Don't believe any of these fancy stories being propagated by the mainstream media. I don't believe that Alexander Vinnik was behind the Mt Gox robbery. It was most likely an inside job, with the knowledge of Mark Karpeles.
Well, I don't think the indictments and press releases suggest that he was necessarily behind the theft of the coins themselves. I don't see charges of computer intrusion. This was also back in 2012, when even these sums of bitcoins weren't particularly impressive in value. On the Russian forums, and among people that have seem to have some inside information regarding BTC-e, nobody seems to think Vinnik was an owner or significant admin. It's conceivable that he just approached BTC-e as a potential liquidity provider (having accumulated coins from the Gox theft, or bought the coins from someone who did, with the intention of washing them). If the stories are true that Karpeles just let a stolen wallet.dat get drained for years (totalling hundreds of thousands of bitcoins), that's simply embarrassing for him, and I don't see how this is some grand vindication, either. |
|
|
|
I don't think they have the owner. They have someone who was involved with btc-e. They think they have the owner.
Indeed, I don't think they have the owner at all. Based on the indictment and what I've read from semi-insiders, Vinnik had some ties to the exchange, but nothing to do with the ownership or launch of the exchange. In the end, it doesn't matter. BTC-e is unlikely to contest anything in court, so the best move for the Feds is to present the patsy (Vinnik) as the kingpin and frame the takedown as a victory. (And hope no one asks why there was no announcement of funds seized.....) |
|
|
|
Unless you are suggesting that the proceeds of the ICO would be used to purchase btc-e debt at a discount, however this would be difficult because afaik, there is no way to even begin to verify debt claims without access to the btc-e DB.
Even with access to the database, this would be very difficult. Over one million accounts and no required verification. I wonder what percentage of the accounts have anything associated with them besides username, email, password, IP logs. Fair enough, who the hell wants to send BTC-e their documents? But I guess that's why we're in this mess...  Yes, it would be very messy for as long as the btc-e website is offline/down. In theory, the US government could bring the DB back online and allow users to transfer assets among each-other for the purpose of assigning debts. Another issue is the fact that the US government does not appear to be holding any of btc-e's crypto assets. The btc-e hot wallet still contains around 400 BTC, and does not appear to have been drained. If the US government did not seize financial assets of btc-e that ultimately belonged to their customers, then their customers would probably not have a claim against the US government just because they forcibly caused btc-e to be shut down. That's the strange thing about this. It seems like the US authorities probably thought they were raiding BTC-e's main servers, including at least hot wallets. At this point, since they haven't announced any funds seized (pretty embarrassing press release really), I'm guessing the servers they seized were just pointing to remote servers. The ETH wallet was moved today..... but we have no idea who moved it. Maybe it was the owners, maybe it was the US government, maybe it was just a dead man's switch. In any case, the overall situation doesn't look good at all for the exchange's customers..... The ETH that was moved is likely to be cold storage based on the fact that it was worth in the high 8 figures of USD. I don't think they would have any kind of 'dead man's switch' for cold storage, as in theory this would go untouched for long periods of time. It doesn't appear that the BTC hot wallets have been seized/moved as of the time of this post. Based on all of the above facts, I think the ETH movement is the result of actions of the owners of btc-e. It is standard practice for financial institutions to change the combination of safes/vaults when an employee with access to a portion of the combination stops working at said financial institution, so it would not be unreasonable for the btc-e operators to generate a new cold storage setup/keys and move crypto into the new cold storage. I would say there is a good chance that the Alex guy likely had at least partial access to crypto held in cold storage. LOL. standard practice for financial institutions . are you serious about that? is BTC-e a financial institutions?  Please go to a real forex company see what it means a financial institution. FXOpen, AvaTrade and others used BTC-e as a liquidity provider. I think Plus500 did as well because their CFD was based on BTC-e's price. Would you consider these to be real forex companies? Do you think they were stupid (or criminals, as the DOJ alleges) for having exposure to BTC-e? |
|
|
|
Does xbtce.com is from same owner of btc-e
Yes. they are same and become ready for another scamming project. Maybe two years later when wallets are hot againIf so, I don't think that was the intention. And if BTC-e exit scams now (i.e. the Feds couldn't seize any funds), it's because that's the safest option for the owners at this point. The FBI wants these guys extradited and imprisoned. As for xBTCe, I doubt they could pull off any significant exit scam, as their business will only decline from here. Everyone knows of their connections to BTC-e, and most suspect their ownership is largely the same. |
|
|
|
When I saw the sad picture of various badges of the US agencies on the btc-e's web site I had even greater admiration for Kim Dotcom who is still standing. Just wanted to share. Any guess when we can expect the service to re-open if ever? My best guess would be in 2-3 months, if we are lucky. Although a tweet in Russian mentioned in 5 to 10 days, hardly believable.  It's anyone's guess at this point. Significant funds may have already been seized (making repayment of their obligations untenable), or there may be no real intention of relaunching (when the FBI is hunting you, disappearing starts to sound sensible). If we ignore those possibilities, then it's a matter of how much of their infrastructure was taken down or seized. If they were really going to relaunch, they would need to plan on constantly switching domains, data centers, shell companies. These things take time and also can risk real exposure for admins. And I imagine employees are worried for their safety now as well. If they come back on a new domain, it could be anywhere from a couple weeks to months. But I think the chances are low. |
|
|
|
After the take down of BTC-E.com how is xbtc-e.com sill up and running?
I also submitted verification documents a month ago, but ofcourse I won't go near this exchange after the btc-e.com scandal.
Clearly they are closely affiliated; BTC-e has been promoting them as a "partner" for years and they outsourced their verification services to them. They have a similar front end and used the same back end; I'm fairly sure they were the only liquidity provider for xBTCe. It's clear from their blog post that they are doing their best to distance themselves from BTC-e, but I imagine most of their customer base is skeptical of that, and are probably running for the exits. |
|
|
|
I think exactly opposite wil happen after network split. Bcc will be dumped by bitcoin lovers and they will keep their btc this will certainly pump the price of btc because all the free money people will get from bcc will be used on buying btc back. We can predict price to reach $3k for btc when bcc will be listed for trading.
But this assumes that BCC actually carries a price that can actually affect the BTC price. That assumes that there are also people who value BCC, and may also be dumping their BTC for BCC. I think all of this is highly unpredictable. We can't predict future demand for BCC. I'm frankly surprised that exchanges have gotten so much interest from users that Kraken and Bitfinex are paying them out (and opening markets for them?), and Coinbase increased their withdrawal limits to allow people to move their coins off exchange. If there is truly a lot of demand for BCC, things could get messy. I just think it's impossible to predict at this point, and we will see the market price things in over time. |
|
|
|
Of course all this happening is never different on 2014 or so on, they have to FUD to make profits. The bitcoin drama will never end because of the greedy people. But its still healthy for bitcoin tho.
There is some truth to that, but it's much more complex. Bitcoin is a diverse ecosystem, and we have seen some level of protocol ossification; large stakeholders have developed--some who prefer more scalable solutions, and some whose business model and profit motives more so align with bigger blocks. In the end, I think a split like this can be healthy. This type of hard fork is not coercive; there is not an assertion (as was the case with XT, Classic, BU) that BCC is "Bitcoin"... so maybe the two sides of this long debate can truly divorce, to some extent. In the short term, that could absolutely be rocky for the price, at least based on network effect. |
|
|
|
At first I was upset and thinking that the Americans have overstepped their jurisdiction. But now it seems that they were right in arresting Alexander Vinnik. WizSec has published enough evidence to link Vinnik with the Mt Gox robbery.
But in the process of busting up some money laundering from 2012 (I don't see actual evidence or charges of computer intrusion, just links to stolen inputs), they have basically guaranteed massive customer losses for the exchange's user base. And given that the feds basically painted the entire customer base as criminals, it doesn't sound like there is going to be any recovery for victims--even if they did seize funds, and they made no announcement of that. And if they didn't seize funds, it's just lose-lose for everyone. Because what makes the most sense, unfortunately, is for the owners to go into hiding and exit scam. Trying to relaunch with fiat channels cut off and an FBI target on your back? That's just not sensible. It's pretty embarrassing for the feds if they couldn't recover any money from all this... |
|
|
|
Right now, only Vinnik is indicted. BTC-e only received a fine (as far as we know).
Unfortunately, it's worse than that. BTC-E was indicted on two counts, as part of the same indictment -- running an unlicensed money service business and conspiracy to commit money laundering. And the feds seized their main domain (BTC-E.nz still seems untouched, not sure about the others). So it looks a bit more grim; I think they expected that $110mm fine to be paid out of seized funds. But it's still not entirely clear if they were able to seize funds. One would think they would have announced it in the initial press releases... |
|
|
|
u guys think so much about your money in btc-e. i feel bad for the ones that has legit money in btc-e, but at the same time you are stupid to be trading in a exchanger that is so shady for so many years. Well, to some extent this is true. But they had the best trading engine, best API and Metatrader. There was certainly a lot of legitimate traders and great technical features. This is why FXOpen and others used them for liquidity... and I'm sure those platforms have lost money from this. if these guys wasnt russians, i could NEVER amagine btc-e up again. but russians has balls.
This is true. This might be the only realistic hope here.  |
|
|
|
As far as I know, the BTC-e servers are in russia, US can't have taken them and so I don't think they have any private keys at all (maybe only Alexanders one from his phone).
So could it be this ETH move is done by the BTC-e admins for their new website???
From my understanding, from reading the indictment, BTC-E did have servers in United States. Yes, but the question is, what are they defining as servers? I've heard their Metatrader servers were in the US ... they used Cloudflare for DDOS protection but clearly that has nothing to do with their servers. And whatever servers may have been seized (in US or EU) may have just been running scripts to remote servers. So the authorities may not have recovered anything valuable. This might explain the lack of announcement regarding seizure of funds. |
|
|
|
As far as I know, the BTC-e servers are in russia, US can't have taken them and so I don't think they have any private keys at all (maybe only Alexanders one from his phone).
Why do you think their servers were in Russia? Their main domain was banned in Russia. They used to run on BTC-E.ru before moving to .com. I've heard servers run from Bulgaria, Cyprus, Panama... so who knows? And it's quite possible that whatever the feds were able to seize were just running scripts pointing to remote servers. But this still may not bode well for customers, due to the risk of future arrest by US authorities. |
|
|
|
I think we lost all. Would like everybody have his money back,but if we lost better than russian btce guys steal our money and not usa goverment,that they are the biggest thieves
are you out of your mind? BTC-e has been sized because it was doing illegal business. Or, at least, one of its head operator was. They are responsible of all the money lost. And you also want to give them a hug? If the coins have not been seized by Fed (as it seems for now)... they have to return them. Otherwise they will be additionally charge of theft and fraud. They cannot simply disappear with the money. And no one should wish this. (unless you work at BTCe  ) As far As I can see, there are 3 options: 1). money has been seized. bye bye money. 2). btc-e still have all the money (at least the crypto assets) and they run for it. ---> They already have the feds on their tails. The feds would love to tear them all apart confirming that btc-e was "indeed an illegal operation". More arrests follow. 3). BTC-e dismisses the arrested guy. Pays the fine. Restores a mirror site, enforces rules, and gives back the money. The third option will: Keep most of BTC-e employers out of jail. Restoring (although it takes time) the valuable business they had. Return money to happy costumers that will praise their new god (btc-e). We will see how it plays. But please, stop wishing that Russian guys have steal the money Entirely reasonable analysis in a sea of chaos, thanks buddy. The trouble with the conclusion made is that in the the third scenario, the feds are still on their tails. So they are risking arrest and seizure of funds. Customers know this too, so reopening to keep "printing money" starts to look less fruitful. I get the feeling given the language from the agency press releases and money laundering charge against BTC-E that they aren't interested in letting them operate in any capacity. Sure, they could play cat-and-mouse with domains or even run a TOR hidden service, but that seems quite risky for the admins. I also think doing so would put Mayzus Financial / Okpay in jeopardy (if they aren't already), because of their close connections to BTC-E. |
|
|
|
Well, I'm not saying there is a good outcome here. I don't think there will be. But I also don't think Vinnik is an owner, nor has access to BTC-E's storage. If you read the Russian forums, those who have been in contact with the owners and admins over the years -- none of them recognize this Vinnik. I don't think the owners would step foot in Greece, either.
But this might all be irrelevant. What matters is that the feds want to shut down BTC-E. What the feds want, they usually get This is not always the case Sometimes they fail miserably. They wanted Snowden extradited, and they had to back off eventually. If the Russian government steps in, all those bald eagles may have to fuck off instantly. Say, Putin through his minions like Greff allows the owners to restart the exchange under whatever name in Russia or in some friendly country or territory (like Abkhazia or Mongolia). In fact, there were certain rumors that Btc-e exchange is (was) strongly affiliated with Sberbank, the biggest Russian state-owned bank. For example, Btc-e has never had any issues with Yandex.Money (at least, as long as I remember), the online payment processing service owned by Sberbank. Further, fiat transactions seem to have been processed via Mongolian companies (banks) where Uncle Sam has no footing altogether. So it all mostly comes down to safety of the crypto wallets and whether the FBI managed to seize any coins Indeed, sometimes they fail miserably in political situations against e.g. Russia. But I don't see that happening here. BTC-E was banned in Russia long ago (hence the popularity of the .nz domain). I believe they were on BTC-E.ru and moved to .com and supposedly to Bulgaria because of this. And Russia is still busy banning access to exchanges today. Why change stance here and now? If they've never had any issues with Yandex, I'm not sure it follows that they are cozy with the Russian government. Agreed, it seems likely that their bank accounts in Mongolia are untouched, so if there was not much to freeze in their 3rd party Okpay/Moneypolo accounts, that might explain the lack of mention of funds being seized by the feds. But even if most of their fiat and crypto are intact...and absent some highly political intervention by e.g. Russia, how can they survive under constant threat from the FBI? Operate like the Pirate Bay did and constantly shift domains? How can they manage to pay people fiat? I suppose shell company payment processors work in the poker world (to some extent), maybe it could still work for BTC-E. It just seems far fetched to me at this point, without some miracle intervention like you mentioned. That would be interesting as hell, though. I certainly know about the overall negative attitude of the Russian government toward Bitcoin in the past years. But if we are to get things as straight as possible, Bitcoin has never been banned in Russia. All these years it remained in gray zone entirely. But recently this attitude seem to have started to change dramatically, so the question is now about legalizing Bitcoin in Russia (regardless of Btc-e), at least to a certain degree. In this manner, protecting the money of Russian citizens (which were the most numerous group of traders at this exchange) may be the step in that direction, especially given the current political circumstances and tensions rising between the US and Russia Anyway, we can only wait and see right now I agree, the attitudes of governments globally (including Russia) seem to be softening towards Bitcoin. And I would hope that Russia has an interest in protecting its residents here. Unfortunately, I suspect BTC-E is too small, and being actively banned in Russia seems to make this possibility less likely. Indeed, we can only hope for the best, and otherwise try to move on... |
|
|
|
guyz, there is still hope. as far as i can see, they only got the fukin domain under control, thats it.
Yeah and you know how that probably happened? FBI came visiting Vinnek in the prison, either hand over all data, plead guilty and get 20 years lowsec prison with visits by wife and child every day or 1000 million years Guantanamo without seeing your family again. Look at his face and you know he signed within a second. Well, I'm not saying there is a good outcome here. I don't think there will be. But I also don't think Vinnik is an owner, nor has access to BTC-E's storage. If you read the Russian forums, those who have been in contact with the owners and admins over the years -- none of them recognize this Vinnik. I don't think the owners would step foot in Greece, either. But this might all be irrelevant. What matters is that the feds want to shut down BTC-E. What the feds want, they usually getThis is not always the case Sometimes they fail miserably. They wanted Snowden extradited, and they had to back off eventually. If the Russian government steps in, all those bald eagles may have to fuck off instantly. Say, Putin through his minions like Greff allows the owners to restart the exchange under whatever name in Russia or in some friendly country or territory (like Abkhazia or Mongolia). In fact, there were certain rumors that Btc-e exchange is (was) strongly affiliated with Sberbank, the biggest Russian state-owned bank. For example, Btc-e has never had any issues with Yandex.Money (at least, as long as I remember), the online payment processing service owned by Sberbank. Further, fiat transactions seem to have been processed via Mongolian companies (banks) where Uncle Sam has no footing altogether. So it all mostly comes down to safety of the crypto wallets and whether the FBI managed to seize any coins Indeed, sometimes they fail miserably in political situations against e.g. Russia. But I don't see that happening here. BTC-E was banned in Russia long ago (hence the popularity of the .nz domain). I believe they were on BTC-E.ru and moved to .com and supposedly to Bulgaria because of this. And Russia is still busy banning access to exchanges today. Why change stance here and now? If they've never had any issues with Yandex, I'm not sure it follows that they are cozy with the Russian government. Agreed, it seems likely that their bank accounts in Mongolia are untouched, so if there was not much to freeze in their 3rd party Okpay/Moneypolo accounts, that might explain the lack of mention of funds being seized by the feds. But even if most of their fiat and crypto are intact...and absent some highly political intervention by e.g. Russia, how can they survive under constant threat from the FBI? Operate like the Pirate Bay did and constantly shift domains? How can they manage to pay people fiat? I suppose shell company payment processors work in the poker world (to some extent), maybe it could still work for BTC-E. It just seems far fetched to me at this point, without some miracle intervention like you mentioned. That would be interesting as hell, though. |
|
|
|
Well, I'm not saying there is a good outcome here. I don't think there will be. But I also don't think Vinnik is an owner, nor has access to BTC-E's storage. If you read the Russian forums, those who have been in contact with the owners and admins over the years -- none of them recognize this Vinnik. I don't think the owners would step foot in Greece, either.
They say, but is all rumors. I also think that the USA does not have the funds. The question is, if Vinnik was just a tech admin and an offshore company mule, would the other owner(s) just open btce for us? Now, at this time? If it were just Vinnik's arrest, I'm sure they would. But by issuing a takedown of BTC-E.com, they are sending a very clear message to the owners that they will be hunted down. That's the most fucked up thing about this. If they couldn't seize any money, they pretty much guarantee that the owners of BTC-E will disappear with it. Trying to operate an open, public exchange with the FBI trying to shut you down and put you in prison for the rest of your lives? I'd like to think positively, but just, why? $100-200k profit/day can't be worth that risk, can it? |
|
|
|
I'm also looking for the next best thing. I don't mind verifying my ID but am looking for an exchange that you can buy/trade LTC, ETH and XRP with BTC.
The options aren't so great. There's Bittrex. I left Polo months ago because of the massive amount of complaints about missing deposits/withdrawals. But that's partly what left me with so much on BTC-E when it went down.......  Has it actually been seized? It just doesn't load for me. They normally put a notice up or announce it has been taken. Doubt they would have left it this long if they had.
Yes, it has been seized. It has not fully propagated, but by tomorrow or so, everyone should see the same thing. From the whois, the name server is now pointing at Shadowserver, which is a proxy for law enforcement. |
|
|
|
But this might all be irrelevant. What matters is that the feds want to shut down BTC-E. What the feds want, they usually get. The corrupt American gov is virtually bankrupt, they will STEAL every dollar they can, like desperate thieves. Not only will they steal every dollar they can, but they will also steal all the crypto, and auction it back to the institutional investors/banksters. It's such a cruel joke, really. Still there is some hope left.
Is there? Honestly, I'm trying to give up all hope so I can move on. I'm trying to think about this logically -- even if the owners have backups and funds are secure, is it really worth trying to relaunch? Fiat channels will be cut off, and the FBI will keep coming. |
|
|
|
Still no contact from support and it's been a week now. Is this normal for them or do they not actually handle some support tickets at all? Does anyone know if they have an official thread or account here as that might be easier.
The last time I sent them a support ticket, it took them 6 days to respond. Then the support rep completely ignored my issues and sent me some boilerplate responses. This was about a month ago. Granted, there is still likely a large influx of new users right now, but this level of support is really quite disappointing given that they are highly regulated and generally held in such high regard. The best way to get their attention is to create a thread on Reddit and hope it gets some attention... they tend to respond to that quickly. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
