List of Major Bitcoin Heists, Thefts, Hacks, Scams, and Losses [Old] - page 13.

Stephen Gornick

legendary

Activity: 2506

Merit: 1010

Quote from: dree12 on September 04, 2012, 04:28:29 PM

New theft: Bitfloor. Ranks #5 (preliminary, not including Pirate).

A quarter million dollars worth of funds gone and it only ranks fifth?

Incidentally, the list ordered by USD is missing a few ..., this BitFloor event and also the Linode (Bitcoina, Slush and Faucet), Bitcionica (May) and Bitcoinica (June) events.
- https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/list-of-major-bitcoin-heists-thefts-hacks-scams-and-losses-old-83794

dree12

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1077

Quote from: LoweryCBS on September 04, 2012, 02:51:02 PM

Keeping up with this list is getting to be a full time job lately.

Quote from: shtylman on September 04, 2012, 12:12:00 PM

(bitfloor coin theft details)

Thank you.

New theft: Bitfloor. Ranks #5 (preliminary, not including Pirate).

LoweryCBS

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

firstbits 1LoCBS

Keeping up with this list is getting to be a full time job lately.

Quote from: shtylman on September 04, 2012, 12:12:00 PM

(bitfloor coin theft details)

dree12

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1077

Quote from: makomk on September 02, 2012, 06:29:53 AM

Quote from: finkleshnorts on August 28, 2012, 09:08:31 PM

Basically, the investors had built their accounts up to over 500,000 BTC collectively via compound interest, so they feel like they lost more bitcoins than they actually had. Those bitcoins never existed. Only the principle deposited and whatever pirate made from his market shenanigans were available to the fund.

This is assuming that Pirate isn't understating the total paper value of everyone's balances at BTCS&T. Some have theorized that the paper loss is much higher than that and that just the actual principle lost alone could reach 500,000 BTC. Maged seems to reckon based on blockchain analysis that Pirate alone made off with about 200,000 BTC from this, not counting the money paid out as interest, though sadly he doesn't seem to be able to publish details of that analysis.

200000 BTC is an even lower estimate than 350000 BTC I gave, but I figure also more accurate. If worse goes to worst, then that is the figure I may preliminarily use.

makomk

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 564

Quote from: finkleshnorts on August 28, 2012, 09:08:31 PM

Basically, the investors had built their accounts up to over 500,000 BTC collectively via compound interest, so they feel like they lost more bitcoins than they actually had. Those bitcoins never existed. Only the principle deposited and whatever pirate made from his market shenanigans were available to the fund.

This is assuming that Pirate isn't understating the total paper value of everyone's balances at BTCS&T. Some have theorized that the paper loss is much higher than that and that just the actual principle lost alone could reach 500,000 BTC. Maged seems to reckon based on blockchain analysis that Pirate alone made off with about 200,000 BTC from this, not counting the money paid out as interest, though sadly he doesn't seem to be able to publish details of that analysis.

proudhon

legendary

Activity: 2198

Merit: 1311

Quote from: dree12 on August 30, 2012, 06:57:54 PM

Update! Some accounts have been repaid. Looks like calling the default was uncalled for.

Also, it doesn't matter if tomorrow he pays back every last bitcent. It will still have been the case that he was in default.

unclescrooge

hero member

Activity: 868

Merit: 1000

Quote from: dree12 on August 30, 2012, 06:57:54 PM

Update! Some accounts have been repaid. Looks like calling the default was uncalled for.

No proof of that unfortunately.

dree12

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1077

Update! Some accounts have been repaid. Looks like calling the default was uncalled for.

finkleshnorts

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

That's probably a good ballpark. I think over the next few weeks we will have a lot more details on the deposit specifics.

dree12

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1077

Quote from: finkleshnorts on August 28, 2012, 09:08:31 PM

Basically, the investors had built their accounts up to over 500,000 BTC collectively via compound interest, so they feel like they lost more bitcoins than they actually had. Those bitcoins never existed. Only the principle deposited and whatever pirate made from his market shenanigans were available to the fund.

Okay, I understand what you are saying. Before I doze off (it's late here!), I will publish my thoughts on a ballpark guess (not an estimate, just wild speculation).

Let T be 500000 BTC (the total amount in the fund), I be the total interest credited. As the scheme was not 500000 BTC from the start, there must have been a growth. Assume that growth started April at 10000 BTC. This works out to 25% growth in the scheme per week, which is reasonable. The geometric sequence based on this growth extrapolates to 140000 BTC interest, which we can round up to 150000 BTC. This is reasonable, and implies the total amount stolen is near 350000 BTC.

finkleshnorts

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

I think nanotube has access to all account information? maybe I'm wrong.

finkleshnorts

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Basically, the investors had built their accounts up to over 500,000 BTC collectively via compound interest, so they feel like they lost more bitcoins than they actually had. Those bitcoins never existed. Only the principle deposited and whatever pirate made from his market shenanigans were available to the fund.

dust

hero member

Activity: 840

Merit: 1000

Quote from: dree12 on August 28, 2012, 08:49:59 PM

Quote from: finkleshnorts on August 28, 2012, 08:49:02 PM

he actually "stole" much less than 500,00 BTC.

Could you please elaborate? I am trying to collect as many sources as possible to provide an objective but accurate estimate to the extent of damage.

New source states 500000 BTC stolen: DailyTech. Uncited, though.

Ah, found the citation (it was from the Verge, which cited Maged's post containing Pirate's own words). This thread, if anyone is curious.

In a ponzi scheme, investors are paid out with other investors money. The operator never has enough money to cover everyone withdrawing at once. So while there is BTC500k on paper, much fewer real coins exist if in fact pirate was running a ponzi.

dree12

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1077

Quote from: Littleshop on August 28, 2012, 09:03:27 PM

Quote from: dree12 on August 28, 2012, 08:49:59 PM

Quote from: finkleshnorts on August 28, 2012, 08:49:02 PM

he actually "stole" much less than 500,00 BTC.

Could you please elaborate? I am trying to collect as many sources as possible to provide an objective but accurate estimate to the extent of damage.

New source states 500000 BTC stolen: DailyTech. Uncited, though.

It is a guess though a pretty accurate number could be had if all of the pass-through published data and you added that to bitcoinmax and gpumax.

You do have to figure that the interest is not real though. If you deposited 100 BTC in the beginning and it compounded to 300 BTC it should be counted as 100 BTC. Pirate may have lied to you , but he did not take 300 BTC.

I prefer to stay away from reconstructions expect as a last resort. Do any Pirate insiders have a more accurate number?

If none of these numbers are available, interest can be estimated by estimating growth, which can be inferred from GLBSE passthrough volumes.

Littleshop

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1004

Quote from: dree12 on August 28, 2012, 08:49:59 PM

Quote from: finkleshnorts on August 28, 2012, 08:49:02 PM

he actually "stole" much less than 500,00 BTC.

Could you please elaborate? I am trying to collect as many sources as possible to provide an objective but accurate estimate to the extent of damage.

New source states 500000 BTC stolen: DailyTech. Uncited, though.

It is a guess though a pretty accurate number could be had if all of the pass-through published data and you added that to bitcoinmax and gpumax.

You do have to figure that the interest is not real though. If you deposited 100 BTC in the beginning and it compounded to 300 BTC it should be counted as 100 BTC. Pirate may have lied to you , but he did not take 300 BTC.

dree12

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1077

Quote from: finkleshnorts on August 28, 2012, 08:49:02 PM

he actually "stole" much less than 500,00 BTC.

Could you please elaborate? I am trying to collect as many sources as possible to provide an objective but accurate estimate to the extent of damage.

New source states 500000 BTC stolen: DailyTech. Uncited, though.

Ah, found the citation (it was from the Verge, which cited Maged's post containing Pirate's own words). This thread, if anyone is curious.

finkleshnorts

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

he actually "stole" much less than 500,00 BTC. Nice thread, btw.

dree12

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1077

I'm at odds about how to handle the recent occurrences. Please read this and offer suggestions accordingly.

Factory

sr. member

Activity: 259

Merit: 250

I just wanted to give my thanks for this list. Everyone should read it over once.

dree12

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1077

Quote from: Ente on August 15, 2012, 02:48:42 AM

Quote from: dree12 on August 14, 2012, 02:40:42 PM

Trying out a new navigation system using links, hopefully this will accommodate the huge volume of thefts. I would appreciate it greatly if anyone could fill me in on the thefts that don't have commentary (you will, of course, be listed in the credits section).

Also, retroactively added the Betcoin Theft (#13).

I like how comprehensive the list is, as well as having several lists with different focus.
Well done! :-)

Ohe hint: With these large numbers, it does not really make sense to give the full decimal number. It just makes it harder to read. In most cases, the numbers are estimates anyway.. I would suggest to cut off the decimals or round to nearest bitcoin, depending on number.

Noting better than waking up and reading through that list, to get your bloodpressure up, right? heh

Ente

I made the decimals smaller when exact, and put them to the side when it is a lower/upper bound or about. The numbers now have descriptors now (l.b. = lower bound, u.b. = upper bound, a. = about, est. = estimate).

While reviewing the list, I revised the Bitcoin7 estimate down 4000 BTC (from 15000 BTC to 11000 BTC) after using a new rationale. This may be either too high or too low, but should be better than the previous value (which is now listed as an upper bound).

Also added a table of contents to organize the list better.

Topic: List of Major Bitcoin Heists, Thefts, Hacks, Scams, and Losses [Old] - page 13. (Read 295041 times)