Topic: The Hack and The Rollback - page 2. (Read 674 times)
It's fortunate that the reality-check sunk in pretty quickly, so they only looked foolish for a short period of time. I don't know why they briefly thought highly enough of themselves to entertain the absurd notion than anyone else would carry the burden of tidying up their mess for them. I can't even begin to imagine a situation where the majority of users in a decentralised crytocurrency would willingly sacrifice the immutability of their blockchain to rescue a centralised company who dropped the ball.
I agree there are countless of ways to launder the funds. But there will be huge hurdles for them.
The bitcoin is being tracked in real time.
Any large amounts are hard to exchange without KYC and depositing a large amount of hacked funds on a mixing service or casino will draw massive attention on the mixing service or casino. It may also attract attention of law enforcement who will go after the service as well as the hacker (Like with BTCe).
Exchanging large amounts into other crypto will also draw attention to the hackers. Since it cannot be exchanged on exchanges that require KYC or that might seize the stolen funds there will be limited places where it can be discreetly exchanges. This is where any volume will give it away.
It is more likely that the hacker will patiently sit on the funds and not withdraw it for years.
The bitcoin is being tracked in real time.
Any large amounts are hard to exchange without KYC and depositing a large amount of hacked funds on a mixing service or casino will draw massive attention on the mixing service or casino. It may also attract attention of law enforcement who will go after the service as well as the hacker (Like with BTCe).
Exchanging large amounts into other crypto will also draw attention to the hackers. Since it cannot be exchanged on exchanges that require KYC or that might seize the stolen funds there will be limited places where it can be discreetly exchanges. This is where any volume will give it away.
It is more likely that the hacker will patiently sit on the funds and not withdraw it for years.
There's a big chance you're right and the thieves do not exchange the stolen funds for fiat for many years... That being said, i'm pretty sure i'd be able to completely "wash" 7000 BTC if i'd had a couple of months and was allowed to "lose" 10-20% on various fees. It's basically a matter of splitting up those huge outputs in smaller chunks, then wash them by using multiple different techniques and services on each of those chunks whilst always using a combination of privacy techniques to make sure you never get your real ip or other digital fingerprint recorded on any of the services you use to "clean" your illgotten gains.
I do realise you'd really have to have a welldrawn plan in order to make the washing seem completely random so nobody can just start analysing the blockchain and pinpoint you... And if you do slipup you'll probably end up in jail... But i don't think it's impossible if you keep your focus and know what you're doing.
Disclaimer: Eventough i'm pretty sure i'd be able to do this, i'm not offering my services to anybody... If you contact me to help you clean stolen funds, i'll probably report you to the authorities...
The only solution to prevent the major hack is by making high-level security in every exchange, and they need always to watch the suspicious activity that might happen in the exchange.
Besides that, they need to stay alert from the attacking that always comes to them as the big exchange because they are a good target to be attacked.
They need to build a team to handle the security on their website, so they will know if something not right is happen.
There a lot of things that they need to fix related to the security for their website and it's not easy but I am sure that binance will handle with care.
Besides that, they need to stay alert from the attacking that always comes to them as the big exchange because they are a good target to be attacked.
They need to build a team to handle the security on their website, so they will know if something not right is happen.
There a lot of things that they need to fix related to the security for their website and it's not easy but I am sure that binance will handle with care.
--snip--
My question is this: Can't this transaction be followed and given a close monitor? Until it gets a point where they would want to discharge as in convert to fiat or spending, and authorities get to freeze the account? do you also think there is a future plan to arresting this hugly situation to ensure greater confidence in the future? Thanks a lot.
My question is this: Can't this transaction be followed and given a close monitor? Until it gets a point where they would want to discharge as in convert to fiat or spending, and authorities get to freeze the account? do you also think there is a future plan to arresting this hugly situation to ensure greater confidence in the future? Thanks a lot.
Yes and No.
Bitcoin is pseudo-anonymous. IF the hackers just keep on funding their own wallets on the bitcoin network, it's defenately possible to keep tracking untill they deposit funds on an exchange or a P2P marketplace and arrest them when they exchange their stolen funds for fiat.
HOWEVER... There are countless "tricks" that can be used to break the connection between 2 wallets. If you combine a couple of these tricks it becomes virtually impossible to keep tracking.
For example:
- The use of mixers
- Coinjoin
- Depositing and withdrawing from casino's
- Exchanging BTC to a privacy coin (like monero), moving the funds around a bit, then exchaning back
I agree there are countless of ways to launder the funds. But there will be huge hurdles for them.
The bitcoin is being tracked in real time.
Any large amounts are hard to exchange without KYC and depositing a large amount of hacked funds on a mixing service or casino will draw massive attention on the mixing service or casino. It may also attract attention of law enforcement who will go after the service as well as the hacker (Like with BTCe).
Exchanging large amounts into other crypto will also draw attention to the hackers. Since it cannot be exchanged on exchanges that require KYC or that might seize the stolen funds there will be limited places where it can be discreetly exchanged. This is where any volume will give it away. There are not many places where you can exchange 40 million without being noticed.
It is more likely that the hacker will patiently sit on the funds and not withdraw it for years.
All markets should upgrade their security first.if binance or anothet market try to rollback, it cause serious trust problem to crypto which they dont want in the first place
Now, there is this talk about the "rollback" which can possibly reverse the 7,000 BTC transfer
The talk has happened yesterday and the idea was abandoned.
Only somebody with insufficient knowledge of Bitcoin could come up with such ideas. OK, Binance has its connections, but it was proven to not be enough to pull a 51% / fork. Luckily. Because it would have been costly and would have done more harm than benefit even to Binance. And why? As somebody else said, 7000BTC is probably peanuts for Binance, maybe there are other such transactions too they didn't disclose? I hope not.
Am I the only one who's pissed that they even suggested this?
I mean, the audacity they have to even make a suggestion like that prompted me to instantly delete my account at Binance.
Source: https://www.coindesk.com/binance-may-consider-bitcoin-rollback-following-40-million-hack
It may have some negative consequences, yeah right. That's going over it pretty lightly to say the least...
That just shows to me that they have way too much power.
I mean, the audacity they have to even make a suggestion like that prompted me to instantly delete my account at Binance.
Quote
“To be honest, we can actually do this probably within the next few days. But there are concerns that if we do a rollback on the bitcoin network at that scale, it may have some negative consequences, in terms of destroying the credibility for bitcoin.”
Source: https://www.coindesk.com/binance-may-consider-bitcoin-rollback-following-40-million-hack
It may have some negative consequences, yeah right. That's going over it pretty lightly to say the least...
That just shows to me that they have way too much power.
Have people forgot already what happens when you rollback? You make yourself look bad for everyone, you make the mockery of the blockchain ideals, which is permanence and immutability,,, hacks are meant to teach people a lesson, so please, learn your lesson. Do not think the community and miners will feel pity for you and rollback just because you were careless with security!
I disagree with the idea of implementing this Rollback. Once completely against the feature of instability! There have been about 100 blocks since the hack problem. And it doesn't feel right to get all this transaction back. Moreover, those who have a lot of money in the crypto world. And no one knows they won't make it a habit.
Thousands of people were being victimized in the event of Mt.GOX, or before, and no one was interested in Rollback? But when it comes to CZ and its precious exchange, we talk about it. CZ says that they are trying to be the best in every speech, making breakthrough in every field. CZ should not forget that the first thing you need to do is to secure the Binance platform and the money there!
The most important thing we need to protect for Bitcoin is that we have to be decentralized. CZ, Ver or any person should not have this power.
Thousands of people were being victimized in the event of Mt.GOX, or before, and no one was interested in Rollback? But when it comes to CZ and its precious exchange, we talk about it. CZ says that they are trying to be the best in every speech, making breakthrough in every field. CZ should not forget that the first thing you need to do is to secure the Binance platform and the money there!
The most important thing we need to protect for Bitcoin is that we have to be decentralized. CZ, Ver or any person should not have this power.
He can do Rollback, fork whatever with his shitcoin BNB, One cannot do Rollback on Bitcoin - The longest running chain. By talking about doing Bitcoin Rollback, CZ is embarrassing himself lol.
I remember the scene from Avengers where the Hulk explains that what happens in the past cannot be changed, and if it does, the future is somewhat ruined. If the rollback is done, imagine how much damage it could do to the whole bitcoin network just for the benefit of one network. It's a good thing they are no longrr vying for such action to be done because the complications can be so severe and the damage, irrepairable.
It is funny how you compared this to the time traveling which happened in end game. Meme worthy stuff! 
But in honesty a rollback would be a bad move on their part because when tragedy strikes they want to do it again.
It will be viewed as a huge eraser by these exchanges to do as they will. And we dont know what bad effects this will have on the blockchain.
It might very well be the breaker of chain(s).
So to speak.
Binance pulled back and decided not to continue campaigning for it. Plus if anyone believes that it's a good idea to let miners roll back the hackers' transaction, then they are stupid.
It's not happening,
https://twitter.com/cz_binance/status/1125996194734399488
It will just undermined blockchain, good to hear this kind of suggestions by those knowledgable minds but it won't work. Not even the genius mind of Tony Starks will actually go this far.
chuckle https://twitter.com/cz_binance/status/1125996194734399488
Quote
pros: 1 we could "revenge" the hackers by "moving" the fees to miners; 2 deter future hacking attempts in the process. 3. explore the possibility of how bitcoin network would deal with situations like these.
cons: 1 we may damage credibility of BTC, 2 we may cause a split in both the bitcoin network and community. Both of these damages seems to out-weight $40m revenge. 3 the hackers did demonstrate certain weak points in our design and user confusion, that was not obvious before.
cons: 4 While it is a very expensive lesson for us, it is nevertheless a lesson. it was our responsibility to safe guard user funds.
cons: 1 we may damage credibility of BTC, 2 we may cause a split in both the bitcoin network and community. Both of these damages seems to out-weight $40m revenge. 3 the hackers did demonstrate certain weak points in our design and user confusion, that was not obvious before.
cons: 4 While it is a very expensive lesson for us, it is nevertheless a lesson. it was our responsibility to safe guard user funds.
It will just undermined blockchain, good to hear this kind of suggestions by those knowledgable minds but it won't work. Not even the genius mind of Tony Starks will actually go this far.
Even if you have 51% of the miners helping out, it's still allmost impossible.
what about with 70% of the hash rate? or 90%?
it is not so much about having a huge hashrate and the ability to perform such an act but the fact that this is going to create a different fork which the network is never going to agree to follow because it will kill bitcoin and turn it into a shitcoin like ethereum in one action and nobody supports that.
ethereum network tried that once before but they failed hardly, (search DAO)
this situation is just $40m and surely no miner will try that but if it happens on a $4b fund most miners and maybe all miners may accept the bribe to help the roallback and make other suffer
$4 billion? No hacking group has ever managed to steal that much at once and the increasing security measures will make sure that no such thing will happen in the future. this situation is just $40m and surely no miner will try that but if it happens on a $4b fund most miners and maybe all miners may accept the bribe to help the roallback and make other suffer
Coming to the main topic, a rollback would complicate things in an insane manner which is why I don't support it. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction which is why it would probably cause more damage than intended.
Rollback would have been possible by a hard fork, under the condition of the consent of almost all miners.
Then it would create a new cryptocurrency and a "Bitcoin classic".
Fortunately, it is not likely to happen.
Then it would create a new cryptocurrency and a "Bitcoin classic".
Fortunately, it is not likely to happen.
ethereum network tried that once before but they failed hardly, (search DAO)
this situation is just $40m and surely no miner will try that but if it happens on a $4b fund most miners and maybe all miners may accept the bribe to help the roallback and make other suffer
i think it's fascinating to consider how the different scenarios might play out. in fact, i'd love to see a rollback attempted since it would apparently push so many peoples' buttons.
bitcoin is amoral and permissionless. miners and other economic actors don't need our permission to do something like this. are users going to fork every time miners do something compatible with the protocol that they don't like? that's quite inefficient. i wonder.
what about with 70% of the hash rate? or 90%?
bitcoin is amoral and permissionless. miners and other economic actors don't need our permission to do something like this. are users going to fork every time miners do something compatible with the protocol that they don't like? that's quite inefficient. i wonder.
Even if you have 51% of the miners helping out, it's still allmost impossible.
what about with 70% of the hash rate? or 90%?
Rollback would have been possible by a hard fork, under the condition of the consent of almost all miners.
Then it would create a new cryptocurrency and a "Bitcoin classic".
Fortunately, it is not likely to happen.
Then it would create a new cryptocurrency and a "Bitcoin classic".
Fortunately, it is not likely to happen.
Now, there is this talk about the "rollback" which can possibly reverse the 7,000 BTC transfer.
there is no "talk" and there has never been any "talk" of a rollback. all there was, was a tweet of someone who lost his mind after losing a huge amount of money (40 million dollars) and was trying anything to get that back and since his understanding of how a decentralized network of bitcoin works is minimal he is bound to make stupid statements like this tweet of his.
--snip--
My question is this: Can't this transaction be followed and given a close monitor? Until it gets a point where they would want to discharge as in convert to fiat or spending, and authorities get to freeze the account? do you also think there is a future plan to arresting this hugly situation to ensure greater confidence in the future? Thanks a lot.
My question is this: Can't this transaction be followed and given a close monitor? Until it gets a point where they would want to discharge as in convert to fiat or spending, and authorities get to freeze the account? do you also think there is a future plan to arresting this hugly situation to ensure greater confidence in the future? Thanks a lot.
Yes and No.
Bitcoin is pseudo-anonymous. IF the hackers just keep on funding their own wallets on the bitcoin network, it's defenately possible to keep tracking untill they deposit funds on an exchange or a P2P marketplace and arrest them when they exchange their stolen funds for fiat.
HOWEVER... There are countless "tricks" that can be used to break the connection between 2 wallets. If you combine a couple of these tricks it becomes virtually impossible to keep tracking.
For example:
- The use of mixers
- Coinjoin
- Depositing and withdrawing from casino's
- Exchanging BTC to a privacy coin (like monero), moving the funds around a bit, then exchaning back
They already said its not gonna happen. Just imagine if one company has the power to initiate a rollback of the bitcoin chain. The reputation of Bitcoin would be gone forever. It was ok to think about it, as cz has already said he didn't know before that it could be possible...
And it was good to discard the idea so fast...^^
And it was good to discard the idea so fast...^^
--snip--
My question is this: Can't this transaction be followed and given a close monitor? Until it gets a point where they would want to discharge as in convert to fiat or spending, and authorities get to freeze the account? do you also think there is a future plan to arresting this hugly situation to ensure greater confidence in the future? Thanks a lot.
My question is this: Can't this transaction be followed and given a close monitor? Until it gets a point where they would want to discharge as in convert to fiat or spending, and authorities get to freeze the account? do you also think there is a future plan to arresting this hugly situation to ensure greater confidence in the future? Thanks a lot.
Yes and No.
Bitcoin is pseudo-anonymous. IF the hackers just keep on funding their own wallets on the bitcoin network, it's defenately possible to keep tracking untill they deposit funds on an exchange or a P2P marketplace and arrest them when they exchange their stolen funds for fiat.
HOWEVER... There are countless "tricks" that can be used to break the connection between 2 wallets. If you combine a couple of these tricks it becomes virtually impossible to keep tracking.
For example:
- The use of mixers
- Coinjoin
- Depositing and withdrawing from casino's
- Exchanging BTC to a privacy coin (like monero), moving the funds around a bit, then exchaning back
Jump to: