect that
this will happen to your coin.
Maybe you got unfortunate and there's just a few hops between your coin and some darknet market.
This is really annoying as you can't do anything once there's relations with
your wallet add and illegalities.
Would they unlock your coins after you contact their support and try to explain the situation? Probably no, knowing how bad the customer support of exchanges usually is.
But you don't have any options, you have to work with your money to the point
that you'll provide everything.
You'll might get some chance but the delayed that will take place will annoyed
you while waiting for your money.
Quote
On that, he noted that crowdsourcing is one of the main ways that these crimes are being committed these days. His suggestion was to identify criminal wallets and flag them so that they cannot be used in the future.
What this means that in the future people will get their coins frozen when they send them to exchange if there's some link to criminal activity. Maybe you got unfortunate and there's just a few hops between your coin and some darknet market. Would they unlock your coins after you contact their support and try to explain the situation? Probably no, knowing how bad the customer support of exchanges usually is.
This company in South Korea is figuring out that once a cyber criminal, always a cyber criminal.
You are right, once you are a cybercriminal, you will be always a cyber-criminal. Whatever the condition, cybercriminals always attack very simply. In my country, the criminal is caught and arrested after being a cybercriminal for several years previously. And he was arrested after doing that criminal in some years. So, does it mean that it is possible for the criminals to be caught and also arrested? Well its always the case. I can agree to it.
The known criminal offenders are going to be the suspects. People who are tagged as sex offenders will usually be the first suspects when there is rape crime in the neighborhood. This pattern will also reflect in cyber crime. If you notice it, the scammers caught today can be tracked that they have actually scam before on differnet platform.
I believe that the way they use and transfer the BTC will never use their primary identification because it will sometimes need the account identification. It means that as long as they are use the centralized exchange, they may be revelaed.
So now those who uses decentralize exchanges mgiht just be closedlt watched under thier radar.
This company in South Korea is figuring out that once a cyber criminal, always a cyber criminal.
You are right, once you are a cybercriminal, you will be always a cyber-criminal. Whatever the condition, cybercriminals always attack very simply. In my country, the criminal is caught and arrested after being a cybercriminal for several years previously. And he was arrested after doing that criminal in some years. So, does it mean that it is possible for the criminals to be caught and also arrested? I believe that the way they use and transfer the BTC will never use their primary identification because it will sometimes need the account identification. It means that as long as they are use the centralized exchange, they may be revelaed.
Its easy to track they say. Its their project so if they can track criminals and put it in a database then tis their call. Blockchain tracks can be used to build cases and proof just how as we find it useful in finance.
Korean exchanges and probably the rest of the exchanges in Asia like Binance had already grabbed a lot of information from us as part of their database to scrape.
Yes and that surprises me! I know bitcoin is not completely anonymous. But unless and until the money is flown into a regulated business like exchanges, payment services, it's very difficult to track the sender. So this bold statement is really surprising. Quote from the article below,
Database can be used to anyone who is in crypto sphere. So if you for once had tried posting your BTC or ETH address somewhere and they learned its yours, the authorities can just try sending some BTC to your account so they can interrogate you. This hasn't yet happening so far but there is no way that our wallets can deny coins sent to it.
For someone who has no connection to terrorism but suddenly receives coin from known or flagged wallets, it could destroy you and your kid's life.
Of course not, Bitcoin should also fit into legal framework and that means that we need to sacrifice a part of of our privacy and anonimity and there is no sense in fighting it.
Nonsense. Centralized exchanges need to fit in to the legal framework, and you need to sacrifice your privacy to use them. There is no requirement to sacrifice your privacy to use bitcoin, and the day I have to complete KYC simply to use my own wallet is the day I sell all my bitcoin.Bitcoin mixer is the dead end for all the investigation in case this blockchain criminal database will be implement. There is no way to track a transaction that process by mixer.
Not necessarily. There was a very interesting thesis posted on this forum last year which found it was potentially possible to break almost all mixing services and link incoming and outgoing transactions together. The only mixer which couldn't be broken was ChipMixer due to its unique mixing methods. You can read the thesis here: Breaking Mixing Services. 
It would be great if they can track the criminals, every website should have those futures that they can track people once there would be cybercrimes happen. It would be great because they will have a record of information about those things. One thing about it is that there are many hackers in this virtual world, we cannot deny those people because they are really expert with that thin they can really access your accounts or they can enter the back end of the website once it is not really secured. We should always have a backup for our files, which is necessary if you want to secure your data.
Bitcoin mixer is the dead end for all the investigation in case this blockchain criminal database will be implement. There is no way to track a transaction that process by mixer. This article show us that Bitcoin is traceable and not anonymous at all.
The only thing I used Bitcoin because it was anonymous and decentralized. If ever this feature will be compromised then it's not really the use case of bitcoin. We should not compromise our privacy in exchange for finding this criminal. Exchange must tighten there security because the problem starts there or maybe they cooperate with them.
Of course not, Bitcoin should also fit into legal framework and that means that we need to sacrifice a part of of our privacy and anonimity and there is no sense in fighting it.
The only thing I used Bitcoin because it was anonymous and decentralized. If ever this feature will be compromised then it's not really the use case of bitcoin. We should not compromise our privacy in exchange for finding this criminal. Exchange must tighten there security because the problem starts there or maybe they cooperate with them.
Of course Bitcoin per se is not complete anonymous.
For me this is already bonderline censorship, and I don't like the idea of our addresses being registered as well, worst idea. I guess criminals will again try to outsmart they investigators, they can used mixers which they have done so, or use other coins besides Bitcoin and the most logical choice will be Monero, which has started already.
(https://www.coindesk.com/argentine-telecom-hackers-demanded-7-5-million-in-crypto-as-ransom)
Bitcoin mixer is the dead end for all the investigation in case this blockchain criminal database will be implement. There is no way to track a transaction that process by mixer. This article show us that Bitcoin is traceable and not anonymous at all.
The only reason I used Bitcoin because it was anonymous and decentralized. If ever this feature will be compromised then it's not really the use case of bitcoin. We should not compromise our privacy in exchange for finding this criminal. Exchange must tighten there security because the problem starts there or maybe they cooperate with them.
Of course not, Bitcoin should also fit into legal framework and that means that we need to sacrifice a part of of our privacy and anonimity and there is no sense in fighting it.
The only reason I used Bitcoin because it was anonymous and decentralized. If ever this feature will be compromised then it's not really the use case of bitcoin. We should not compromise our privacy in exchange for finding this criminal. Exchange must tighten there security because the problem starts there or maybe they cooperate with them.
And what did we expect? To have broader and broader use of Bitcoin and services and that everything will remain the same? Including the illegal use of Bitcoin?
Of course not, Bitcoin should also fit into legal framework and that means that we need to sacrifice a part of of our privacy and anonimity and there is no sense in fighting it.
Of course not, Bitcoin should also fit into legal framework and that means that we need to sacrifice a part of of our privacy and anonimity and there is no sense in fighting it.
Is it really useful in the case of cybercrimes or is it not at all, and just a pretext to try and take a grip over the control handle? Will it do more criminal prevention than it will harm the average Joe's privacy?
Of course not, but that's never stopped governments before. Facial recognition scanners on the streets, despite the fact they don't work and don't reduce crime. Attempting to force backdoors in to services like WhatsApp, ignoring of course the hundreds of other methods criminals will use to communicate instead. Attempting to ban encryption, despite the fact that doing so is impossible. Wide-scale mass surveillance, despite it not reducing crime. It's the same nonsense "Won't you think of the children!" argument, just being applied to bitcoin. It's an excuse to increase their control over the population, not to reduce crime. We'll probably reach the boiling point the moment they'll ask you to show your ID whenever you want to pay with or use crypto for the same excuse.
Some services already do that. BitPay for example, one of the worst anti-bitcoin/anti-privacy services, demand KYC from customers, not just merchants, over a certain spending limit. Thankfully, you will always be able to trade bitcoin peer-to-peer. The more and more difficult centralized services like these make it to pay or trade with bitcoin, the faster they accelerate their own downfall. ~
The only option they have is pushing for mandatory KYC for any kind of usage of BTC, with no more anonymous limits. Feels like they're slowly starting to whisper "KYC isn't enough anymore, guys", doesn't it?Their "anti-criminal strategy" falls off a huge cliff the moment you start wondering how these hackers will cash out.. because they are most likely not that stupid to ever move their coins to a centralized exchange anyway. They'll probably use Bisq or other p2p methods in combination with mixers to get through unseen, so how useful is this blockchain identification thing then if the ways they'll cash out are KYC-less anyway?
Is it really useful in the case of preventing cybercrimes or is it not useful at all and just a pretext to try and take a good grip over the control/surveillance handle? Will it do more criminal prevention than it will harm the average Joe's privacy?
We'll probably reach the boiling point the moment they'll ask you to show your ID whenever you want to pay with or use crypto for the same excuse: Crime prevention.
So how are we going to flag criminal wallets so that they cannot be used in the future? Because that's censorship, and Bitcoin is a censorship-free cryptocurrency.
There is no way to disable to an address at the protocol level without a fork, which obviously the community will never agree to. So the best they can do is build a database of "flagged" addresses and appeal to centralized exchanges and services to refuse service to these addresses.How is that a viable option, though. They can't stop those coins from moving, so what if the coins are mixed? What if they are sent to an exchange which doesn't follow the blacklist? What if they take part in a coinjoin transaction? Do you add every known output of said mixer or exchange to the blacklist? Do you blacklist every output from the coinjoin? What if the coins are simply sent to a new address? What about after 10 transactions? 100? 1000? How many addresses do you blacklist? It's a completely untenable solution, and soon enough, every bitcoin in circulation will have been tainted in some way.
I'm all for identifying and apprehending individuals who steal other user's money, but I draw at line at when doing so infringes on my rights. Whenever there is talk about banning encryption, banning bitcoin, banning privacy, then not only do you lose my support, but you also reveal that you don't know what you are talking about.
Jump to: