These behind the alleged theft of $31 million worth of Tether’s US dollar-backed tokens have been also involved in a higher-profile hack two years ago, a cybersleuth has concluded from obtainable blockchain information.
The organization behind the dollar-backed cryptocurrency tether claimed Monday night that it had been robbed, sparking a new wave of speculation about the token, its backers and its alleged part in recent bitcoin market movements.
And, as may well be expected, the availability of public blockchain information for the transactions involved led a number of observers on the internet to trace them back in an attempt to discover answers.
In posts on the r/bitcoin and r/cryptocurrency subreddits, a user going by the deal with SpeedflyChris has linked the alleged Tether attack to the $five million hack of Bitstamp in 2015. As reported at the time, workers at that Luxembourg-based bitcoin exchange fell victim to a weeks-lengthy phishing attempt, eventually major to the loss of some 18,000 bitcoins.
At the heart of SpeedflyChris’ evaluation is this wallet, for which transactions from Bitstamp can be noticed dating back to January 2015.
As SpeedflyChris notes, the address in query was used to send bitcoins to one more address that later received tokens from Tether’s “treasury” wallet, in a series of 21 transactions more than the course of Nov. 19. Included in the alleged theft of the roughly $31 million in tethers was 5 BTC, which ended up in threeseparatewallets as Tether makes use of Omni, a bitcoin-primarily based software program protocol to effectively “tag” coins to serve distinct purposes.
Separately, SpeedlyChris’ analysis indicates that the principal address in query is also connected to thefts that occurred at the China-primarily based bitcoin exchange Huobi in 2015, as effectively as a quantity of transactions to peer-to-peer bitcoin exchange LocalBitcoins.
In spite of the pseudonymous nature of public blockchains like bitcoin, the data gives a level of transparency into the movements of the funds involved.
However the absence of identifying information beyond wallet addresses signifies that on the internet sleuthing has its limitations.
On the other hand, in the event of a law enforcement investigation, such data could eventually come into play.
Magnifying glass image by means of Shutterstock
The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is an independent media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. Have breaking news or a story tip to send to our journalists? Get in touch with us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Disclaimer: This article should not be taken as, and is not intended to provide, investment tips. Please conduct your own thorough investigation ahead of investing in any cryptocurrency.
Published at Tue, 21 Nov 2017 20:00:39 +0000