Topic: Discussion of Leaked FBI Report on Bitcoin- April 2012 - page 2. (Read 6990 times)
I would not think the FBI would ever refer to US dollars as "fiat currency." Indeed a Google search for "fiat currency" site:fbi.gov comes back with zero hits. Same goes for the CIA and the DOJ websites.
Yeah I think people are mistaking the scope and intent of the report.
This isn't a briefing for operating "fast & furious coins" it is a Bitcoin for dummies (law enforcement edition).
Now everyone is the FBI can read it and have at least a basic understanding of what it is, how it works, why people use it, and what complications it presents law enforcement. It wasn't intended to make anyone a Bitcoin expert, or look for flaws in the protocol. At least in meetings people won't go "Bitcoin what?" and the meeting goes way off track.
Your tax dollars hard at work. I worked on more than one of those: (INSERT TOPIC HERE) for dummies - Defense Agency Edition.
This isn't a briefing for operating "fast & furious coins" it is a Bitcoin for dummies (law enforcement edition).
Now everyone is the FBI can read it and have at least a basic understanding of what it is, how it works, why people use it, and what complications it presents law enforcement. It wasn't intended to make anyone a Bitcoin expert, or look for flaws in the protocol. At least in meetings people won't go "Bitcoin what?" and the meeting goes way off track.
Your tax dollars hard at work. I worked on more than one of those: (INSERT TOPIC HERE) for dummies - Defense Agency Edition.
You'll have to clarify your position. I'm not going to guess what your thoughts are about it, then try to refute those guesses. That's just silly. What would you have written about Mt. Gox that wasn't there?
The lack of any real observations that MtGox is based overseas, complicating any potential US actions.
I didn't get the impression at all that the FBI was looking to shut down Bitcoin entirely. To me, the paper was about how to combat criminals who utilize Bitcoin, not at all about criminalizing people who use Bitcoin.
Quote
(U//FOUO) Law enforcement might have opportunities to discover real user identifying information from some
third-party Bitcoin services because users must provide the services with real payment account information to
buy, sell, trade, and convert their bitcoins. For example, the Terms of Service for the third-party bitcoin trading
platform Mt. Gox states “members agree to provide Mt. Gox with accurate, current and complete information
about themselves as promoted by the registration process, and keep such information updated.”
third-party Bitcoin services because users must provide the services with real payment account information to
buy, sell, trade, and convert their bitcoins. For example, the Terms of Service for the third-party bitcoin trading
platform Mt. Gox states “members agree to provide Mt. Gox with accurate, current and complete information
about themselves as promoted by the registration process, and keep such information updated.”
You'll have to clarify your position. I'm not going to guess what your thoughts are about it, then try to refute those guesses. That's just silly. What would you have written about Mt. Gox that wasn't there?
The lack of any real observations that MtGox is based overseas, complicating any potential US actions.
If you look at the original, they alternate between capitalizing and not capitalizing bitcoin. Review what was actually said about MtGox and then contemplate what information you would have included about them had you written the report.
See below:Quote
(U//FOUO) This assessment will not address malicious actors outside of the cyber underground,
such as traditional organized crime groups, extremist groups, or child predators. Throughout the
paper, the term “Bitcoin,” when capitalized, refers to both the open source software used to
create the virtual currency and the P2P network formed as a result; “bitcoin” using lower case
refers to the virtual currency that is digitally traded between users.
such as traditional organized crime groups, extremist groups, or child predators. Throughout the
paper, the term “Bitcoin,” when capitalized, refers to both the open source software used to
create the virtual currency and the P2P network formed as a result; “bitcoin” using lower case
refers to the virtual currency that is digitally traded between users.
Though they don't hold to this convention in every single case, I think it was just bad proofing on their part. Can't make it perfect, I guess. But I partially suspect multiple writers simply because of slight variations like this (and varied spacing in the footnote references) between the earlier and later parts of the document.
None of you who are calling fake have even explained what possible motive a person could have to fake a document like this? Why on earth would someone spend hundreds of hours to go through the complexity and detail that is shown in this document?
Likely, the language that "comes from the forum" is because the writer(s) of the document spent a good deal of time on the forum for research. They picked up on the lingo, such as the "stabilization" of bitcoin, etc, because that is what is talked about. They have at least 2 endnotes that reference threads in the forum as well.
Ok, great. Now how about my second point?
If you look at the original, they alternate between capitalizing and not capitalizing bitcoin. Review what was actually said about MtGox and then contemplate what information you would have included about them had you written the report.
See below:Quote
(U//FOUO) This assessment will not address malicious actors outside of the cyber underground,
such as traditional organized crime groups, extremist groups, or child predators. Throughout the
paper, the term “Bitcoin,” when capitalized, refers to both the open source software used to
create the virtual currency and the P2P network formed as a result; “bitcoin” using lower case
refers to the virtual currency that is digitally traded between users.
such as traditional organized crime groups, extremist groups, or child predators. Throughout the
paper, the term “Bitcoin,” when capitalized, refers to both the open source software used to
create the virtual currency and the P2P network formed as a result; “bitcoin” using lower case
refers to the virtual currency that is digitally traded between users.
Though they don't hold to this convention in every single case, I think it was just bad proofing on their part. Can't make it perfect, I guess. But I partially suspect multiple writers simply because of slight variations like this (and varied spacing in the footnote references) between the earlier and later parts of the document.
None of you who are calling fake have even explained what possible motive a person could have to fake a document like this? Why on earth would someone spend hundreds of hours to go through the complexity and detail that is shown in this document?
Likely, the language that "comes from the forum" is because the writer(s) of the document spent a good deal of time on the forum for research. They picked up on the lingo, such as the "stabilization" of bitcoin, etc, because that is what is talked about. They have at least 2 endnotes that reference threads in the forum as well.
Ok, great. Now how about my second point?
It was a nice run for my OCR software - only took a few minutes to make into a proper document.
Post it up - let's compare. 
I binned it, but I'll send you a copy if you like - pm me an email and I'll ping it across.
If you look at the original, they alternate between capitalizing and not capitalizing bitcoin. Review what was actually said about MtGox and then contemplate what information you would have included about them had you written the report.
See below:Quote
(U//FOUO) This assessment will not address malicious actors outside of the cyber underground,
such as traditional organized crime groups, extremist groups, or child predators. Throughout the
paper, the term “Bitcoin,” when capitalized, refers to both the open source software used to
create the virtual currency and the P2P network formed as a result; “bitcoin” using lower case
refers to the virtual currency that is digitally traded between users.
such as traditional organized crime groups, extremist groups, or child predators. Throughout the
paper, the term “Bitcoin,” when capitalized, refers to both the open source software used to
create the virtual currency and the P2P network formed as a result; “bitcoin” using lower case
refers to the virtual currency that is digitally traded between users.
Though they don't hold to this convention in every single case, I think it was just bad proofing on their part. Can't make it perfect, I guess. But I partially suspect multiple writers simply because of slight variations like this (and varied spacing in the footnote references) between the earlier and later parts of the document.
None of you who are calling fake have even explained what possible motive a person could have to fake a document like this? Why on earth would someone spend hundreds of hours to go through the complexity and detail that is shown in this document?
Likely, the language that "comes from the forum" is because the writer(s) of the document spent a good deal of time on the forum for research. They picked up on the lingo, such as the "stabilization" of bitcoin, etc, because that is what is talked about. They have at least 2 endnotes that reference threads in the forum as well.
It was a nice run for my OCR software - only took a few minutes to make into a proper document.
Post it up - let's compare.
It was a nice run for my OCR software - only took a few minutes to make into a proper document.
If you look at the original, they alternate between capitalizing and not capitalizing bitcoin. Review what was actually said about MtGox and then contemplate what information you would have included about them had you written the report.
The language doesn't seem right. I suspect fake.
I also suspect it is fake, a lot of the language sounds like it is from the Bitcointalk forums and not the FBI.
Current top post on cryptome.org: http://cryptome.org/2012/05/fbi-bitcoin.pdf
The retyped document is completed and ready to be hosted, I just need 3.8 BTC more for the bounty.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.888564
I will release the docx and a PDF when the bounty is reached.
EDIT: Bounty reached! Documents released. Please download them and do not use the dropbox viewer - they look funky in their viewer.
PDF: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0nc35rpevjcu9p4/Bitcoin%20FBI.pdf
DOCX: https://www.dropbox.com/s/p9m3hd7yfq2ee16/Bitcoin%20FBI.docx
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.888564
I will release the docx and a PDF when the bounty is reached.
EDIT: Bounty reached! Documents released. Please download them and do not use the dropbox viewer - they look funky in their viewer.
PDF: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0nc35rpevjcu9p4/Bitcoin%20FBI.pdf
DOCX: https://www.dropbox.com/s/p9m3hd7yfq2ee16/Bitcoin%20FBI.docx
I didn't see a link to the PDF (image-based) yet so there's this here:
- http://heikki.zerodistance.org/bitcoin/92797476-FBI-Bitcoin-Report-April-2012.pdf
I wonder if it is because they are considering Bitcoin to be a form of prepaid access (formerly called "stored value") then that this applies? I'ld love to see this challenged with the argument that Bitcoin is a commodity, not a form of "prepayment of value" (as a person buying a bitcoin does not get in exchange a claim that can be later redeemed to get funds back.)
And just an interesting observation from the report:
Where that claim comes from is a misunderstanding by the author of an article from the media (see #14 in the report). There is the ability to monitor nodes (such as what Blockchain.info does) and learn which node (of the ones monitored) that happened to be the first to relay the transaction. That may not necessarily be the node of the individual making the transaction, particularly if the individual configures the client in a manner so that the chances of detection are less, even without using Tor or other method for IP address anonymity.
- http://heikki.zerodistance.org/bitcoin/92797476-FBI-Bitcoin-Report-April-2012.pdf
They also mention the $1,000 a day threshold does not apply
Source 'Additionally since any third-part Bitcoin services falls under the MSB rule would do so as a money transmitter, there is not a transaction threshold (such as 1,000 per day) that must be met for regulations to apply, unlike dealers in foreign exchange or issuers or sellers of checks or monetary instruments'
Source 'Additionally since any third-part Bitcoin services falls under the MSB rule would do so as a money transmitter, there is not a transaction threshold (such as 1,000 per day) that must be met for regulations to apply, unlike dealers in foreign exchange or issuers or sellers of checks or monetary instruments'
I wonder if it is because they are considering Bitcoin to be a form of prepaid access (formerly called "stored value") then that this applies? I'ld love to see this challenged with the argument that Bitcoin is a commodity, not a form of "prepayment of value" (as a person buying a bitcoin does not get in exchange a claim that can be later redeemed to get funds back.)
And just an interesting observation from the report:
Quote
"All Bitcoin transactions are published online and Internet Protocol (IP) addressses are linked to the public Bitcoin transactions. If a user does not anonymize his or her IP address, an interested party can identify the individual's physical location. (13, 14)"
Where that claim comes from is a misunderstanding by the author of an article from the media (see #14 in the report). There is the ability to monitor nodes (such as what Blockchain.info does) and learn which node (of the ones monitored) that happened to be the first to relay the transaction. That may not necessarily be the node of the individual making the transaction, particularly if the individual configures the client in a manner so that the chances of detection are less, even without using Tor or other method for IP address anonymity.
The only part that my OCR did right:
emphasis mine
"(U) Despite the virtual nature of Bitcoin, users value the currency for many of the same reasons people trust Federal Reserve notes: they believe they can exchange the currency for goods, services, or a national currency at a later date. As such, Bitcoin is currently accepted as a form of payment at hundreds of legitimate retailers including vendors selling clothing, games, music, and some hotels and restaurants."
FBI sees legitimacy in Bitcoin's use.
emphasis mine
"(U) Despite the virtual nature of Bitcoin, users value the currency for many of the same reasons people trust Federal Reserve notes: they believe they can exchange the currency for goods, services, or a national currency at a later date. As such, Bitcoin is currently accepted as a form of payment at hundreds of legitimate retailers including vendors selling clothing, games, music, and some hotels and restaurants."
FBI sees legitimacy in Bitcoin's use.
3) We have learned that many surety bond issuers can issue a multi-state bond. So if you need to be licensed in 8 states and the largest requires a 200K bond you can find an issuer who can issue a bond covering your obligation in all 8 states. It will be more than the cost of a single state bond but it won't be 8x the cost of a single state bond. Cost is still pretty significant though. Oh to just have an extra $200K in cash (to post a security deposit in lieu of a bond).
This is very interesting, and potentially very impactful on startup business plans.
I just want a complete copy. I don't care how it gets done. If you guys want to compete that is fine. If you want to work together split the work and the reward. I don't really need two complete copies from independent sources though. 
I would however STRONGLY suggestion someone start a seperate thread, put up a donation address, a goal for releasing, and show progress. If you do all the work, release it, and THEN try to get some compensation I guarantee you it will end being less than flipping burgers.
Done: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.888564 I would however STRONGLY suggestion someone start a seperate thread, put up a donation address, a goal for releasing, and show progress. If you do all the work, release it, and THEN try to get some compensation I guarantee you it will end being less than flipping burgers.
I just want a complete copy. I don't care how it gets done. If you guys want to compete that is fine. If you want to work together split the work and the reward. I don't really need two complete copies from independent sources though.
I would however STRONGLY suggestion someone start a seperate thread, put up a donation address, a goal for releasing, and show progress. If you do all the work, release it, and THEN try to get some compensation I guarantee you it will end being less than flipping burgers.
I would however STRONGLY suggestion someone start a seperate thread, put up a donation address, a goal for releasing, and show progress. If you do all the work, release it, and THEN try to get some compensation I guarantee you it will end being less than flipping burgers.
Jump to: