The Bitfinex Money-Laundering Story Gets Weirder

ALSO: Sweden leads EU on proposed crypto mining ban, Coinbase's PAC and more |

Overheard on CoinDesk TV...

Sound Bites

"If we're going to solve poverty, we have to start being innovative around it. And I think the Lighting Network offers that."

 

–Pro-bitcoin California congressional candidate Aarika Rhodes, on CoinDesk TV's "First Mover."

What others are writing...

Off-Chain Signals

  • Crypto is like the 1990s internet, nearing a hyper-adoption phase, Wells Fargo says (Market Watch)
  • Who paid for Reese Witherspoon's NFT collection? (Dirty Bubble Media)
  • NFT wash traders scammed $9M from unsuspecting newbies last year (Protos)
  • GTA Publisher Take-Two Thinks NFTs Are A Good "Fit" But Wants To "Stay Away From Speculation" (Nintendo Life)
  • New Alfa Romeo SUV Will Come With NFT Service Record (Decrypt)
  • Lawmaker Takes Aim at Puerto Rico as Crypto Tax Haven (Decrypt)
  • AssangeDAO wins Julian Assange x Pak NFT for $53 million (The Block)
  • Revolut seeks senior blockchain engineers amid token rumors (The Block)
  • Inside Wirex's crypto strategy for the US (American Banker)

It's never been easier to earn interest on Bitcoin and Tether with BitMEX EARN. Enjoy up to 10% APR on Tether and 4% on Bitcoin, fully backed by the BitMEX Insurance Fund. 

 

With new products, reliable security, and responsive customer service, there's never been a better time to join BitMEX. Start earning interest today by subscribing to EARN here

 

BitMEX products and services are not available to US Persons and in other specified jurisdictions.

Putting the news in perspective

The Takeaway

4 Unanswered Questions About the Bitfinex Hack

Yesterday we got stunning news of the arrest of a New York couple, Ilya "Dutch" Lichtenstein and Heather R. Morgan, for their alleged role in attempting to launder bitcoin now worth a staggering $4.6 billion. That bitcoin was stolen from the global exchange Bitfinex in August 2016, and in the half-decade since then, there has been little additional insight into the attack.

 

That long silence (along with what we'll call some more lyrical factors) drove intense fascination with yesterday's news. But as much as we learned, there's still a great deal we don't know, including dangling questions that could lead down a much deeper rabbit hole. Some of the most important unknowns involve the hack itself, the business fallout of the hack and the alleged launderers' own puzzling behavior during the period they're accused of trying to wash the stolen BTC.

 

As you might expect, grappling with unanswered questions involves some speculation. I've done my best to highlight where that speculation appears, but we're off the map here in general, so take what follows largely as a series of hypotheticals and thought experiments.

 

How did the initial hack happen?

A crucial but easily overlooked element of yesterday's charges is that they do not  allege that Lichtenstein and Morgan were responsible for the initial hack of Bitfinex. The charges don't offer any specific theory about how they came into possession of the private keys controlling the coins.  One possibility is that the couple purchased the BTC from the initial hacker(s) at a discount. Another is that they were merely acting as agents for the hacker(s), though that's less likely given their direct control of the keys.

 

There is, however, some circumstantial reason to believe that the couple could have been involved in the hack itself, and the Department of Justice just didn't have quite enough evidence to charge them with more than money laundering.

 

The most intriguing (though again entirely circumstantial) evidence is that Morgan appears to have been outright obsessed with "social engineering," a type of hacking that focuses on compromising people instead of code. In one lengthy presentation given at the event series NYC Salon, she described methods of deception and intimidation that she had used in real-world exercises to influence individuals and gain access to spaces and organizations.

 

That is particularly intriguing given the nature of the original hack, which involved compromising multisignature protections that went through security provider BitGo. In CoinDesk's reporting at the time, Michael McSweeney wrote that "in order to withdraw such a large amount of funds, BitGo would likely have had to sign off on those transactions," because of a multisignature security layer implemented for Bitfinex users. That raises the possibility that social engineering was involved in the hack.

 

It has been noted that Morgan interviewed Matt Parrella, a former chief compliance officer at BitGo, for a 2020 Forbes column titled, amazingly, "Experts share tips on how to protect your business from cybercriminals." That's a serious eyebrow-raiser, but it may not mean much given that Parrella was only briefly employed at BitGo in 2019 and 2020.

 

Why would crypto-literate criminals store private keys in the cloud?

One of the really bizarre things revealed in yesterday's charging documents is that authorities claim they were able to seize the stolen BTC after accessing private keys that Lichtenstein/Morgan had stored in a cloud service. Keeping private keys offline at all times is one of the most fundamental security tenets of crypto management, and it's implausible that someone undertaking to launder crypto on such a huge scale wouldn't be well aware of that.

 

There are a few non-conspiratorial ways to understand the keys being stored online. Most importantly, the keys were themselves encrypted, which you can at least imagine someone rationalizing as secure.

 

Crypto researcher Eric Wall further suggested that despite claims in the charging documents, the keys may not have been decrypted by law enforcement. Instead, the keys may have been handed over by the culprits when confronted. That could also explain why a large portion of the stolen coins was moved on Feb. 1. Perhaps the accused launderers were demonstrating that the keys worked before handing their booty over to the feds.

 

It's also worth remembering that the BTC in question was worth about $70 million at the time of the hack. It ballooned to multiple billions over the course of five years, possibly outpacing the culprits' ability to upgrade their security practices.

 

Read the full story here.

 

David Z. Morris

Making Bitcoin Better

 

iBitLabs has developed a solution to split bitcoin (BTC) into BitBTC on the Ethereum or EVM-based chains through smart contracts so that one BTC is split into 1 million BitBTC. BitBTC then has faster transfer speeds and lower transfer fees, is more suitable for micropayments, saves more energy and is more convenient for DeFi. BitBTC makes it easier to buy anything with BTC. Indeed, iBitLabs has begun a Twitter campaign offering a reward of 1 million BitBTC to someone who can let Laszlo Hanyecz buy pizza with BitBTC.

 

*This is sponsored content from BitBTC.

The Chaser...

The Node

A newsletter from CoinDesk

Were you forwarded this newsletter? Sign up here.

See Previous Editions

Copyright © 2021 CoinDesk, All rights reserved. 

250 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10003, USA

Manage your newsletter subscriptions  |  Unsubscribe from all CoinDesk email 

Related Posts


EmoticonEmoticon

:)
:(
=(
^_^
:D
=D
=)D
|o|
@@,
;)
:-bd
:-d
:p
:ng
:lv