Binance Hackers Bombard Chipmixer to Launder at Least 4,836 BTC

[leea-1334]

If we follow Clain’s report on their website (https://blog.clain.io/binance-hack-2019-deep-dive-into-the-money-laundering/) it does talk quite a lot in terms of likelihood. If fact, of the 4836 BTCs it has allegedly identified as being sent to Chipmixer, it only (currently) used a stronger more assertive vocabulary for 183 BTCs, stating that those are “surely” ("certainly", I figure they mean) identified as hacker funds, in contrast with  814 BTCs termed as “likely”.

Semantics is important, and although they may well have a good trail on something, when performing an accusation of this nature it is important to be certain and not likely certain.

Interestingly enough, back in March 2019, Clain studied the hack on a Japanese exchange called Zaif (see https://blog.clain.io/applying-machine-learning-for-thorough-investigation-of-zaif-hack/). Their investigation leads them to believe that, out of the 5957 BTCs stolen, 875 went through Chipmixer’s tumbler, and at least 1549 (mixed or not) ended up in Binance deposit addresses, with amounts below the KYC threshold of 2 BTCs used by Binance for withdrawals...

I think this is the best case for now. Everyone is saying this is bad for Chipmixer but first of all, there is no proof that they aided this activity at all,,, and like you said, more than 1500 BTC went to Binance and Binance did nothing. And immediately used it to process withdrawals for its customers.

So,,, Bitcoin fungibility wins.

[1715188092]

1715188092

[1715188092]

1715188092

[1715188092]

1715188092

[malevolent]

I don't think that they have any real choice here. If the feds are involved, then they need to cooperate with them. Else, they will just get destroyed, like BTC-e and numerous other cryptocurrency ventures. If they could limit the damage, by giving only a part of the information (like past 3 months data), then they may be able to retain a fraction of the user-base. But at the same time, there is no guarantee that the feds will allow Chipmixer to continue its operations, as now it is proven that criminals are making use of its services.

Also, it is quite possible that the feds will push for mandatory KYC verification for the Chipmixer users, which defeats the very purpose of using their services. I am feeling quite skeptical about them, and I have a feeling that they probably won't survive for long (irrespective of whether they are ready to cooperate with the FBI or not).  

First they would have to find who they are/where they're from, unlike btc-e/wex they don't deal with fiat currencies, so they have no legal entities to search for. And they'd have to prove Chipmixer knowingly accepted stolen bitcoins.

I am amazed why those hackers decided to use the Chipmixer coin-mixing service when they are aware that the transactions can still be traced. I am hoping that there can be an official investigation to this and something can be done especially in tracking these people who are the real scumbags of this industry. As to Chipmixer, the last among the many, let's hope this can never lead to its own downfall.

The stolen bitcoins were traced to Chipmixer, but tracing where they went is another matter. Yes, they mixed more coins than usual after the theft, but it can only be said mixed coins from Chipmixer are more likely to come from the theft for a while, telling which ones came from the theft will not be easy. Blockchain analysis companies probably work with exchanges, payment processors like Bitpay, etc. so depending on how many of Chipmixer's users spend coins where their identities can be deduced it will make the job of identifying the stolen coins easier or harder.

[eaLiTy]

At least 4,836 Bitcoin (BTC) of stolen from Binance exchange in May 2019 was laundered through crypto mixing service Chipmixer.

It is a really bad news for chipmixer as a service as they are put under the bus by this act, with mixing service closing left and right because of pressure from authorities and with his new update the authorities will be putting too much pressure to one of the only surviving good mixing service, even if they reveal the identity of the hackers it will hurt their business, how they are going to respond to the authorities is the biggest suspense here.

[MonsterV]

This surely is a bad light for Chipmixer now, although I believe that they won't openly cooperate and maintain full control of their mixing operations, but the main question is until when? They are a decent mixing service and a trusted name at that department, although once people knew that the said mixing service openly gave all the necessary info as to what happened to the coins and where it landed, I doubt people will still trust the said service. This is what my fears are for mixers, and was just a matter of time before news like this one surface. FATF, FBI and other agencies would come at Chipmixer's front door knocking and asking whether they want to cooperate or not, and I hope they know how to handle such issue.

Well, maybe this is a nightmare for chipmixers if binance really demands chipmixers, even though chipmixers are just a service, but because the services can launder money, they can be dragged into the case of hacking Binance. Especially if the country where the chipmixer stands is a member FATF, this will be an initiative action for the government of the country to further investigate cases like this. But here I hope the chipmixer will be fine because I also need a mixer service, but if something bad happens then another mixer service might be affected.

[squatter]

I don't think that they have any real choice here. If the feds are involved, then they need to cooperate with them. Else, they will just get destroyed, like BTC-e and numerous other cryptocurrency ventures.

If Chipmixer is set up properly, the most the US government can do is seize their clearnet domain. Even if they can get their hands on servers, proper encryption should leave all funds intact. The service could be restarted within a few days in that case.

When fiat money isn't involved, the US government isn't that great of a threat.

[hv_]

Muh, mixers are just stupid. Its only good for criminal use. No decent user needs that at all. U might need to trace back all ur coin txs in case...

I'm not a criminal. I for example use a mixer when I need to make a purchase in Bitcoin and buy these coins through my local exchange. It gives me a peace of mind knowing that it provides me a layer of privacy I didn't have before.

Exchanges increasingly start to look at what you do with your coins after withdrawing them-- their banking partners can demand them to boot you off their platform, and they will definitely not go against that.

An example is Coinbase that has booted hundreds or maybe even thousands of users, all because they withdrew coins to a service their banking partners don't agree with. Mixers come in very handy here.

Give me some realistic calc for how much % u ll end up holding tainted coins after the  mix pls - I'd never ever put clean coins to risk !

[bob123]

Give me some realistic calc for how much % u ll end up holding tainted coins after the  mix pls - I'd never ever put clean coins to risk !

That's not how bitcoin works.
There are no 'clean' and 'dirty' coins.

There can be UTXO with an illegal source, but after the next transaction they are not traceable anymore.


Image, you have 1 'dirty' bitcoin (input A) and 1 'clean' bitcoin (input B).
Now you create a transaction consuming both inputs and creating 4 outputs (0.5 BTC each; output W, X, Y, Z).

Which 2 outputs are 'clean' and which are 'dirty' ?
That question can not be answered.

Same applies to cash:
1 'dirty' 10$ bill and 1 'clean' 10$ bill. Now you exchange them to 4 5$ bills. You can't say which of them are 'clean' and which are 'dirty'.

[hv_]

Give me some realistic calc for how much % u ll end up holding tainted coins after the  mix pls - I'd never ever put clean coins to risk !

That's not how bitcoin works.
There are no 'clean' and 'dirty' coins.

There can be UTXO with an illegal source, but after the next transaction they are not traceable anymore.


Image, you have 1 'dirty' bitcoin (input A) and 1 'clean' bitcoin (input B).
Now you create a transaction consuming both inputs and creating 4 outputs (0.5 BTC each; output W, X, Y, Z).

Which 2 outputs are 'clean' and which are 'dirty' ?
That question can not be answered.

Same applies to cash:
1 'dirty' 10$ bill and 1 'clean' 10$ bill. Now you exchange them to 4 5$ bills. You can't say which of them are 'clean' and which are 'dirty'.

Sorry - talk with ur (potential) bank or finance Institute that should hanlde ur coins in any future, where Adoption must go - or ur coin will join the Liberty Reserve history and Exit the gene pool

Learn: Due dilligence is what u CAN do with minimal effort.

Physical cash is different. 

[bob123]

Sorry - talk with ur (potential) bank or finance Institute that should hanlde ur coins in any future

 
I won't let anyone handle / control my coins. Ever.

If you believe that banks are going to control and manage your BTC in the future, you didn't understand the philosophy of bitcoin yet.
Be your own bank implies to not let a bank manage your coins.


Bitcoin is a mean of payment, and not a speculative object. While quite a lot people see it as such, the utility behind it is what will change the world we live in.
Decoupling from banks does not work if you let them manage your coins.

Physical cash is different. 

I think there are quite some things regarding the technical aspects of bitcoin you don't understand.

My argument is valid.

[Red-Apple]

i don't get one important thing about this whole article. how do they even figure out that the transactions belong to ChipMixer mixing services? it is not like they brand their transactions with their name! they can very well belong to any other exchange services out there.
they never explain this important part.

[bob123]

i don't get one important thing about this whole article. how do they even figure out that the transactions belong to ChipMixer mixing services? it is not like they brand their transactions with their name! they can very well belong to any other exchange services out there.
they never explain this important part.

That's actually not that hard.
ChipMixer splits those coins into chips having fixed sizes.

You can determine whether they went to ChipMixer by looking at the outputs created. If you see X BTC being split into 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, etc.. UTXO's you can be pretty sure that they sent their coins to ChipMixer.

However, whether the coins were sent to a mixing service is not a privacy implication at all.
It would be problematic if you could trace which coins were sent back in exchange. But fortunately that's not the case with ChipMixer.

[arpon11]

This is a very stupid move and it might lead to the hacker being caught a lot quicker. A mixer service takes your coins and mix them with other people's coins, but the larger the amount of coins being mixed, the higher the chances that those coins might be mixed by the coins being send. It is rumoured that mixing services are less anonymous with larger amount of coins being mixed. 

So let's hope this backfires on them and that they dug their own grave by doing this.    The companies tracking these coins, might just have received a jackpot from these hackers bombarding a single mixer service with a lot of coins. 

If what you said is how mixing worked then I don't there is any privacy in it and those hackers will definitely going to be apprehended. Chipmixer should also helped in exposing the hackers as this will help in reducing laundry of Bitcoin and funds as this is one of the major reasons why those with bright mind and those that want things to be done right refused to support cruptocurrency adoptions. As for those blaming chipmixer in doing the mixing, remember that the interest is to make everything Anonymous as possible.

[hv_]

Sorry - talk with ur (potential) bank or finance Institute that should hanlde ur coins in any future

 
I won't let anyone handle / control my coins. Ever.

If you believe that banks are going to control and manage your BTC in the future, you didn't understand the philosophy of bitcoin yet.
Be your own bank implies to not let a bank manage your coins.


Bitcoin is a mean of payment, and not a speculative object. While quite a lot people see it as such, the utility behind it is what will change the world we live in.
Decoupling from banks does not work if you let them manage your coins.

Physical cash is different. 

I think there are quite some things regarding the technical aspects of bitcoin you don't understand.

My argument is valid.

Good - I wish u good luck.

Original BitCoin was designed to work with ANY counterparty - and sorry - does include banks

[erikalui]

This is why bitcoin has got a bad name as these mixers enable to turn "tainted" coins into "clean" coins without asking for any proof. If this laundering of money is proved, then like bestmixer now chipmixer will be seized to shut down. It was this year when I learnt about mixers and felt they operate with a license but the main purpose of using these mixers i just to launder money else why would anyone use them and how can they be called legal?

[bob123]

Good - I wish u good luck.

Original BitCoin was designed to work with ANY counterparty - and sorry - does include banks

It is called Bitcoin, not BitCoin.

And it works with any counterparty. Feel free to let a 3rd party control your coins - and therefore your money.
But this definitely won't be the future for the majority, and there is zero sense in that.

Counterparty - by the way - implies that you can transact with anyone, which is always the case. Even without giving full control away.
Letting someone else manage your funds, does not fall under 'work with any counterparty'.


Why would i need luck ?
I am using BTC as it is supposed to be. You'd be the one who needs luck if you are going to let a 3rd party control your funds. You are giving away all the benefits bitcoin offers.

If this laundering of money is proved, then like bestmixer now chipmixer will be seized to shut down.

I heavily doubt that.

The operator behind Bestmixer obviously didn't know how to run such a business.
The people behind ChipMixer are way more competent than those of any other mixer around (past and present).

It was this year when I learnt about mixers and felt they operate with a license but the main purpose of using these mixers i just to launder money else why would anyone use them and how can they be called legal?

Maybe because there are people around who care about their privacy ?

I mean.. sure.. there a lot of people like you who give their whole privacy away just for a few bucks (e.g. KYC for shitty tokens worth nothing).
Or by browsing with tracking cookies, or by installing the amazon browser plugin basically giving away your privacy for 10$.

Not everyone is like that.

[malevolent]

That's not how bitcoin works.
There are no 'clean' and 'dirty' coins.

There can be UTXO with an illegal source, but after the next transaction they are not traceable anymore.

Image, you have 1 'dirty' bitcoin (input A) and 1 'clean' bitcoin (input B).
Now you create a transaction consuming both inputs and creating 4 outputs (0.5 BTC each; output W, X, Y, Z).

Which 2 outputs are 'clean' and which are 'dirty' ?
That question can not be answered.

Same applies to cash:
1 'dirty' 10$ bill and 1 'clean' 10$ bill. Now you exchange them to 4 5$ bills. You can't say which of them are 'clean' and which are 'dirty'.

If you follow where the outputs are being spent, and if the hackers aren't smart enough about how they sell or spend the bitcoins, or if too many of Chipmixers' users spend the mixed coins through services with KYC (or by buying physical products or services in their name), then eventually it might be possible to state with increasing likelihood which outputs are clean and which have a higher probability of being dirty.

[hv_]

Good - I wish u good luck.

Original BitCoin was designed to work with ANY counterparty - and sorry - does include banks

It is called Bitcoin, not BitCoin.

And it works with any counterparty. Feel free to let a 3rd party control your coins - and therefore your money.
But this definitely won't be the future for the majority, and there is zero sense in that.

Counterparty - by the way - implies that you can transact with anyone, which is always the case. Even without giving full control away.
Letting someone else manage your funds, does not fall under 'work with any counterparty'.


Why would i need luck ?
I am using BTC as it is supposed to be. You'd be the one who needs luck if you are going to let a 3rd party control your funds. You are giving away all the benefits bitcoin offers.

If this laundering of money is proved, then like bestmixer now chipmixer will be seized to shut down.

I heavily doubt that.

The operator behind Bestmixer obviously didn't know how to run such a business.
The people behind ChipMixer are way more competent than those of any other mixer around (past and present).

It was this year when I learnt about mixers and felt they operate with a license but the main purpose of using these mixers i just to launder money else why would anyone use them and how can they be called legal?

Maybe because there are people around who care about their privacy ?

I mean.. sure.. there a lot of people like you who give their whole privacy away just for a few bucks (e.g. KYC for shitty tokens worth nothing).
Or by browsing with tracking cookies, or by installing the amazon browser plugin basically giving away your privacy for 10$.

Not everyone is like that.

Those who are overly cautious need to have the crypto they spend for goods and services in a coin like monero then and just keep their investments in Bitcoin. Bitcoin is not a privacy based coin and trying to force it relies upon a lot of trust which goes against the system. (Trusting a mixer won't just steal your coins, trusting they aren't keeping logs, trusting they have a good mixing algorithm)

Bitcoin is a very good enough privacy system, esp at high txs throughput and proper only - fresh public address handling -  but it will and never should be an ANONYMITY system, cause such attracts only criminals.

[bob123]

Those who are overly cautious need to have the crypto they spend for goods and services in a coin like monero then and just keep their investments in Bitcoin. Bitcoin is not a privacy based coin and trying to force it relies upon a lot of trust which goes against the system.

Not necessarily. There are proposals to increase the anonymity of bitcoin.

While coinjoin is fine, there are better solutions available, such as payjoin.

If you follow where the outputs are being spent, and if the hackers aren't smart enough about how they sell or spend the bitcoins, or if too many of Chipmixers' users spend the mixed coins through services with KYC (or by buying physical products or services in their name), then eventually it might be possible to state with increasing likelihood which outputs are clean and which have a higher probability of being dirty.

Not really.

By combining 2 'dirty' and 'clean' outputs, creating 4 new outputs, it is not possible to call any one of them 'clean' or 'dirty' anymore.
The whole concept of 'dirty' coins simply does not work. Coins do not exist. Only UTXO do. And UTXOs are being 'destroyed' in each transaction.

[erikalui]

Maybe because there are people around who care about their privacy ?

I mean.. sure.. there a lot of people like you who give their whole privacy away just for a few bucks (e.g. KYC for shitty tokens worth nothing).
Or by browsing with tracking cookies, or by installing the amazon browser plugin basically giving away your privacy for 10$.

Not everyone is like that.

So for few bucks you earn from your signature campaign, you are ready to personally attack members to defend your campaign so would you ready to even take the blame if they turn out to be criminals?

Your website (as you now talk like you own it) is involved in a criminal activity so don't defend it blindly. What I do is none of your concern as I don't support criminals nor will go to the extent you went. You want to launder money, you do it but when you get caught, you can't blame the Government because you want to PROTECT YOUR PRIVACY.

I thought you were a decent member to talk to but sorry to say you can't even talk properly.

[LeGaulois]

Maybe because there are people around who care about their privacy ?

I mean.. sure.. there a lot of people like you who give their whole privacy away just for a few bucks (e.g. KYC for shitty tokens worth nothing).
Or by browsing with tracking cookies, or by installing the amazon browser plugin basically giving away your privacy for 10$.

Not everyone is like that.

So for few bucks you earn from your signature campaign, you are ready to personally attack members to defend your campaign so would you ready to even take the blame if they turn out to be criminals?

Your website (as you now talk like you own it) is involved in a criminal activity so don't defend it blindly. What I do is none of your concern as I don't support criminals nor will go to the extent you went. You want to launder money, you do it but when you get caught, you can't blame the Government because you want to PROTECT YOUR PRIVACY.

I thought you were a decent member to talk to but sorry to say you can't even talk properly.

You use Paypal: Paypal is involved in criminal activities
You use a bank: Banks are involved in criminal activities

So you do support criminals, don't defend them either

Most coins will be tainted soon or later if someone uses a mixer it doesn't mean he is a criminal, as well.
You guys got brainwashed too much and sometimes you have weird reasoning with double standarts

This is why bitcoin has got a bad name as these mixers enable to turn "tainted" coins into "clean" coins without asking for any proof

You can't be serious