Topic: Suspicious loan to 2double0 from hacker1001101001 (marcotheminer involved) - page 2. (Read 860 times)

I agree that I also have been unable to sign message from address which I hold in my blockchain wallet. Do you mind sharing screenshots of your conversation with 2double0 publicly or maybe share with someone trusted (i.e actmyname if he doesn't minds)?

Firstly Yes I provided a loan to 2double0 after looking at his post in the lending section here


I would like to clarify what Quickseller said here :


The transaction you are talking about which occurred here is the one which I asked 2Double0 to confirm his BTC address by sending me a small amount of BTC to my BTC address. I did this as he said that he holds the address 1J4YGjWGyWSQ1U8VCTUeXn3XqMxiUhheZ7 in his blockchain.com wallet from where he was unable to sign a message. He also sent me some ScreenShots of him logged in with the wallet in his PC.

Form this I confirmed that he was owning an address posted from his account at least 1.5 years ago here and I sent the loan directly to his previous address.

---

Thank You nutildah for notifying me about this thread

I don't think they are a separate account. I think they are alt account and alt accounts usually don't verify the signature, don't give transaction id as they don't send coin but in this case, they sent to make it trustworthy and as there was discussing for not to fund by anyone.

hacker1001101001 should have had 2double0 verify his signature publicly, in the thread, instead of just instantly filling the loan. it's also peculiar to me that both users just starting posting frequently in Meta around the same time.

Okay, if it is self-loan then they are alt account and trying to scam. Because by self-loan they will try to be trustworthy and will fly away when someone will fund them. In this way, they can't be trusted and they are a genuine scammer, isn't it?

Aye. It makes no sense when one sends dust to an address (which 2double0 presumably does not know prior to hacker's tx) just moments before the loan is fulfilled.

Unless we see evidence of some kind of communication that justifies the 20 uBTC transaction, this seems like a case of a self-loan.

I actually asked 2double0 in PM about the loan details that he defaulted and which is now he is repaying by participating in signature campaigns(with proofs). I didn't got any reply and he also locked the thread after it was filled by hacker1001101001. I was going to create the thread myself but you saved me the work.

Anyway this is something interesting which I didn't noticed and I will look into it.

To be entirely fair, marco was at one point entrusted with 50+BTC from a new (at the time) exchange (worth ~$25k at the time) to run their signature campaign.

He has somewhat of a history of these kinds of shady shenanigans, and I am not entirely sure what his end game was/is. It may be to earn more in (custom) signature deals, or otherwise earn money in the marketplace, or to eventually sell his accounts at a higher price with positive trust. Or it may be to build up trust, and give trust to his other accounts and then use those accounts to scam, preserving his trust. 

As on his loan thread, I posted about it and that marcotheminer and 2double0 are the same people. Also, you know Marco opened a loan thread at the same time he was asked loan he locked his loan thread after several posts which we made and also from a private message. And 2double0 send a message to me which seems like account sells. He told me "if you can't give me 0.05 then no problem, how much you can give me by taking this account as collateral". I offered 0. Both people from different account tried to take the loan and sent a message on several ways, though I told not to send me any more message. So, there is a lot of chance that is running by the same people and also this loan will be a default. If it cant be default this time then there might have 2 reasons:
1. will try to take more loan then a scam and/or
2. To avoid loss of both accounts as we are discussing it.

Recently 2double0 opened a loan request thread asking for what turned out to be a 0.05BTC loan (it looks like it might have originally been 0.06, but that is not really important).

I know based on blockchain evidence that 2double0 used to be owed by marcotheminer and believe he was for many years, however marco is/was also an account seller, so it is not out of the realm of possibility that it was sold.

What was strange is that marcotheminer was vouching for him being "who he says he is" AND claiming to have given him a (apparently) no collateral loan from "a while ago".

2double0 recently came back from a ~10 month hiatus, with his 1st post after returning made Jan 25, 2019 (a loan request offering his account as collateral), and his last post before leaving was in March 2018 (wrapping up a bounty campaign he was apparently running).

marco also recently came back from a hiatus, with his first post back being on Jan 16, 2019 (claiming a giveaway), however on Jan 22, he reopened his lending thread (that has subsequently been locked, apparently without making any additional loans), and the next day asking for a 1 ETH loan, which was the same day 2double0 requested his loan. Before he left, his last post was in October 2018 (asking to join a signature campaign), however this was only two posts, and prior to that he posted in May 2018, trying to sell a couple of domains, and prior to that was in June 2017.

Based on the above, I would say it is reasonable that marco and 2double0 are currently the same person, although I cannot rule out this not being the case. Perhaps someone can review the security log back to March 31, 2015 when marco confirmed to me that it was "in his possession".

It is obviously not proof of a scam that someone has multiple accounts or is involved in the account market "underworld". The vouch, strictly in regards to marco saying that 2double0 is "who he claims to be" might be something I can look past if they are the same person. The claiming to have given 2double0 is certainly not appropriate if they are the same person -- even though there is no claim of a successful repayment, it implies it is the opinion of a longstanding forum member with positive trust that someone can be trusted when no one else is saying as much -- if they are not the same person, it would mean marco sold this account, which would be somewhat of a conflict of interest to give this vouch.

I saw the above and was considering making a thread about this.  I certainly do not approve of vouching for yourself, or giving what may be a fake no-collateral loans, but was somewhat on the fence about opening this thread, mostly because I have no way to efficiently go though the old security logs to check for evidence that 2double0 changed hands. However.....

The most damming part of the loan to 2double0 is the blockchain activity immidiately prior to hacker1001101001 making the loan. 2double0 asked for the loan to be funded to 1J4YGjWGyWSQ1U8VCTUeXn3XqMxiUhheZ7 and hacker1001101001 funded the loan via txid 9e25bbb34f3c4504f3275c93502afe82efec15ecd04581b1d9f9f19dfc48aa6b, whose inputs are from 1JAYESHqohMYvXS4Do6ZNEYJiwZ588MVKi -- this transaction was confirmed in block 564462, which also confirmed a withdrawal from huobi in the amount of 0.0502 (enough for the loan plus a small amount for the tx fee), but the strange thing is that 8 blocks prior to hacker1001101001 receiving the withdrawal from huobi, he received 0.00001 BTC from 1J4YGjWGyWSQ1U8VCTUeXn3XqMxiUhheZ7 the address 2double0 asked the loan to be funded to. This might be circumstantial evidence that hacker1001101001 may be the same person as 2double0.

PS - the loan thread was immidiately locked after receiving the loan, which is a practice that I very much dislike, despite its stated goal of eliminating useless posts by those with paid signatures.