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

[nicecrypto]

Why is the chipmixer services need? i don't see the relevant of their service if it can be mostly use for criminal activities, who knows this is what many hackers use so that those stolen coins will be hard to trace, funny how their signature is been paraded by top members of this forum.

[1713931697]

1713931697

[CoinClarity]

Why is the chipmixer services need? i don't see the relevant of their service if it can be mostly use for criminal activities, who knows this is what many hackers use so that those stolen coins will be hard to trace, funny how their signature is been paraded by top members of this forum.

What's even funnier is that they insist the majority of bitcoins being mixed through ChipMixer are legally obtained. Bestmixer was shut down precisely because the majority of its coins came from illegal activity. Why would this trend apply to Bestmixer but not ChipMixer?

If these ChipMixer guys continue to believe their sig payments aren't coming from illicitly gained bitcoins its because $350 a week will do that to some people I guess. Regardless, they are in no position to be casting judgment on others at this point in time.

[malevolent]

What's even funnier is that they insist the majority of bitcoins being mixed through ChipMixer are legally obtained. Bestmixer was shut down precisely because the majority of its coins came from illegal activity. Why would this trend apply to Bestmixer but not ChipMixer?

Bestmixer actively advertised the use of their mixer to evade the law, Chipmixer does none of that.

Why is the chipmixer services need? i don't see the relevant of their service if it can be mostly use for criminal activities, who knows this is what many hackers use so that those stolen coins will be hard to trace, funny how their signature is been paraded by top members of this forum.

Some recommended reading as this has been answered again and again:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Privacy#Why_privacy
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Privacy#Examples_and_case_studies

[CoinClarity]

What's even funnier is that they insist the majority of bitcoins being mixed through ChipMixer are legally obtained. Bestmixer was shut down precisely because the majority of its coins came from illegal activity. Why would this trend apply to Bestmixer but not ChipMixer?

Bestmixer actively advertised the use of their mixer to evade the law, Chipmixer does none of that.

Really doesn't matter at this point.

Some recommended reading as this has been answered again and again:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Privacy#Why_privacy
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Privacy#Examples_and_case_studies

Both of these links say don't use centralized mixing services.

[coolcoinz]

Some recommended reading as this has been answered again and again:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Privacy#Why_privacy
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Privacy#Examples_and_case_studies

Both of these links say don't use centralized mixing services.

They do, but not because of the risk of them being shut down by the government, but because there's a risk of this mixers stealing your coins. This risk is still there even with trusted mixers (although it is very low). We can believe that chipmixer will remain fair to its customers, but the decision is ultimately in the hands of its owners. Sometimes a good dog bites. Anyway, i'll say it again, it doesn't mean they will be prosecuted and/or forced to cease activity.

[erikalui]

(casts doubt about authenticity of article's findings)

Anybody not wearing a ChipMixer signature have doubts about Clain's findings?

When I said the same thing about Chipmixer, the signature bearers started stalking me (yes, earlier I worked in another mixer campaign but even back then I did not use one to protect my privacy nor did I go about defending them) as they just don't want anyone even point a single finger at Chipmixer (in case this allegation is proven true). They said that even if it's proven, nobody can do anything to Chipmixer which I highly doubt so expecting them to even address it is of no use. I'll only wait to see what happens to mixers in future as Government should definitely not let criminals go free because "some" people want to use mixers for their privacy. When Cryptopia was hacked, nobody even found out any information about the hacker but here atleast they are trying to find out information about the stolen coins.

A service that helps hackers (even if it's useful to some who use it for a genuine purpose) shouldn't continue to support such criminal activities.

[Zemomtum]

This will indeed bring bad reputation to Chipmixer, but I am of the opinion that this will not be the first time they will be dealing with this kind of unwarranted event. If they are able to manage it, they will come back stronger and if it is otherwise, it might lead to the end of their operation.

[BitBustah]

Why is the chipmixer services need? i don't see the relevant of their service if it can be mostly use for criminal activities, who knows this is what many hackers use so that those stolen coins will be hard to trace, funny how their signature is been paraded by top members of this forum.

People claim that honest users may want to use their services for privacy reasons but lets be real,  most people using their services have gotten their coins in a shady matter.  Usually theft, drugs, or other crime.

[shield132]

Wow, it's historical high of fund inflows through chipmixer, this news isn't really good because legal funds from legal and most famous exchange was laundered through chipmixer, red light shines there.
Btw I think they may share the history of bitmixer but however this mixer has serious ambitions, they were launched before bitmixer closed, interesting to know what will happen around them.

[malevolent]

People claim that honest users may want to use their services for privacy reasons but lets be real,  most people using their services have gotten their coins in a shady matter.  Usually theft, drugs, or other crime.

[figmentofmyass]

Why is the chipmixer services need? i don't see the relevant of their service if it can be mostly use for criminal activities, who knows this is what many hackers use so that those stolen coins will be hard to trace, funny how their signature is been paraded by top members of this forum.

People claim that honest users may want to use their services for privacy reasons but lets be real, most people using their services have gotten their coins in a shady matter.  Usually theft, drugs, or other crime.

anecdotally, i have one sports betting friend who got his coinbase account shut down a few years ago for gambling activity. ever since then, he always runs his sportsbook withdrawals through a mixer before sending coins to an exchange.

i'm not sure what percentage of mixer usage this demographic occupies, but food for thought: all gamblers in the USA withdrawing bitcoins from casinos/books/poker sites need to somehow disguise the source of their funds before cashing out through licensed exchanges, who generally comply with the UIGEA and interstate wire act.

[finaleshot2016]

Why is the chipmixer services need? i don't see the relevant of their service if it can be mostly use for criminal activities, who knows this is what many hackers use so that those stolen coins will be hard to trace, funny how their signature is been paraded by top members of this forum.

People claim that honest users may want to use their services for privacy reasons but lets be real,  most people using their services have gotten their coins in a shady matter.  Usually theft, drugs, or other crime.

How can you easily say that?
All of the things in here that are being made by a man can be used in good and bad things because we all differ on the perspective on how we will use that specifically. Let's be real here also, did you ever search about the advantages of Bitcoin mixing?  

Are there any sources of articles that can prove mixers are for negative things only?  
Did you ever think about Bitcoin that is being used for bad things also? Scamming, buying drugs, illegal guns and other crime. They're the same thing, the only differences are, a mixer is a platform and Bitcoin is the currency but both can be used in bad or good things.

[figmentofmyass]

Are there any sources of articles that can prove mixers are for negative things only? 

this just in---some opposing evidence.

chainalysis said earlier this year that 90% of mixed coins are not used for illicit purposes: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/chainalysis-most-mixed-bitcoin-not-used-for-illicit-purposes

Specifically, Chainalysis believes that 8.1 percent of all mixed coins were stolen, while only 2.7 percent of coins had been used on darknet markets. As such, less than one in every 11 coins sent to mixers could be identified as having been used for illicit purposes. Additionally, 1.9 percent of mixed coins came from gambling or betting sites, which could be illegal depending on the jurisdiction of the users and the sites.

In contrast, almost half of all mixed coins were sent from exchanges. This includes 40 percent from traditional exchanges and 7.7 percent from peer-to-peer exchanges. Over a quarter of mixed coins came from other mixers.

there goes the theory that mixers are only used by criminals! the biggest users of mixers are exchange customers.

[CoinClarity]

Are there any sources of articles that can prove mixers are for negative things only?  

this just in---some opposing evidence.

chainalysis said earlier this year that 90% of mixed coins are not used for illicit purposes: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/chainalysis-most-mixed-bitcoin-not-used-for-illicit-purposes

Specifically, Chainalysis believes that 8.1 percent of all mixed coins were stolen, while only 2.7 percent of coins had been used on darknet markets. As such, less than one in every 11 coins sent to mixers could be identified as having been used for illicit purposes. Additionally, 1.9 percent of mixed coins came from gambling or betting sites, which could be illegal depending on the jurisdiction of the users and the sites.

In contrast, almost half of all mixed coins were sent from exchanges. This includes 40 percent from traditional exchanges and 7.7 percent from peer-to-peer exchanges. Over a quarter of mixed coins came from other mixers.

I listened to the entire Chainalysis webinar and nowhere did they say "most mixed bitcoin is not used for illicit purposes."

https://register.gotowebinar.com/recording/8980410054773689612

What they did say was this:

While stolen funds only represent about 8% of the funds received by mixers, mixers are by far the biggest destination of funds after they've been stolen.

They also had these slides in their presentation:





So, however you want to interpret their findings is up to you; my conclusion is they don't have a very high regard for bitcoin mixers.

[veleten]

if this is true , then the hacker is pretty dumb
using one mixer to launder his coins leads to nothing good , it is wrong on so many levels
first of all , the more coins you have at a mixing service , the more chances that your coins will be mixed ...with your own coins
this defeats the purpose of using such a service , I highly doubt Chipmixer has 5000 btc to provide at least a 50% mix
secondly , this allows tracking agencie like Chainalysis follow the coins easily and governments to take action and arrest of freeze them as they please
and it could endanger the mixing services in general , since they can be accused of assisting criminals, sponsoring terrorism etc. and shut down

[Mpamaegbu]

This is bad for Chipmixer.  If the authority decided to investigate on this and targeted Chipmixer to shutdown regardless of the investigation, they can easily do it since they have a proof in their hand that a mixing service had been used to launder a hacked BTC.  I wonder why Chipmixer did not suspend those transactions.., Did they failed to track that those BTC were hacked?

I don't see how this is really bad for Chipmixer because I believe laundering is part of what tumblers do, except the management will want to act Hollier-Than-Thou now by feigning ignorance. Otherwise it is a legitimate business for the anonymity they provide for clients. Criminals will from time to time get in the mix and patronize such services.

[Vishnu.Reang]

I listened to the entire Chainalysis webinar and nowhere did they say "most mixed bitcoin is not used for illicit purposes."

https://register.gotowebinar.com/recording/8980410054773689612

What they did say was this:

While stolen funds only represent about 8% of the funds received by mixers, mixers are by far the biggest destination of funds after they've been stolen.

Hmm... so it is worrying. The total illicit usage may be much higher than 8%, because stolen coins are only one of the illicit usage types. The majority of the coins may be linked with dark markets and the vendors would use mixers to "clean" their coins before converting to fiat cash. And I can't think about any other safe destination for stolen coins. It is not practical to transfer the stolen coins directly to exchanges.

[LeGaulois]

@CoinClarity Thank you for the clarifying information.

...I can't think about any other safe destination for stolen coins. It is not practical to transfer the stolen coins directly to exchanges.

It is... Certainly less in 2019 but it's always been, more or less. For years it was almost usual. There was no 'control' or 'analysis'. There were hardly any experts. And the exchanges either didn't care or didn't have the needed resources.

After a few years, it began to change It's not something that's openly announced but I can tell you that the biggest exchanges (Kraken, Bitstamp and others) work together to fight against funds coming from a hack or other. For example, to block coins received, etc.

After that, it started to be public when some exchanges proudly announced: "We blocked the coins of this hack".
It has become an opportunity to promote themselves. But they really work together when necessary. Unfortunately, there are still a lot of exchanges that still don't care where the coins come from, or don't have the resources (like back in the earlier days)

Someone else (@CoinClarity?) was posting a pic about coinjoin transactions. It's possible to make your bitcoins looking not used with CJ

[squatter]

Specifically, Chainalysis believes that 8.1 percent of all mixed coins were stolen, while only 2.7 percent of coins had been used on darknet markets. As such, less than one in every 11 coins sent to mixers could be identified as having been used for illicit purposes. Additionally, 1.9 percent of mixed coins came from gambling or betting sites, which could be illegal depending on the jurisdiction of the users and the sites.

In contrast, almost half of all mixed coins were sent from exchanges. This includes 40 percent from traditional exchanges and 7.7 percent from peer-to-peer exchanges. Over a quarter of mixed coins came from other mixers.

I listened to the entire Chainalysis webinar and nowhere did they say "most mixed bitcoin is not used for illicit purposes."

Those words are quoted from a news article. Who cares if Chainalysis didn't say the words verbatim? They published data that speaks for itself.

What they did say was this:

While stolen funds only represent about 8% of the funds received by mixers, mixers are by far the biggest destination of funds after they've been stolen.

Moving the goal posts, are we? This is what you were trying to prove:

I'm sure a few people use it for non-criminal purposes, but they are in the minority.

Can you at least concede that you were utterly wrong about that?

They also had these slides in their presentation:

It's interesting that you chose completely generic slides summarizing how mixers work, when Chainalysis gave us actual data that disproves what you're saying. And you already know this. It's almost as if you're being disingenuous.

Here's a more relevant slide:

[CoinClarity]

Specifically, Chainalysis believes that 8.1 percent of all mixed coins were stolen, while only 2.7 percent of coins had been used on darknet markets. As such, less than one in every 11 coins sent to mixers could be identified as having been used for illicit purposes. Additionally, 1.9 percent of mixed coins came from gambling or betting sites, which could be illegal depending on the jurisdiction of the users and the sites.

In contrast, almost half of all mixed coins were sent from exchanges. This includes 40 percent from traditional exchanges and 7.7 percent from peer-to-peer exchanges. Over a quarter of mixed coins came from other mixers.

I listened to the entire Chainalysis webinar and nowhere did they say "most mixed bitcoin is not used for illicit purposes."

Those words are quoted from a news article. Who cares if Chainalysis didn't say the words verbatim? They published data that speaks for itself.

The author of the article is making inferences of their own. You just happen to agree with them because they align with your own economic interest. Deciding because its a "news article" it must be 100% factually accurate also falls into this category.

What they did say was this:

While stolen funds only represent about 8% of the funds received by mixers, mixers are by far the biggest destination of funds after they've been stolen.

Moving the goal posts, are we? This is what you were trying to prove:

I'm sure a few people use it for non-criminal purposes, but they are in the minority.

Can you at least concede that you were utterly wrong about that?

What does it say next to the words "Possible exploit" in this slide?

They also had these slides in their presentation:

It's interesting that you chose completely generic slides summarizing how mixers work, when Chainalysis gave us actual data that disproves what you're saying. And you already know this. It's almost as if you're being disingenuous.

The data doesn't disprove what I'm saying. Just because funds came from exchanges or other sources it does not mean they weren't gained from illicit or illegal activity.

Here's a more relevant slide:

Its not a "more relevant slide." They are all relevant. You prefer this slide because you can use it to draw conclusions that favor your own economic interests, even if they are ultimately biased or incorrect.