I was hacked (1170btc stolen) - 500btc max BOUNTY

[BurtW]

Another way to look at it is what if we did have $10,000 bills in circulation (in Bitcoinland we do, in fiatland not so much).  But if someone did present you with at $10,000 bill would making change without AML/KYC information be morally wrong?  I say no.  The government would, of course, say it is legally wrong but once again that is just another arbitrary law.

Found this:

Anyway that 7 day hold could be good but for only big amounts like 100 or more btcs.

That is arbitrary.  That is the kind of thing we really need to avoid at all costs.

[1715103015]

1715103015

[1715103015]

1715103015

[HarHarHar9965]

And yet, you haven't responded to any of the points made.

Maybe if I post it twice, you'll read it? Highlighted in bold for emphasis

I'm just discussing an idea here, I haven't worked out all the answers and you keep asking for them.

But it seems it would not be that hard to make a mixing service that was truly about privacy and not money laundering.

What criminal would send stolen bitcoin to a service that would take those coins out of their hands entirely for 7 days? I would say none but fools.

The details could be worked out.

But it's good to see you are the kind of guy who likes to take a shit on an idea before you actually know what the idea is. You must be fun to hang out with.

Hey lemme get this straight. So you come up with an idea that doesn't work, argue that it should be the way things are done, even though you can't figure out how to make it work. And you are arguing.....why? Oh ya, to convince a bunch a bitcoiners that money laundering is a crime.

[BurtW]

Money laundering is never a crime. They made it a "crime" because they are too bad at catching people for real crimes such as theft.

OK, I will change my stance to:  money laundering is currently a crime in many/most countries however bitcoin mixing is not money laundering.  Good enough?

[poeEDgar]

And yet, you haven't responded to any of the points made.

Maybe if I post it twice, you'll read it? Highlighted in bold for emphasis

I'm just discussing an idea here, I haven't worked out all the answers and you keep asking for them.

But it seems it would not be that hard to make a mixing service that was truly about privacy and not money laundering.

What criminal would send stolen bitcoin to a service that would take those coins out of their hands entirely for 7 days? I would say none but fools.

The details could be worked out.

But it's good to see you are the kind of guy who likes to take a shit on an idea before you actually know what the idea is. You must be fun to hang out with.

Break out the ad hominem why don't you?

Before I know what it is? I explained the implications of it, and you apparently refuse to accept this, though you acknowledge that you cannot support your own arguments. It's a moral issue, and we obviously have very opposing viewpoints.

In that sense, I would not be fun to hang out with for a police officer or a soldier, either.

[Eadeqa]

Money laundering is never a crime. They made it a "crime" because they are too bad at catching people for real crimes such as theft.

The law defines what's "crime".  Money laundering is a crime in most countries. You can argue all you want "you made it crime because you are not good at catching people" in the court, all you want, but that kind of defense won't stand a chance.

[hollowframe]

GIVE ME BACK MY MONEY!

YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE CLEVER?

I MADE BIG PATIENCE IN ORDER TO FOOL YOU UNTIL I HAVE YOU.

WHAT YOU STOLE (1170BTC + 10M NXT) IS ABOUT 2000BTC

I WANT 1400 1000BTC IN THE NEXT 24H.

BOUNTY WAS NEVER OVER

EDIT: Probably the NXT were dumped for about 400BTC. So he stole about 1600BTC. He returned 462. He will still have more than 100btc profit...

I am confused.

I thought that you agreed to cancel the bounty for the hacker. Did he miss one of the payments that he was going to send you?

If he did not default on one of his payments then opening the bounty back up will more likely then not get him to not make his next payment.

Another thing that I think you should consider:

Instead of offering a large bounty to get the coins back, I would suggest offering a bounty for useful information about either the hack, the hacker, or some other information that may help you get your coins back.

There have been so many posts "to" the hack and "to" bitmixer saying to simply give you your coins back and to pay the poster your 500 BTC bounty. It isn't like the hacker is going to read something that some newbie posts and will think "...oh well if this random newbie says I should do it then..."

On a more serious note, the current bounty will likely not result in you getting your coins back. If someone were to somehow steal the coins from the hacker, then they could do a)  return the coins to you minus your 43% bounty or b) keep 100% of the coins while the original hacker would still be blamed for the theft. This person would have a huge incentive to simply to "b"

If you instead offered a bounty for information, then you, yourself can put the pieces together and try to get the coins back.

[CEG5952]

In any case, no one would risk using an "honest" mixer. The fact that they have a policy that enables them to, unto themselves, confiscate and redistribute deposited money based on a (quite possibly arbitrary) link to a theft, would scare any "honest" customers away. Even those uninterested in laundering money have no incentive to risk having their coins arbitrarily stolen by the "honest" mixer.

[zvs]

I don think bitmixer will release any info unless the department want from them

else it will just broke thier business .

I don't think anyone else would look at bitmixer any differently if they gave up those details.  They are doing the right thing in this instance.

Really? I'd certainly campaign for users to boycott them. WTF is the point of mixers if the community is going to arbitrarily decide when mixers ought to betray the trust of their customers?

This is a much bigger question than just saying, "just this one time." You are either for privacy, or against it when it doesn't suit you. Pick one. If the latter, then just denounce the very premise of mixers already.

What country is this service located? They might be legally obliged to keep a record and cooperate with the authorities. Theft of this amount of money is a felony in the US (over 10 years prison).  If they don't disclose the information and did not keep a record, they might be legally responsible both criminally and open to civil lawsuit.

Probably none of the mixers are operating from US, not even from some properly regulated EU country. So catching a mixer owner is not an easy deal. But, if they're caught, it'll be difficult for them to evade imprisonment.

Only if they knew that they were aiding and abetting some crime, and I guess the penalties for that would vary a lot by country, no clue.

I could think of a few good reasons why someone might want to use such a thing for entirely legal purposes...

bitcoind stuff is stored in ramfs on my machine, but I guess I couldnt know if it was being actively monitored or logged.  i'd think germany would have laws to prevent such a thing, w/o something akin to a search warrant

[PilotofBTC]

So are you saying that bitmixer has to be aware of "stolen bitcoins" why the hell does he need to care where the bitcoins are coming from?,

Absolutely. He is dealing with money, and stolen money. He needs to keep a record. If not, he he would be liable both criminally and civil lawsuit.  bitmixer should  hope that he isn't in the US. If he was, he would get in trouble (serious trouble) someday. Eve if he isn't in the US, his funds/ personal bank accounts can be frozen by the US govt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_Laundering_Control_Act

According to the US, bitcoin is not currency or money. It is an asset.

[JorgeStolfi]

According to the US, bitcoin is not currency or money. It is an asset.

But that does not matter. AML enforcement agencies are not that dumb; they undrstand that one way to launder money is to convert it to other assets, like gold, stocks, art, boats, real estate, etc..
How stuff works: Money laundering basics

[BurtW]

According to the US IRS, bitcoin is not currency or money. It is an asset.

But according to fincen it is something else and according to the judge in the Trendon Shavers trial it is something else.

The IRS does not rule for the entire US goobermint.

[DannyElfman]

Money laundering is never a crime. They made it a "crime" because they are too bad at catching people for real crimes such as theft.

The law defines what's "crime".  Money laundering is a crime in most countries. You can argue all you want "you made it crime because you are not good at catching people" in the court, all you want, but that kind of defense won't stand a chance.

Using a bitcoin mixer the way that the OP's attacker did was not laundering the bitcoin, but rather trading his bitcoin for other bitcoin that is unlinked to the coins that were put in.

Money laundering is when you mask the source of income to make it look legit when the income was truly obtained from illegal sources. One example of this would be someone owns one of those laundry shops would deposit a bunch of money in the laundry machines to make it look like more people used their services then really did, the money that was deposited was from some illegal activity. (no pun intended on the "laundry")

[JorgeStolfi]

Using a bitcoin mixer the way that the OP's attacker did was not laundering the bitcoin, but rather trading his bitcoin for other bitcoin that is unlinked to the coins that were put in. [ ... ]

Money laundering is when you mask the source of income to make it look legit when the income was truly obtained from illegal sources. [ ... ]

Well, that goes against all I thought I knew.  Or, rather, both sentences describe money launderins, only that one is the process, the other is the goal.

AFAIK, money laundering is indeed exchanging "dirty" money, that came from illegal activities (in this case, theft), for "clean" money, that (hopefully) cannot be linked to the dirty one, and appears to have come from legitimate sources.

[Benjig]

Money laundering is never a crime. They made it a "crime" because they are too bad at catching people for real crimes such as theft.

The law defines what's "crime".  Money laundering is a crime in most countries. You can argue all you want "you made it crime because you are not good at catching people" in the court, all you want, but that kind of defense won't stand a chance.

Using a bitcoin mixer the way that the OP's attacker did was not laundering the bitcoin, but rather trading his bitcoin for other bitcoin that is unlinked to the coins that were put in.

Money laundering is when you mask the source of income to make it look legit when the income was truly obtained from illegal sources. One example of this would be someone owns one of those laundry shops would deposit a bunch of money in the laundry machines to make it look like more people used their services then really did, the money that was deposited was from some illegal activity. (no pun intended on the "laundry")

Yeah i think most people missed this one, mixing bitcoins is only that ; a mix. I dont think someone has invented a law against mixing

Money laundering is used in fiat world not bitcoin world, how the hell someone wil be charged with that if 80 percent of bitcoiners dont pay taxes, in other words, everybody would need to be obligated to declare the source of bitcoins before someone can be chaged with bitcoin laundering, currently everybody is owning no mans money.

[Houseman]

"An honest mixer"  Surely an oxymoron.

Can't think of any reason other than illegal that would require coins to be mixed. But am prepared to be educated otherwise.

[Anon136]

"An honest mixer"  Surely an oxymoron.

Can't think of any reason other than illegal that would require coins to be mixed. But am prepared to be educated otherwise.

I bought some silver with bitcoin once. Absolutely nothing illegal about the deal but I mixed it. I just wanted to preserve my privacy. Who knows what sort of crazy shit the government will come up with some day. Better to be safe than sorry.

[x0Jakeyboy0x]

"An honest mixer"  Surely an oxymoron.

Can't think of any reason other than illegal that would require coins to be mixed. But am prepared to be educated otherwise.

I bought some silver with bitcoin once. Absolutely nothing illegal about the deal but I mixed it. I just wanted to preserve my privacy. Who knows what sort of crazy shit the government will come up with some day. Better to be safe than sorry.

That's right. Don't make the mistake of falling into the "I have nothing to hide" category and slowly allowing your privacy to be stripped away.

[Benjig]

"An honest mixer"   Surely an oxymoron.

Can't think of any reason other than illegal that would require coins to be mixed. But am prepared to be educated otherwise.

And there are tons of "free" mixers, altcoin exchangers , gambling sites, you can deposit there and withdraw, even better you can buy altcoin and sell it in other exchange, if you do this with amounts of 1 btc or less do you think the exchange will bring personal data outside only because someone claimed those bitcoins are theirs?
You can deposit the btcs in the ripple network and withdraw them. Creativity im not lacking.

And this are not ideas for hackers, but to protect our privacy.

Ontopic, in any case this hacker needs punishment, with a forensic investigation he surely left behind some trail.

[EternalWingsofGod]

What I learned from this thread
Do not mess with Klee unless your good enough to hide them from him and the forum 

[Kprawn]

Imo If the money obtained from criminal actions, needed to be "Cleaned" and put back in circulation, it is in definition "Money laundering" {Why would he want to use a service to "clean" the money in the first place? {Because HE/SHE/THEY cannot use it, in it's current form} Without it being traced or followed.

Is the "Mixer" service liable? {I cannot speak for other countries, but in my country, if a service is used, for criminal intent, the service provider needs to supply information to the authorities, to enable them to get to those criminals} If they do not supply that information or willingly refrain from doing it, they are assisting in the crime}

Example : By law {In my country} ISP's need to keep records of traffic going through their service, if they do not keep records, or backups, their doors are closed.

I sometimes wonder, if people will still have the same opinion, if they were in Klee's shoes. {If they lost all that money to a hacker}

Do I agree with all these laws, well it debatable. {Privacy VS Protection} Depends on what you need the most. 

I still feel, we need to support Klee in every way we can, because WE might be the next victim, and then we will need the same support from this community.