Crypto.com CEO Confirms Hundreds of Accounts Were Hacked (theverge.com) 29
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: The CEO of cryptocurrency exchange Crypto.com, Kris Marszalek, has finally confirmed that hundreds of user accounts were indeed compromised by hackers and had funds stolen as a result, though details of the exact method of breach remain unclear. Marszalek acknowledged the hack in an online interview with Bloomberg Wednesday, stating that around 400 customer accounts had been compromised. He also told Bloomberg that he had not received any outreach from regulators since the attack was first disclosed but would share information if official inquiries were made.
Previous statements from Marszalek and other communications from Crypto.com have been criticized for being vague and unclear. Official messaging from the company referred to a security "incident," and an early Twitter post mentioned only that a small number of users were "reporting suspicious activity on their accounts." Marszalek followed up by tweeting that "no customer funds were lost" -- a statement some commentators interpreted as meaning that the exchange would take the financial hit rather than passing it on to customers. Shortly afterward, security company PeckShield posted a tweet claiming that, in reality, Crypto.com's losses amounted to around $15 million in ETH and were being sent to Tornado Cash to be "washed."
Previous statements from Marszalek and other communications from Crypto.com have been criticized for being vague and unclear. Official messaging from the company referred to a security "incident," and an early Twitter post mentioned only that a small number of users were "reporting suspicious activity on their accounts." Marszalek followed up by tweeting that "no customer funds were lost" -- a statement some commentators interpreted as meaning that the exchange would take the financial hit rather than passing it on to customers. Shortly afterward, security company PeckShield posted a tweet claiming that, in reality, Crypto.com's losses amounted to around $15 million in ETH and were being sent to Tornado Cash to be "washed."
How am I going to pay for my NFTs now? (Score:1, Funny)
All my shitcoins lost and regulators doing nothing!
Brave? (Score:4, Funny)
Same thing happens on coinbase (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Same thing happens on coinbase (Score:5, Insightful)
Duped. Scammed.
You opted to convert your regulated and protected assets with a known (if not entirely trustworthy) into unregulated, unprotected assets with people who you don't know, and aren't covered by any regulation or protections.
You literally signed up for this. You signed up to have no one protect you, because you believe that government is less trustworthy than these people, who plain upfront told you that the reason you should join them is because there is no government there.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, pretty much this. Banks are heavily regulated to prevent things like this. Coinbase and others profiteering from the scam do the minimal in security they think they can economically get away with.
Re: Same thing happens on coinbase (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you hold your own bitcoin wallet, you're just swapping out one bank with another, less-regulated bank. The real hack was when they made you think this was a good idea. The entire cryptocurrency universe, as it currently exists, is "suspicious activity" end to end.
Another day (Score:2)
Another crypto hack.
This just keeps getting better and better.
Re: (Score:3)
Hack or inside job?
Re: (Score:2)
Hack or inside job?
Does it matter?
Shocking... (Score:5, Insightful)
I will never cease to be amazed at how readily people who are allegedly super excited about cryptocurrencies cash theirs in for some vendor-specific IOUs to obtain a little extra convenience.
Re: (Score:3)
Greed really. No one cares to do it properly, they just want in on this get-rich-quick opportunity. They treat it like any other investment account, like for stocks, where you transfer in money and then you buy stocks and leave the stock in your account. You could transfer the stock out into your own possession (you can still get physical stock certificates), but most people keep it in their accounts to save the hassle. Of course, there are strong regulations on this - that stock is your property and remain
Re: (Score:2)
Running a secure operation is expensive, requires specialised skills and is often inconvenient for users or staff.
In a small operation where someone security conscious and skilled is near/at the top, they might be able to operate in a fairly secure way. On the other hand in a large organisation there will often be lots of competing interests and inertia even if there are security-aware people present in the organisation.
Most organisations consider security an unwanted cost, and generally won't want to inves
Re: (Score:2)
Greed really. No one cares to do it properly, they just want in on this get-rich-quick opportunity.
Indeed. On all sides, including the "exchanges". As they are not regulated, they are doing the cheapest thing possible and they probably steal form their own customers regularly as well. Does not seem to matter, the suckers keep coming.
Re: (Score:2)
That is far and beyond what you can get on any bank account.
Really?
You haven't figured out why just yet?!
But, the stadium! (Score:2)
Did they at least get the signs changed before things went to hell?
Better when it always goes up (Score:2)
Back when a pizza cost 7 BTC and the price has continued rising it seemed cool. Who would care if someone hacked my 7 BTC @ 1USD/BTC? Nowadays it's all just kind of stupid and wasteful. At least slot machines have moving graphics.
Someone call up Matt Damon... (Score:2)
It sounds like it's time for crypto.com's spokesman to save the day, again! I just hope that he got back from Mars OK, I know that he ran into problems the last time he was there.
Crypto (Score:2)
Due dilligence reminder (Score:2)
Anyone taking payment in the affected cryptocurrencies have to be careful not to take "currencies" of unknown provenance. Because despite what they call themselves, they aren't actually currencies, but assets.
There's no technical way to change that - it's a legal category, a government has to recognize it as currency for it to be currency in that jurisdiction, no matter its properties.
Receiving stolen assets leaves you in much hotter water than receiving stolen currency, as far as the jurisdictions I know.
S
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And are you willing to take it at the same price as a freshly mined coin? If you took it at a discount you would be making my point...
Re: Due dilligence reminder (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My claim is that in fact not all bitcoin (or ethers, or what have you) are worth the same. Coins with known good provenance should be worth more.
At least, as long as they aren't both worthless.
Re: (Score:2)
My claim is that in fact not all bitcoin (or ethers, or what have you) are worth the same. Coins with known good provenance should be worth more.
At least, as long as they aren't both worthless.
Oh I'd absolutely agree with that statement. That said, in my particular case my crypto investing is exactly the same as my blackjack investing at a casino. Play with money you don't need and that wouldn't break your heart if you got wiped out. I'm probably one generation too old to believe this is the currency of the future.
How does Tornado still exist? (Score:2)