Looks like the stolen Ethereum is on the move and being laundered on Huobi How do you know it's stolen from Cryptopia? They never posted any TX and never disclosed any amount stolen. All they said was "significant" and "9.4% of total holdings". Why do you think they kept these a secret, I'm interested to hear your opinion. As long as nobody from Cryptopia indicated ETH was stolen, I don't think it's up for us to say so. Why should we accredit the ideea of stolen, when there are other equally probable situations? I know it is stolen because the users that had Ethereum on Cryptopia had 100% of their Ethereum "exchanged" for the Cryptopia Loss Marker(CLM) token. Indicating to me that 100% of the Ethereum was taken. |
|
|
|
Looks like the stolen Ethereum is on the move and being laundered on Huobi https://www.coindesk.com/the-cryptopia-hackers-are-moving-funds-into-at-least-four-walletsNow, according to an analysis by CoinFirm, the hackers are moving that cash into separate wallets, including two CoinDesk found that were directly connected to Huobi.   OK so there's something that's confusing me a lot regarding cryptos and liquidation. Particularly with MTgox and what happened to their customers and apologies in advance if I've got the wrong idea regarding this.
MTGox repaid their customers in USD value at the time of the liquidation, they did not return the coins users had.
If cryptopia does this in a few months and say we still go at the parabolic rate the market is going in now, can they do the same thing and pay back what the USD value is now?
What happens, if they do pay the $$$ value, to the coins left over. Who gets them?
Same question with MTgox, who or what entity is now owners of the bitcoins not paid out?
MtGox was very different. They only traded bitcoin and were insolvent for some time (several hacks).  It was initially thought there were no bitcoins left but a cold wallet was eventually "found". MtGox was based in Japan so Japanese law applied and funds were intermingled with company funds. NZ law is different. Most of the coins I don't expect to have been intermingled. I have previously posted how I expect the liquidation to be conducted. here and here Any other way would be stupid and will get a lot of opposition. |
|
|
|
It's not a shit post, it's just a shit PM. Enjoy!  Stfu and suck my dick bitch, yo u nobody ass fucking faggot with 20 damn posts.
Sellergirl1 is a T girl ? |
|
|
|
Tradesatoshi.com belongs to Adam Clark.
Well he is also one of the owners of the now bancrupt exchange cryptopia.
All victims of cryptopia know now how they were cheated.
After the hack around 15% of funds were lost.
But most of the remaining cryptos were not able to be traded or withdrawn afterwards.
So Cryptopia made mode damage than the hackers.
False and missing information from the scammers at cryptopia.
All Funds inside are now lost.
But until the last day they allowed deposits, so they rose the damage.
Just keep that in mind, if you trade on tradesatoshi.com with at least one of the same guys...and think twice if you can trust them....
As far as I am aware Tradesatoshi does not belong to Adam Clark. Francesco Alibrandi started Tradesatoshi and paid Adam Clark for the code to set up an exchange. Since then the exchange has changed a lot and has other site developers. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09878766/officersSince then Tradesatoshi moved its jurisdiction from the UK to HK. According to the HK company records Francesco Alibrandi is still the sole director.  |
|
|
|
It is exactly the reason why they had to call in the liquidators - because they cannot use other peoples funds or continue trading if they are insolvent. That's not true. You don't have to involve a liquidator if you want to close a business. You simply close it, pay back all the concerned parties and that's that. And make no mistake, this is a voluntary liquidation, no one forced it upon them. It clearly says so in their company filings. A question remains: if voluntary, why not first receivership but straight to liquidation? Contrasting this with all their tweets saying they are on the way to resuming normal activity? Nope. Not allowed under the Companies Act 1993 http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0105/203.0/DLM319570.htmlAlso I don't think you understand the terminology that you are using. Receivership is where the assets are sold for the benefit of one secured creditor. Appointment is through enforcement of a clause in the deed or instrument that created the security. Liquidation is where the assets are returned or sold for the benefit of all creditors. A liquidator can be appointed by the company or by a creditor petitioning the court. Where a company appoints a liquidator costs are saved because if a creditor petitions the court their legal fees are priority debt. |
|
|
|
If 14% of their total holdings was hack, How come these thieves are saying there are not enough money to cover everyone's money! they already haircut people's balance to cover the losses in the hack.
Where's the remaining 86% money own by their customers? It means they are using people's deposit to fund their operation while collecting trading fees and listing fees. IN this case, They are all thieves and scammers, IMHO they should go to jail for their actions.
It is exactly the reason why they had to call in the liquidators - because they cannot use other peoples funds or continue trading if they are insolvent. It doesn't even necessarily mean that there is not enough funds to cover the debt. It could be that they do not have enough cash at hand to pay for their bills going forward. The volume on the exchange was dead. You can't keep trading if you are likely to run out of money to pay for costs at some stage (i.e. server lease, wages and building rental) . The post hack work that they have done will just assist the liquidators with resolving it faster. In this case all customers should be the priority and be the first to get paid in the liquidation process. One thing, Why they don't just allow all users to withdraw their money/coins from the exchange instead of asking help from liquidators which probably incur more fees and more money that they don't have. This is not how the law works in western countries. Of course, money being deposited IN TRUST will go back to their rightful owner; however, crypto is not considered money and it's definitely not IN TRUST. So, basically the liquidators can do whatetever they want with it. There will not be anything left for us, customers, this is how it works now at this point in time, in this society. I will say this again, people, don't leave coin at exchanges. Are you a lawyer? Your Coin Balances are operated by us, and represent entries in your name on the general ledger of ownership of Coins maintained and held by us. This means the Coins in your deposit wallets may be pooled in our internal accounts with other Users' Coins at any time.
Each User's entry in the general ledger of ownership of Coins is held by us, on trust, for that User.  https://web.archive.org/web/20190113164519/https:/www.cryptopia.co.nz/Home/Terms#4 https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6535069065508200448/ |
|
|
|
If 14% of their total holdings was hack, How come these thieves are saying there are not enough money to cover everyone's money! they already haircut people's balance to cover the losses in the hack.
Where's the remaining 86% money own by their customers? It means they are using people's deposit to fund their operation while collecting trading fees and listing fees. IN this case, They are all thieves and scammers, IMHO they should go to jail for their actions.
It is exactly the reason why they had to call in the liquidators - because they cannot use other peoples funds or continue trading if they are insolvent. It doesn't even necessarily mean that there is not enough funds to cover the debt. It could be that they do not have enough cash at hand to pay for their bills going forward. The volume on the exchange was dead. You can't keep trading if you are likely to run out of money to pay for costs at some stage (i.e. server lease, wages and building rental) . The post hack work that they have done will just assist the liquidators with resolving it faster. |
|
|
|
What about shareholders in this company, how will they be treated? I can see the coins are held in trust so should be given back but do shareholders have any rights to wind up funds ahead of customers?
Shareholders (unless in exceptional circumstances) are the last to get anything. They usually carry the largest loss. In most instances they can only get paid if all the liabilities are settled. |
|
|
|
btw, dont expect your money or funds back ever, this is mt.gox scale stuff
My personal opinion is that II don't believe it is. I believe it is a way they can legally get out of their building lease, leased servers, employment contracts and other obligations that over time will cost unnecessary $ and get a fair and legal way to return funds and preserving value. It is clear from the reported volume that there is not enough volume on the exchange to continue trading and cover expenses. Currently it is in the hands of liquidators that have statutory powers and they have indicated they will seek the courts approval for certain matters regarding distribution of funds. https://www.grantthornton.co.nz/faqs-cryptopia-liquidation/While I don't think all issues will be resolved but I think the bulk of the issues will be resolved within a reasonable timeframe. From what I have read is that it is likely that they will seek the courts approval to return crypto assets via withdrawal. This would require some legal approval because it depends on whether the courts see it as being held on behalf of customers or as a company asset. The most logical and easiest way forward would be to consider it "held on behalf of customers" since it is easily identifiable, held separately, and preserves the best value. (some of the alts would have no value in a fire-sale). Court approval would allow this to happen. It also will provide funds to allow this to happen and allow them to hire independent experts to make this happen Personally I feel more confident in liquidators (who are legally recognized as experts in such matters) making those decisions rather than things just dragging on for months unresolved. The method in which Cryptopia has previously treated the funds (i.e. providing marker tokens for lost funds & their TOS) also indicates that it is the most likely path they will pursue. Under New Zealand law crypto is considered "digital property". This is distinctly different from Japan where it is considered "currency". |
|
|
|
Most likely topia refund btc and alts by the price of CMC or last trades. Sometime in july.
That is prediction ? I think that is unlikely. They have indicated publicly that it will take some time to sort out. It is likely that they will seek specialist advise & court approval as to how to handle the liquidation. “Given the complexities involved we expect the investigation to take months rather than weeks.”
The liquidators are also working with independent experts and the relevant authorities with regards to the company’s obligations. Source: https://www.grantthornton.co.nz/press/press-releases-2019/cryptopia-limited-appoints-grant-thornton-as-liquidators/ |
|
|
|
How is the Cryptopia hack situation progressing? I can see that it is stil not possible to withdraw altcoins from Cryptopia. When will this be enabled?
Cryptopia has gone into statutory management with a liquidator having been appointed. It is not likely that they will reopen while it is potentially still possible. I think the most likely scenario is that the liquidator will allow the eventual withdrawal of some funds once liquidity is established. |
|
|
|
Does the new message on Cryptopia.co.nz and Twitter mean, that all my funds on Cryptopia are lost?
Not lost per se, but the company is entering liquidation proceedings. If you have a balance on Cryptopia, you will need to make a claim with the liquidators or trustee in the coming weeks or months. Then you'll wait in line with all of Cryptopia's other creditors who are hoping to get a fraction of their money back. This could be a long, drawn-out process. It could end up taking years, like the Mt. Gox bankruptcy. Appointment of liquidators shows the situation is not good but it also does not mean that it necessarily over. Liquidators have special powers under New Zealand law - investigative, ability to compel creditors and shareholders to accept a resolution, restructure and cancel contracts like a lease. http://www.lawsociety.org.nz/lawtalk/lawtalk-archives/issue-880/an-introduction-to-liquidationsThey also have the power to continue trading if it is the best solution forward. I'm disappointed but not surprised that they have taken this course of action. They did not have a lot of options after such a heist. I feel sorry for the small coins that only trade on there and people who hold balances of such coins. The person or persons responsible for the theft didn't just steal the funds. They stole the livelihood of their staff, the potential of some of the coins, the value from the shareholders and CEFs holders and hurt a lot of the exchange users. |
|
|
|
Not good enough if you are caught. Best steals are those that become legendary like D.B. Cooper -> never identified or captured.  D B Cooper may not have survived the parachute jump either. |
|
|
|
I understand all this but I am still wondering how hackers benefit in making donations to streamers or to anything else for that matter. Unless the person receiving that donation is also inside the scam.
The Drug Courier for example, they know that they are carring drugs to deliver to the destination and get paid or are coerced to do it. How do streamers fit in this equation?
By making thousands of payments to random people the hacker can obfuscate transactions made to those involved in the hack. It would be hard to judge whether a payment was made to a random person or someone involved in the hack. Some hackers have done this in the past. Clustering of payments usually still make it identifiable. The theory is that if you give 99% of the stolen funds to strangers it becomes hard for the police to identify the hacker who manages to launder 1% (or more). Since it is then impossible to determine whether it was a random payment or a payment to the person linked to the crime. In practice it still can result in being charged with "receiving stolen goods" if someone uses or moves the funds. |
|
|
|
Ortiz was a smart hacker
Such a great talent and genius can be put to use for the benefit of the cryptocurrency industry.
I appreciate Joel Ortiz tech skills,
You guys didn't read more than 3 lines of that article, did you? Joel Ortiz, a skilled SIM Swapper Do you know what a SIM Swapper is? A guy that goes to a phone company office and tries with a convincing story to have the victim's sim card replaced and handed to him. Then he uses that sim card to have all the passwords of the victim's social media accounts or exchange reset and takes control over them. There is no "hacking", no "tech-savvy" , he is at the same level as a guy trying to sell snake oil to some morons. I agree - SIM jacking is not "tech savvy". It is a confidence trickster. It is on par to stealing someones car by fooling the valet parking attendant into giving you the keys. It is also foolish to tie your accounts to a phone number. Using text or email as your 2FA is like locking your house and leaving a note on the door reminding where the backup key is hidden. Txt is not secure - it can be intercepted. With companies greedily trying to steal customers from other providers and service providers hiring people that are not aware of how much is at stake when they give a phone number to the wrong person - phone numbers are not secure. Porting a number to another phone is relatively easy if you have certain information. There are whole websites dedicated to phone jacking and stealing social media accounts for profit. |
|
|
|
I'm just wondering if its possible to have this kind of system where you just need to scan your finger print and you will be login directly to your account. I'm talking about this one using our mobile phones since most of the phone now have their own finger print technology, and i usually used my phone to work on this forum. Any violent reactions or any clarification are really appreciated. Thank you.  Why would you want to give such private information away ? What is wrong with signing in with a complex password and 2FA for security ? Do you really want a scan of your fingerprint circulating on the internet ? Bitcointalk has been hacked three times already https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4405796.0There have been 6 major exchange hacks already in 2019. Anything crypto is a target for hackers. Besides - someone can easily replicate your fingerprint or intercept the data containing the digital version of your fingerprint. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
