Nothing to see here, move along.
News agencies post whatever makes a good story and BAN THIS SICK FILTH is always a good story. Also LulzSec are trolls, they probably put the false information out themselves to cause drama for the lulz.
Topic: wide spread attempts to discredit bitcoin (Read 1576 times)
Aaron Barr is an asshat who does not know what he is talking about. Remember how wrong he was about nicks in anonops IRC? He might as well retire from the Internet and the world of the switch and become a goat farmer.
He will never achieve any sort of credibility in the security community and only further hurts himself with each sad little tweet.
He will never achieve any sort of credibility in the security community and only further hurts himself with each sad little tweet.
An excerpt from http://www.dailytech.com/LulzSec+Downs+CIAs+Public+Site+Appears+to+be+Subject+of+Framing+Attempt/article21916.htm
II. Framing Attempt?
LulzSec has been the subject of what appears to be wildly bizarre framing attempt involved the increasingly popular peer-to-peer digital currency Bitcoins. Former HBGary CEO, Aaron Barr, posted to Twitter:
Lulzsec manages to pilfer nearly a half million dollars in bitcoins while running their tele-DDOS-athon today. tinyurl.com/3mfngql
Only the link in question didn't receive the funds today -- it received them on Monday (6/13). And while it did send a donation to LulzSec's public donations account:
176LRX4WRWD5LWDMbhr94ptb2MW9varCZP
It only sent the typical token gesture: 0.31337 ("elite" in leetspeak) -- worth about $7 USD.
So where did this bizarre rumor begin? It appears to trace back to a Pastebin:
http://pastebin.com/88nGp508" rel="nofollow
Which was a repost of the Bethesda press release, with one important alteration -- the account was altered to make it look like:
1KPTdMb6p7H3YCwsyFqrEmKGmsHqe1Q3jg
...was a LulzSec donations account.
Clearly that account appears to be involved with some mass fraud or is a clever social engineering project to offer the appearance of a mass fraud. Either way, the attempt to tie LulzSec to it seems clearly flawed and like a clear framing. No official LulzSec press release has ever carried that number.
It's unclear whether Mr. Barr is merely a uninformed observer, or is more deeply involved with this possible framing attempt. But it's clear that his wild claims appear unfounded.
It's also possible that the postings are some sort of attempt to discredit Bitcoin itself. In recent weeks several news agencies have been spreading posts with dubious claims, attempting to discredit the digital crypto-currency.
For example The Guardian's Ruth Whippman writes:
An odd alliance of libertarians, geeks, businesspeople and drug kingpins hail Bitcoin as the future of the internet – global, private and immune from national economic crises and the whims of reckless bankers. Its critics in the political sphere fear that it could give rise to an online Wild West of gambling, prostitution and global bazaars for contraband.
Previously dismissed as a nerdy curiosity, the untaxable Bitcoin may soon be due for a crackdown.
And Gawker adds:
Not all Bitcoin enthusiasts embrace Silk Road. Some think the association with drugs will tarnish the young technology, or might draw the attention of federal authorities. "The real story with Silk Road is the quantity of people anxious to escape a centralized currency and trade," a longtime bitcoin user named Maiya told us in a chat. "Some of us view Bitcoin as a real currency, not drug barter tokens."
Silk Road and Bitcoins could herald a black market eCommerce revolution. But anonymity cuts both ways. How long until a DEA agent sets up a fake Silk Road account and starts sending SWAT teams instead of LSD to the addresses she gets? As Silk Road inevitably spills out of the bitcoin bubble, its drug-swapping utopians will meet a harsh reality no anonymizing network can blur.
Seemingly, some people are suggesting that Bitcoin is more villainous than the far more anonymous form of currency -- cash. The source of this misinformation/smear campaign is unknown, though, news agencies seem happy to spread it gleefully.
II. Framing Attempt?
LulzSec has been the subject of what appears to be wildly bizarre framing attempt involved the increasingly popular peer-to-peer digital currency Bitcoins. Former HBGary CEO, Aaron Barr, posted to Twitter:
Lulzsec manages to pilfer nearly a half million dollars in bitcoins while running their tele-DDOS-athon today. tinyurl.com/3mfngql
Only the link in question didn't receive the funds today -- it received them on Monday (6/13). And while it did send a donation to LulzSec's public donations account:
176LRX4WRWD5LWDMbhr94ptb2MW9varCZP
It only sent the typical token gesture: 0.31337 ("elite" in leetspeak) -- worth about $7 USD.
So where did this bizarre rumor begin? It appears to trace back to a Pastebin:
http://pastebin.com/88nGp508" rel="nofollow
Which was a repost of the Bethesda press release, with one important alteration -- the account was altered to make it look like:
1KPTdMb6p7H3YCwsyFqrEmKGmsHqe1Q3jg
...was a LulzSec donations account.
Clearly that account appears to be involved with some mass fraud or is a clever social engineering project to offer the appearance of a mass fraud. Either way, the attempt to tie LulzSec to it seems clearly flawed and like a clear framing. No official LulzSec press release has ever carried that number.
It's unclear whether Mr. Barr is merely a uninformed observer, or is more deeply involved with this possible framing attempt. But it's clear that his wild claims appear unfounded.
It's also possible that the postings are some sort of attempt to discredit Bitcoin itself. In recent weeks several news agencies have been spreading posts with dubious claims, attempting to discredit the digital crypto-currency.
For example The Guardian's Ruth Whippman writes:
An odd alliance of libertarians, geeks, businesspeople and drug kingpins hail Bitcoin as the future of the internet – global, private and immune from national economic crises and the whims of reckless bankers. Its critics in the political sphere fear that it could give rise to an online Wild West of gambling, prostitution and global bazaars for contraband.
Previously dismissed as a nerdy curiosity, the untaxable Bitcoin may soon be due for a crackdown.
And Gawker adds:
Not all Bitcoin enthusiasts embrace Silk Road. Some think the association with drugs will tarnish the young technology, or might draw the attention of federal authorities. "The real story with Silk Road is the quantity of people anxious to escape a centralized currency and trade," a longtime bitcoin user named Maiya told us in a chat. "Some of us view Bitcoin as a real currency, not drug barter tokens."
Silk Road and Bitcoins could herald a black market eCommerce revolution. But anonymity cuts both ways. How long until a DEA agent sets up a fake Silk Road account and starts sending SWAT teams instead of LSD to the addresses she gets? As Silk Road inevitably spills out of the bitcoin bubble, its drug-swapping utopians will meet a harsh reality no anonymizing network can blur.
Seemingly, some people are suggesting that Bitcoin is more villainous than the far more anonymous form of currency -- cash. The source of this misinformation/smear campaign is unknown, though, news agencies seem happy to spread it gleefully.
Jump to: