r/Bitcoin: how the attacker could cash out hundreds of BTC
reddit-cash-out-forensics-question
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1vegndz/a_forensic_question_about_the_coldcard_attacker/
Latest reviewed change
source content difference between and
A short comment suggesting P2P cash-out in China was removed from the thread.
body:
You use the bitcoin to purchase online assets, other crypto, mining credits etc... they pay out and you keep the laundered cash.
-comment: p1ibhav
-parent: t3_1vegndz
-author: riseandride69
-created_utc: 1785785426
-edited: false
First lines only. The complete diff is in the timeline below.
- Organisation
- Evidence role
- Community discussion
- Published
- not established
- Source changes
- 20
- Detected differences
- 20
- Unreviewed
- 0
- Copies held
- 21
Every check is recorded, including checks that found no text change. A detected edit is therefore bounded between two checks. The publisher's exact save time is not observable from this record. Last checked .
Also held inside a captured conversation
This post is held twice: here, with this project's own note on why it matters, and again as part of the conversation captured at , which is polled for changes. Both copies are the same post; neither is a separate event.
Public privacy boundary
Snapshot and diff bodies for this chain monitor are held in the local evidence archive but withheld from the public site because they can contain the addresses of people who published nothing themselves. Capture times and reviewed change summaries remain available below.
Held captures
-
A short comment suggesting P2P cash-out in China was removed from the thread.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 8 lines
body: You use the bitcoin to purchase online assets, other crypto, mining credits etc... they pay out and you keep the laundered cash. -comment: p1ibhav -parent: t3_1vegndz -author: riseandride69 -created_utc: 1785785426 -edited: false -body: -Yes, easily via p2p in China - comment: p1ictmp parent: t1_p1i4kx5 author: marshaljsExtracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: [deleted] created_utc: 1785771629 edited: 1786027811 body: [deleted] held before deletion (captured 20260806T100059Z): I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer.Excerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
The thread gained a new comment consisting of 'How do you like dem apples'.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 8 lines
edited: false body: Whomever did this was not an ordinary scammer from India or Nigeria. I m sure they know how to be unnoticed. + +comment: p2g5bqf +parent: t1_p1gwnlg +author: bravedave109 +created_utc: 1786191370 +edited: false +body: +How do you like dem applesExtracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: [deleted] created_utc: 1785771629 edited: 1786027811 body: [deleted] held before deletion (captured 20260806T100059Z): I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer.Excerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
New top-level comment by Dreamer5752 saying the perpetrator was not an ordinary scammer and knows how to stay unnoticed.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 8 lines
Most people are forgetting the main, most common way - they clean / mix it or move it into privacy coins and move it around, and then sell it for cash to other criminals local to them who use it to purchase / import from abroad Easiest, most reliable way with basically 0 paper trail + +comment: p23fr99 +parent: t3_1vegndz +author: Dreamer5752 +created_utc: 1786035719 +edited: false +body: +Whomever did this was not an ordinary scammer from India or Nigeria. I m sure they know how to be unnoticed.Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: [deleted] created_utc: 1785771629 edited: 1786027811 body: [deleted] held before deletion (captured 20260806T100059Z): I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer.Excerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
A comment by IllllIIlIllIllllIlll was self-deleted ([deleted]), and a new comment by OrganizationLong3812 describes mixing into privacy coins and selling for cash as the common laundering route.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 18 lines
comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz -author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll +author: [deleted] created_utc: 1785771629 -edited: false -body: -I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. +edited: 1786027811 +body: +[deleted] comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz edited: false body: [ Removed by Reddit ] + +comment: p20uhsx +parent: t3_1vegndz +author: OrganizationLong3812 +created_utc: 1786006307 +edited: false +body: +Most people are forgetting the main, most common way - they clean / mix it or move it into privacy coins and move it around, and then sell it for cash to other criminals local to them who use it to purchase / import from abroad + +Easiest, most reliable way with basically 0 paper trailExtracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: [deleted] created_utc: 1785771629 edited: 1786027811 body: [deleted] held before deletion (captured 20260806T100059Z): I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer.Excerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
Two new comments: OtherwiseAlbatross14 criticising another user's reading comprehension, and a top-level comment showing "[ Removed by Reddit ]".
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 16 lines
edited: false body: Nicely trying. + +comment: p1zwni3 +parent: t1_p1ijgvc +author: OtherwiseAlbatross14 +created_utc: 1785990371 +edited: false +body: +Reading comprehension is an area you should work on + +comment: p20i8hk +parent: t3_1vegndz +author: Repulsive_Spite_267 +created_utc: 1786000183 +edited: false +body: +[ Removed by Reddit ]Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
A commenter’s proposed small-scale cash-out scenario was removed from the thread.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 8 lines
body: because every transaction lives on the chain forever -comment: p1sivtz -parent: t1_p1jm32c -author: Remarkable_Gap_3418 -created_utc: 1785903911 -edited: false -body: -Just go to SEA country and pay some local a few weeks of meals worth of money to go withdraw on your behalf. He never even needs to see your face. However yes, it's incredibly inefficient and not feasible in this scenario. It would take multiple lifetimes to withdraw 100+mil this way lol. - comment: p1ssdoo parent: t1_p1jkjq8 author: blackrackExtracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
The thread gained three comments suggesting luxury-goods and gold purchases as cash-out methods, joking about cocaine, and dismissing an earlier proposal.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 24 lines
body: Dumb +comment: p1tauj3 +parent: t3_1vegndz +author: Visible_Abroad9810 +created_utc: 1785916741 +edited: false +body: +Very easy you can buy expensive watches with the crypto or gold nowadays turning crypto into fiat is piss easy + comment: p1tiucp parent: t1_p1h1f0v author: PensionConscious6752 edited: false body: yea i didn't claim it would be easy or safe for the people with that legitimate BTC. + +comment: p1wncqy +parent: t1_p1hbm95 +author: m39583 +created_utc: 1785954357 +edited: false +body: +But how much cocaine does one person need?! + +comment: p1xdzc6 +parent: t1_p1kxub0 +author: Dear_Combination_805 +created_utc: 1785961198 +edited: false +body: +Nicely trying.Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
Reddit served a short exchange noting that a proposed cash-out method would require cooperation from legitimate bitcoin holders and would be neither easy nor safe for them.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 16 lines
edited: false body: Dumb + +comment: p1tiucp +parent: t1_p1h1f0v +author: PensionConscious6752 +created_utc: 1785920644 +edited: false +body: +i could be wrong but wouldnt that take cooperations of large numbers of people holding legitimate btc to do that? + +comment: p1tzk9u +parent: t1_p1tiucp +author: skr_replicator +created_utc: 1785928104 +edited: false +body: +yea i didn't claim it would be easy or safe for the people with that legitimate BTC.Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
The thread gained discussion of government recovery, permanent on-chain transaction records and an impractical cash-out scenario, plus a dismissive reply.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 32 lines
There's a difference between taking unknown gold vs taking one that everyone can see was there and then was taken. Original owner would have a hard time proving it was theirs, nor would even notice it missing for a long long time. On bitcoin blockchain it's highly visible. But yeah, you generally have to turn in big findings into authorities and maybe seek a finder's fee. Those are the rules where I live though. In other societies with billions of people that type of regulation/law may not be a factor in their decision making. + +comment: p1rv47r +parent: t1_p1oar4q +author: saltyfoot73 +created_utc: 1785895341 +edited: false +body: +yeah I thought that was the case but why doesn't whichever branch of government has the keys transfer it back to bitfinex if someone steals your car and then the police get it back do the police just keep your car i realize not a great analogy because insurance but you know what I am saying right + +comment: p1rxglm +parent: t1_p1krumf +author: JoeMillersHat +created_utc: 1785896120 +edited: false +body: +because every transaction lives on the chain forever + +comment: p1sivtz +parent: t1_p1jm32c +author: Remarkable_Gap_3418 +created_utc: 1785903911 +edited: false +body: +Just go to SEA country and pay some local a few weeks of meals worth of money to go withdraw on your behalf. He never even needs to see your face. However yes, it's incredibly inefficient and not feasible in this scenario. It would take multiple lifetimes to withdraw 100+mil this way lol. + +comment: p1ssdoo +parent: t1_p1jkjq8 +author: blackrack +created_utc: 1785908006 +edited: false +body: +DumbExtracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
The Reddit thread gained new participant comments.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 18 lines
5. Profit + +comment: p1r6bql +parent: t1_p1my2i5 +author: RetiredAvocado +created_utc: 1785887305 +edited: false +body: +Fro stealing a literal car example people get more than just equivalent value to pay back. There are lawyer's fees to get a more comfortable sentence deal, probation, community service hours, many serve jail terms. If you steal someone's car or bitcoin, you should go to jail, as a stronger discouragement than just giving back what you stole when caught. + +comment: p1r93mh +parent: t1_p1ksmg8 +author: RetiredAvocado +created_utc: 1785888196 +edited: false +body: +There's a difference between taking unknown gold vs taking one that everyone can see was there and then was taken. Original owner would have a hard time proving it was theirs, nor would even notice it missing for a long long time. On bitcoin blockchain it's highly visible. + +But yeah, you generally have to turn in big findings into authorities and maybe seek a finder's fee. Those are the rules where I live though. In other societies with billions of people that type of regulation/law may not be a factor in their decision making.Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
The Reddit thread gained new participant comments.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 15 lines
+comment: p1kkapi +parent: t1_p1jwcws +author: Numerous-Annual-721 +created_utc: 1785809526 +edited: 1785809970 +body: +not true. they'd have to prove you still have the keys to the coins. +you cannot be sentenced to jail indefinitely for theft, but you can be held in jail for contempt of court / non compliance with an order to return the stolen property. +but that part is limited based on your ability to actually return said property. +if you don't have the keys, they can't hold you. +so far the record for being held in such contempt is 14 years [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.\_Beatty\_Chadwick](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._Beatty_Chadwick) + +edit: bottom line, they'd have to prove quite a lot. +the theft part that affected lots of people is the serious one in terms of sentence because you stole from 1000 people so you can get thousands of years stacked in prison. but theft has the shortest statute of limitations. just a few years. if you don't do anything stupid until that statute passes, the next thing would be money laundering (as you haven't actually hacked any computer system, but maybe there's something there too). but money laundering would possibly be a single offense and we'd be pretty far away from the original crime. but the money laundering offense is only relevant to the money that has been laundered, and that would presumably be in the form of cash/gold/cars/house, which they'd take. any coins you still have have not been laundered... + comment: p1kppkn parent: t1_p1ilaoq author: anonymous-12358Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
The Reddit thread gained 2 new comments.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 28 lines
Yes, but if it came out publicly you could now use this to force account flags in exchanges by transferring funds to them. If the funds are useless anyway, might as well cause havoc. Could also use all the confusion tot ry to get some percentage of funds cleared somehow. My main point is that the assumption that because the wallet with the funds is well known it's easy to mitigate further misuse is at best wishful thinking. + +comment: p1qiabm +parent: t3_1vegndz +author: _gianlucag_ +created_utc: 1785880071 +edited: false +body: +Fee rebating. + +By colluding with a miner, you could prepare a transaction of few sats but a humongous fee, let's say a fee of 1 btc. The miner gets the fee and the usual block reward, and then it will send you a transaction of 1 btc back. You now have 1 perfectly clean btc. Problem is, you must trust the miner to give you back the 1 btc, or lets say 0.7 btc, depending on the agreement. + +comment: p1qjj8j +parent: t3_1vegndz +author: choppadonmiss +created_utc: 1785880421 +edited: false +body: +1. Find a foreign government that opposes the US + +2. Offer bitcoin for a steep discount + +3. Get threatened by the foreign government + +4. Give up bitcoin for nothing in exchange + +5. Profit + +Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
The Reddit thread gained 1 new comment.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 10 lines
edited: false body: I'm not sure, but it would not be difficult to code some software that would automatically track the transfer from wallet to wallet. Transfers are not even close to being instantaneous either by virtue of how block chains work so its possible for such software to stay ahead. Will they do it? I have no idea. But it's possible. + +comment: p1pytk1 +parent: t1_p1pxg35 +author: Euphoric-Language695 +created_utc: 1785874813 +edited: false +body: +Yes, but if it came out publicly you could now use this to force account flags in exchanges by transferring funds to them. If the funds are useless anyway, might as well cause havoc. Could also use all the confusion tot ry to get some percentage of funds cleared somehow. + +My main point is that the assumption that because the wallet with the funds is well known it's easy to mitigate further misuse is at best wishful thinking.Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
The Reddit thread gained 1 new comment.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 8 lines
If they are automatic, this could be weaponized by dumping funds into a bunch of wallets to disable them. The way I see it is this is an arms race and the hackers can lijely move faster than these exchanges. + +comment: p1pxg35 +parent: t1_p1po56m +author: scrandlle +created_utc: 1785874452 +edited: false +body: +I'm not sure, but it would not be difficult to code some software that would automatically track the transfer from wallet to wallet. Transfers are not even close to being instantaneous either by virtue of how block chains work so its possible for such software to stay ahead. Will they do it? I have no idea. But it's possible.Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
The Reddit thread gained 1 new comment.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 12 lines
edited: false body: Of a friend who knows a guy that knows a guy's cousin who met a guy that heard about.... + +comment: p1po56m +parent: t1_p1k1kjd +author: Euphoric-Language695 +created_utc: 1785871995 +edited: false +body: +Are those systems automatic and also immediately flag any ither wallet sent from the hacker wallet? Because otherwise you're just a new wallet away from moving funds. + +If they are automatic, this could be weaponized by dumping funds into a bunch of wallets to disable them. + +The way I see it is this is an arms race and the hackers can lijely move faster than these exchanges.Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
The Reddit thread gained 2 new comments.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 16 lines
edited: false body: Coins up until now have not been returned to bitfinex. They made their customer base good because it was only around 50M USD at the time, after BTC dumped because of the hack. They leveraged assets to pay the customers back, and BTC increase on it's own healed their accounts pretty quickly. + +comment: p1p1y0y +parent: t1_p1jhjhn +author: Soulists_Shadow +created_utc: 1785866378 +edited: false +body: +You could turn satoshi into the bad guy by doing that. A if he is still alive, he didnt return three coins. You were holding onto stolen property. + +comment: p1p2so3 +parent: t1_p1hr7gd +author: Healthy_Committee888 +created_utc: 1785866591 +edited: false +body: +Of a friend who knows a guy that knows a guy's cousin who met a guy that heard about....Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
1 new Reddit comment was posted, by 00MacDonald, discussing the Bitfinex hack and customer reimbursement.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 8 lines
edited: false body: You misunderstand me. By sending to just a few wallets it's possible to see who the victims are. If they sent to many wallets, there would be no way to see that. I agree that tracking isn't affected - but only if you can see what to track. + +comment: p1oar4q +parent: t1_p1ksqzg +author: 00MacDonald +created_utc: 1785859629 +edited: false +body: +Coins up until now have not been returned to bitfinex. They made their customer base good because it was only around 50M USD at the time, after BTC dumped because of the hack. They leveraged assets to pay the customers back, and BTC increase on it's own healed their accounts pretty quickly.Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
1 new Reddit comment was posted, including Secret_Operative.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 8 lines
You are aware there are tons of decentralized exchanges? Depending on who stole the coins washing them might just be a matter of time, take Lazarus for example. + +comment: p1npyzz +parent: t1_p1jwz0d +author: Secret_Operative +created_utc: 1785854252 +edited: false +body: +You misunderstand me. By sending to just a few wallets it's possible to see who the victims are. If they sent to many wallets, there would be no way to see that. I agree that tracking isn't affected - but only if you can see what to track.Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
1 new Reddit comment was posted, including DaseR9-2.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 10 lines
edited: false body: you only owe the monetary equivalent value in fiat… just wait for the next hype and sell, give the stolen value in fiat back, and keep the remainder as profit + +comment: p1nerdc +parent: t1_p1hjbel +author: DaseR9-2 +created_utc: 1785851213 +edited: false +body: +You are aware there are tons of decentralized exchanges? + +Depending on who stole the coins washing them might just be a matter of time, take Lazarus for example.Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
7 new Reddit comments were posted, including DelcimarMartins,upo33,DOG-ZILLA.
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 56 lines
edited: false body: with sufficiently poor opsec yeah. if you buy some Cocaine with the wallet of stolen funds, and the selller is dumb enough to use a exchange wallet to receive your funds, you're now one person spilling the beans away from being toast. + +comment: p1m97tl +parent: t3_1vegndz +author: DelcimarMartins +created_utc: 1785836270 +edited: false +body: +Sua preocupação não é o ataque nem a falha da empresa sua preocupação é outra e o bandido usar o btc é a mesma coisa em se preocupar se a nota de dólar que está na sua mão foi usada para cheira coca + +comment: p1m9wqd +parent: t3_1vegndz +author: upo33 +created_utc: 1785836607 +edited: false +body: +Black Exchanges in Iran, North Korea, Russia, China ? + +comment: p1moii2 +parent: t3_1vegndz +author: DOG-ZILLA +created_utc: 1785842842 +edited: false +body: +They would use what's called a "mixer". You deposit your BTC into it and then it's mixed with others. You can then take out BTC but without the 1:1 trace. + +comment: p1mr9wm +parent: t3_1vegndz +author: Fabulous_Mud2554 +created_utc: 1785843855 +edited: false +body: +Probably not one person but a group. Each will take their cut. Wash it. If it was US attacker, maybe you'd trace one or a few, but more than likely not US. Probably in a country that blesses scams and scammers before the work day. Its an a real thing that happens in some places. Their government gets their cut. + +comment: p1mu78l +parent: t1_p1j4yst +author: Informal-Special-984 +created_utc: 1785844896 +edited: false +body: +not in netherlands, they have box 3 taxing + +comment: p1my2i5 +parent: t1_p1hx0e5 +author: Informal-Special-984 +created_utc: 1785846200 +edited: false +body: +you owe the monetary equivalent value… just sell in a hype, give the stolen value in fiat back, and keep the remainder as profit + +comment: p1myt46 +parent: t1_p1l3v3u +author: Informal-Special-984 +created_utc: 1785846442 +edited: false +body: +you only owe the monetary equivalent value in fiat… just wait for the next hype and sell, give the stolen value in fiat back, and keep the remainder as profitExtracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
-
Recovered from the Internet Archive rather than captured by this project. The row records that third-party provenance separately from captures made by this project.
What changed from the previous capture 0 lines
Extracted text as captured
post: 1vegndz author: quantumdot44 created_utc: 1785770905 title: A forensic question about the Coldcard attacker: how could someone actually cash out hundreds of BTC? body: Hello, I was thinking about the Coldcard incident and what an attacker who now controls hundreds of stolen BTC could realistically do. The interesting part is not moving the coins. The blockchain is public, the addresses are known, and every transaction leaves a permanent record. The real question is: **How could an attacker turn such a large amount of BTC into fiat money without exposing themselves?** I came up with two theoretical ideas and would like to hear what people with more knowledge about blockchain forensics think. The first idea would be extreme fragmentation. The attacker could split the BTC across millions of wallets and create a huge amount of transaction activity. The idea would be to make the connection between the original stolen coins and any future conversion into fiat much harder to establish. Would something like this actually make forensic tracking significantly harder, or would analysts still be able to identify patterns because the entire transaction history remains visible? The second idea would be cooperation with a powerful external actor, for example a state actor or organization with its own infrastructure and resources. Instead of trying to solve the problem only through technical methods, the attacker could rely on an entity with different capabilities and incentives. Would something like this actually solve the problem of converting stolen BTC into usable wealth, or would the transparent nature of Bitcoin still make it difficult? I am curious what others think. What other options would a sophisticated attacker consider? Do these ideas make sense from a forensic perspective, or am I missing important factors? comment: p1gsslf parent: t3_1vegndz author: IllllIIlIllIllllIlll created_utc: 1785771629 edited: false body: I couldn't say it without getting banned from this censored sub lol (rule 3). But everyone knows the answer. comment: p1gt1wt parent: t3_1vegndz author: LaukessExcerpt only. The complete copy is held offline and backs quotations on this site. The original publication remains the canonical public source.
0 presentation-noise differences. Sidebar, ticker and other page chrome churn that our review classified as not being changes to what the source says.
How to check this yourself
The excerpts and plain unified diffs above show the text this project held and how it changed. To verify a quotation, compare it against the page itself or against the Internet Archive's copies, which are independent of this project.
Complete captures are held offline rather than mirrored here, so this page shows diffs and excerpts. If a quotation is ever disputed, the full copy can be produced. Ask.
How to check this yourself
Compare the screenshot or a quotation against the original while it is available.