this post was submitted on 16 May 2024
277 points (96.6% liked)

Technology

59656 readers
4115 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 115 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Here is a more detailed explanation of the exploit.

The Pepaire-Bueno brothers exploited a bug in MEV-boost's code that allowed them to preview the content of blocks before they were officially delivered to validators, according to the indictment.

The brothers created 16 Ethereum validators and targeted three specific traders who operated MEV bots, the indictment said. They used bait transactions to figure out how those bots traded, lured the bots to one of their validators which was validating a new block and basically tricked these bots into proposing certain transactions. [...]

So hardly an attack on any core system of cryptocurrencies.

[–] survirtual@lemmy.world 35 points 6 months ago (5 children)

So they discovered faulty code and made some money?

Can anyone explain to me how this is illegal?

The code is a contract. If someone writes bad code and loses money, then write better code - just like if someone writes a bad legal contract and loses money.

The justice system is awful.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 39 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

IANAL and all, but bad/unfavorable contracts and literal deception/fraud are two different things, at least in the legal system. Not everything that's technically possible is also allowed, obviously.

Compare it to using a security flaw to hack into a system. Technically you're only using the official API, maybe in unusual ways, but still. But you're doing it in bad faith and causing harm, maybe pretending to be someone you're not or injecting fake data into the system, and that can make a difference.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] blargerer@kbin.social 33 points 6 months ago (5 children)

This is like saying they discovered how to pick a lock so deserve everything in whats locked by it.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] yetAnotherUser@feddit.de 30 points 6 months ago (2 children)

You withdraw cash at an ATM but the software has faulty code which causes your balance to remain the same after withdrawing any amount.

You notice this and then empty the entire ATM this way, making $200,000. I'm sure once you explain to the jury that the ATM just gave you a bad contract, they will acquit you.

[–] Cypher@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago
[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

No one ever said ATM-code is law. Ethereum code is supposed to be. Code is law is one of their slogans.

Everything that a blockchain does could be handled by a single office computer. The whole reason for the huge, expensive over-head is to put crypto beyond the law. Stuff like this exposes the whole, huge waste of human effort.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 6 months ago

They created a bunch of fake shell companies in foreign companies and were preparing to flee the US

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Doesn't sound a huge deal different to High Frequency Trading, and Wall Street nobheads fall over themselves to exploit that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] treadful@lemmy.zip 22 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Frustratingly vague for a Slashdot write-up.

“These brothers allegedly committed a first-of-its-kind manipulation of the Ethereum blockchain by fraudulently gaining access to pending transactions, altering the movement of the electronic currency, and ultimately stealing $25 million in cryptocurrency from their victims,” said Special Agent in Charge Thomas Fattorusso of the IRS Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) New York Field Office.

Good to know the prosecutors have an understanding of what they're prosecuting... Not even a single mention of MEV in the DoJ press release.

[–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 6 months ago (4 children)

by fraudulently gaining access to pending transactions

That makes no sense to me. The mempool is public, everyone can see pending transactions.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Frog-Brawler@kbin.social 47 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yea, we wouldn’t want anyone doing anything illegal with crypto… 🙄

[–] shortwavesurfer@monero.town 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

We also wouldnt want anyone doing anything illegal with dollars, euros, yen, etc. Crypto is money and all money will be used for illegal things

[–] Ibaudia@lemmy.world 15 points 6 months ago (20 children)

True, but Crypto has been awash with scams from its inception. Blockchain inherently rewards those who engage with it deceptively since access to tokens = ownership, there are no take backsies, 0 consumer protections, and it's global.

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] hark@lemmy.world 37 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This is a prime example of why the "code is law" selling point for smart contracts is a disaster waiting to happen. Proponents claim you won't need lawyers, arbitrators, courts, etc, but in reality you'll need all those and on top of that programmers to write and verify smart contracts.

[–] mPony@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

"code is law" can become "might makes right" without oversight. Those who lobby against oversight are a problem.

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 28 points 6 months ago (3 children)

US Attorney Damian Williams said the scheme was so sophisticated that it "calls the very integrity of the blockchain into question."

If that’s actually true, they should be given a sentence of time served and a job writing useful software.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 44 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

It's not. They tricked some MEV-Boost bots into doing bad trades.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Kyrgizion@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago

More likely they'll get the Mitnick treatment.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 25 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

It is wrong to criminalize him. He found a bug and got a reward. Bring him in to fix the bug and to make it better. If you start scaring away people hunting for bugs and exploits for fun you will end up being exploited by a much nastier adversary

Edit: I did more research and it seems like there was some questionable actions such as creating a bunch of fake shell companies and crypto exchanges. This wasn't a "bug" as the title is clickbait.

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 22 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's a victimless crime really.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

Its all imagination and pixie dust anyway.

Like trying to arrest someone for theft cause they took a jar of sand home, and some delusional lunatic goes "OMG YOU CANT TAKE THAT, THATS MONEY, EACH GRAIN IS WORTH 80,000 DOLLARS!"

[–] walter_wiggles@lemmy.nz 17 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Lesson learned: always use your girlfriend's browser to look up how to do crime.

[–] ivanafterall@kbin.social 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

You'd think these guys would know how to open a private Firefox tab.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

I'll try a simple explanation of what this is about, cause this is hilarious. It's the kind of understated humor, you get in a good british comedy.

For a payment system you must store who owns how much and how the owners transfer the currency. Easy-peasy. A simple office PC can handle that faster and cheaper than a blockchain. But what if the owner of the PC decides to manipulate the records? No problem, you just go to the police with your own records and receipts and they go to jail for fraud. Their belongings are sold off to pay you damages. That's how these things have worked since forever. It's how businesses keep track of their debts.

Just one little problem: What if the government wants your money. Maybe you don't want to pay your taxes, or some fine. Or maybe you have debts you don't want to pay, like your alimony. Perhaps the government wants to seize the proceeds from a drug deal. They can just go to the record keeper and force them to transfer currency.

This is where cryptocurrencies come to the rescue (as it were). There are different schemes. ETH (Ethereum) uses validators. The validators are paid to take care of the record-keeping. The trick is, that you have to put down ETH as a collateral (called staking) to run a validator. If you manipulate the record/blockchain, then the other validators will notice and raise the alarm. That results in you losing your collateral.

This means the validators can remain anonymous. You don't need to know their identities to punish them for fraud. You just take their crypto-money. They need to remain anonymous so that the government (or the mob) can't get to them.

This is where it gets hilarious. These 2 brothers operated fraudulent validators. The stake/the collateral didn't matter at all. The whole scheme didn't matter. It was a horrible waste of money and effort. The indictment even details how they tried to launder the crypto. That is, how they tried to transfer it, so that it couldn't be traced on the blockchain. The indictment even has the search queries they used to look up the info on how to do that.

The whole point of it all is that you supposedly do not need the government to prosecute anyone. If validators are kept honest by the threat of criminal prosecution, then you do not need the whole Proof of Stake scheme. You do not need the whole expensive overhead.

The only rational reason for crypto to exist, is to avoid laws; buying drugs and what not. I'm not judging. The hilarious fact is that the law knew everything about these guys.

It's all a sham. The one thing that crypto is supposed to do: Foil the government. And it doesn't work.


When people want to buy crypto on the blockchain, they put out a request so that a validator will execute that transaction and record it on the blockchain. So, while the request is waiting, a bot comes along and scans it. It may be that a purchase changes the exchange value of a currency. In that case, the bot adds 2 more transactions. First, to buy that currency before the original request, and to sell it afterward. The original request drives up the price in between the buy and sell, so that the bot makes a profit for its operator. The original request has to pay a little extra. That's where the profit comes from.

Sound shady? I hope not, because that's what the victims did.

The accused operated their own validators. At the right time, they put out their own buy request to lure in a bot. When the bot proposed the bundled transactions, their validators feigned acceptance. But then switched out the lure transaction of buying for selling.

The indictment makes a fairly good argument. It's like there is a "contract" between these automatic systems. The trading bot wants the bundled transactions to be carried out exactly so. The validator feigns agreement, but does not follow through.

[–] Wrench@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That sounds a lot like what I understood how etrade platforms like Robinhood work when I was reading up on the GME shorts fiasco.

I definitely only have a surface level understanding of it, but it sounded like the stock brokers have a buffer in-between the transaction request to buy/sell, and they first try to handle that locally within their portfolio, before expanding to external trades. And if there's a favorable internal trade, brokers like Robinhood siphon out a little something something for themselves.

Sounds like people are getting busted for doing essentially the same thing Wallstreet has been doing for decades. Again.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 13 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Whoa. A slashdot link? Remember when that wasn't a cesspool, but it's been awhile. For an ars technica summary this was extremely disappointing with regards to details.

My only take away here is that we really should make H.E.B (highly educated brothers) a part of the vernacular.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 6 months ago

I'm honestly very surprised that site is still around. Like digg.

[–] PlantJam@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Sorry, the term HEB is already taken by Texas groceries.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago

Remember when the slashdot effect was a thing that mattered?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 0nekoneko7@lemmy.world 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

"Each brother faces "a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison for each count," the DOJ said." 😬 They will be going in for a long time.

Thomas Fattorusso of the IRS Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) New York Field Office, said that investigators "simply followed the money." 🔎💸

[–] Miaou@jlai.lu 25 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Should have stolen taxpayer's money instead, silly them

[–] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 30 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Or raped someone. .how the fuck is this more prison time than much more serious crimes.

Presumably they can claw back some of the money too

[–] Evil_incarnate@lemm.ee 9 points 6 months ago

The people with money make the laws. They want to protect their money above all else, so crimes against their money are punished more harshly than others. Note this doesn't happen when people with money steal from poor people en masse.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)
[–] Shurimal@kbin.social 12 points 6 months ago

Nice! Too bad they got caught, though.

No sympathy for cryptobros and trading bots.

[–] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 months ago (3 children)

incoming JSTOR replay in the courts, here we go!

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

not stole. Were given.

If code is law, then they just found the right way to ask. And the code gave the money to them, because they asked nicely.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 6 months ago

Code isn't law. The article above does a bad job of explaining it and makes it sound like it was just a weekend bug find. It wasn't a bug, it was them setting up a bunch of fake entities misdirect funds.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/05/sophisticated-25m-ethereum-heist-took-about-12-seconds-doj-says/

load more comments
view more: next ›