Topic: Should all scam busting techniques be made public? - page 2. (Read 626 times)

In this particular case, yes that is true. But in other cases they wouldn't be able to access the section.

Of course, I am not saying he shouldn't. But the methods used in uncovering the scam doesn't need to be made public to the accused. Only the result of the investigation. The methods can be documented in a different section not available to everyone.

For example. If I accuse you of something, I need to make my case and findings public.
A connected thread would lead to a section describing the exact methodology I used in uncovering what you did. But you don't need to know how I did it because that will give you ideas to do a better job next time.

Exactly!

First of all restricting newbies from scam accusation boards will do more harm than good because people who often trapped into scam attacks are newbies and real beginners who should be allowed to read and post on that section to avoid getting caught in the hand of scammers in the future. And investigation board have such restrictions so if we don't want to let the process known to others can be discussed there still it is not an convincing idea to me.

I am more than sure that after such an investigation, those who have alternative accounts on the forum and these accounts are used in dishonest activities, ran to check or delete their history. I fully agree that we should not show all the methods that detectives use to determine fraud.
Scammers have already learned how to independently check photos, and today they are harder to find. The farms that exist on the forum have also gained experience, and they are found by random errors.
BUT at the same time, if I know that there is a farm that does not link its contacts in the forum in any way, how can I prove it? Proofs are always needed for the prosecution, and we are obliged to provide them to everyone, otherwise, we deprive the forum of publicity.

Everyone deserves due process, and should have the right to defend themselves against any possible evidence suggesting they have done wrongdoing. You dont need to disclose how you found certain information, but you should disclose the information you found that is incriminating.

A person admitting they ran a Ponzi is concrete evidence in the eyes of the law, but people who the administrator trust tend to be immune from consequence. 

For the question in the subject - why?  Trapping someone is wrong (would they have done it if you hadn't baited them?) but if they screw up and you catch them - it's still valid evidence even though you didn't inform them.   Most of the major scammers (before the first jump to 20K) probably linked addresses together in the chain, and they will get caught.  But I doubt many people will care at this point, as long as they got some.   

Actually, spotting scammers is a constant challenge. Every single hour passed, there would always be another idea or technique that would be made by scammers since they aren't imprisoned and freely lurking. Also, AFAIK, there are jobs that is really for anti-fraudulent activities by different companies and they train constantly as the technology innovates. It is not just the people that learn from the actions of the scammers, it is also the scammers who learn more (smoother scamming methods) from the mistakes they make -- somehow a gradual learning of social engineering.

Well it's always a catch 22 situation as you have to show the evidence at some point if you want to expose someone and some people will learn from that. You could maybe offer sufficient proof but keep something to yourself id there's more but it's always going to be cat and mouse chase. If you're smart then you'll never get caught or exposed (think satoshi), but if you're and idiot or don't cover your tracks sufficiently then you'll likely get caught eventually (Ross Ulbricht) but at some point how you got caught is going to come to light and is a necessary process so there's nothing you can do about people learning what not to do. A while back I think some people did discuss or propose some sort of hidden sub board for scam investigations but that could be compromised and even so at some point the info is going to become public so there's not much you can do. Scammers and schemesters will likely get smarter and clever trying to avoid detection and scambusters/grasses will also get more determined and thorough. Covering your tracks by not using the same addresses is pretty basic way of not getting caught and most people should know that by now though.


Not everyone knows but it's pretty obvious to anyone that isn't a complete idiot that you can be caught this way.

A newbie here who start the forum journey to earn, starts with bounty. Others are either real users who have no interest in signature campaign (later they may take the advantage of) or alt accounts hiding their negative feedback, evading ban. So, it doesn’t matter if you are using that boards. Alt will have access to that board as well.

What nutildah did was quite simple (for lack of a better word; not trying to diminish his effort) and well known to anyone who cares about privacy. I think the perp also knew it and they switched to better practices later on but those early mistakes can't be removed from the blockchain and can be discovered years later. In other words I don't think that nutildah's post revealed any substantial new tricks, and without disclosing these details the proof would have been incomplete / not convincing.

If someone reads it and learns something from it - more power to them. Look on the bright side - there is also a chance that someone learns how to catch other sockpuppets.

Do you believe those participants are doing a signature campaign on the Chipmixer they don't know about address connection? Of course, they know, but he/she wasn't imagined that he/she will be caught. I assume you mean that we shouldn't reveal all the methods of exposing scammers. But fortunately when you will try to prove someone as a scammer, ultimately the methods of investigation will be revealed. For example, nutildah exposed signature by investigating bitcoin addresses, if he doesn't show the connection between each other, will you believe all those accounts are connected. No one will believe verbal explanations without solid evidence. Yes, we can keep secret investigation tools.

That will not help against a lot of them, remember that all those three accounts would have been able to access the section.


And to the "scammers" since the way I view this if you accuse something it's normal to allow him a way to defend himself, so how would that look if you accuse a junior member of something and not allow him to post in that section? A trial behind closed doors with the accused on a bench in a park and the sentence delivered by uber?   Somewhere down the road you will have to show everybody the proofs you have against him at which point if the scammer is not a full retard he will understand how the evidence against him was found and what mistakes he has done.

oh, forgot something:
One thing I agree on not making public is the way plagiarism and stolen and modified photos are identified and what tools we use.
This would indeed help scammers testing their whitepapers, team photos, etc before they make it public and making harder to catch them.

I have been reading this incredible thread written by nutildah. I can't even begin to imagine how much work was put into investigating the accounts and putting all the pieces together — my respect for nutildah and his research abilities.

But all this made me think. I am sure I can't be the only one who sees something troubling in threads like the one by nutildah. Troubling isn't the right word, but let's work with that for now. Some of you might be thinking: What is this idiot talking about? I will cut to the chase.


When you look at nutildah's thread, you see a dedication to catch wrongdoers and expose them to the public. But in this process, something else happens. You get exact instructions of WHAT TO DO to not get caught. Let's focus only on this segment. Whoever operates multiple accounts or considers doing so, has a lot of great advice on this forum of what not to do, and how to cover his tracks better. Unfortunately, that is the other side of the scam busting medal. You are the scam investigator and teacher to scammers in one person.

Thread titles for these type of threads could very well be:
Step-by-step instructions of how not to get caught when using multiple accounts in signature campaigns! or Avoid these mistakes to protect your alt accounts.


I feel like not everyone should have access to the scam accusations board, or at least to well-constructed threads like the one by nutildah. Now, if that means that I can't read them either, that's OK. We have an investigations board, and that one is not publicly available for JR. Members and lower ranks. Maybe scam investigations could walk down a similar path.

It is going to be very difficult to make changes, and I doubt there will be any. Scam accusations are supposed to be public for everyone, especially for newbies and new people in crypto. But consider the other side of the medal that I mentioned. If the methods, tools, sites, and services that scam busters use to catch cheaters were better protected, it wouldn't give those same cheaters new ideas to improve their 'work' to avoid detection. They would also not know what they are doing wrong that gets them caught.