Twitter Vigilantes Crypto-scammers are being hunted

[ad_1]
The main problem with amateur research, of course, is that they lack teeth. Crypto-sleuth threads or blog posts that show their findings are only good at warning potential victims or embarrassing the perpetrators. The hope is that people will care enough about their reputation to make repairs. That was the case with Divergence Ventures, and earlier NFT marketplace OpenSea, which was found in the middle of another “insider trading” scandal in September, after one. Twitter user The artist who was about to appear on the front page of OpenSea accused his product head of accumulating NFTs, thus benefiting from the rise of the announcement. The product boss was forced to resign.
But when embarrassment doesn’t cause changes, there is little he can do. Many of the behaviors revealed by crypto-sleeves occur in a regulatory vacuum. “Insider trading has a very specific meaning: the use of non-public information when trading on the stock market,” says Nick Pricek, a specialist in cryptocurrency assets at the Osborne Clarke law firm. “These tokens are not stocks and shares. NFTs are not regulated, so it’s not insider trading.”
Cases of fraud, such as cryptographic theft or tampering with a smart contract, can be reported to police, Price says. But he says the level of analysis coming from the cryptocurrency community and the quality of information that can gather the crowd is “unprecedented”. For example, in October users of the DeFi protocol indexed Finance he said they had masked a person who stole $ 16 million online – even though negotiations with the hacker to recover the funds did not come out in the end. The group is working to “determine what authority they have over the attack.” According to a recent Twitter post.
Blockchain’s open record is a great advantage for naughty research. “It leaves a better audit trail than other sectors,” Price says. “There is more information for people who are willing to do technical analysis.”
That said, there are risks to relying on anonymous Twitter accounts to control a feverish and dangerous network site. In May, @WARONRUGS, a Twitter-based caretaker who allegedly signed up as a passionate fraud hunter run away nearly $ 500,000 in stolen cryptography. Even when cases of extreme infidelity are discounted, some are concerned that the system based on online calls is too prone to abuse. Mitchell Amador, founder of Immunefi – a company that handles “bug bounty” deals between hackers and DeFi developers – is critical of what he calls a “crowdsourced panopticon,” and Harris, a young Divergence Ventures employee, talks about Twitter abuse. run the wallet used to organize the airdrop operation. Harris, who is still a college student, was targeted by dozens of tweets, taunts and insults. Divergence Ventures said it wasn’t the company’s actions, but Harris deleted his biography on Twitter and fell silent on social media.
Gabagool admits that Twitter has a “malicious side” to the police. “I think for some people, it’s reminiscent of a kind of‘ leave culture ’. But that wasn’t really my intention, ”he says. In his view, self-regulation is still the best way to preserve DeF’s space of freedom and innovation. Failing to do so, he fears “something else will arise. And I can’t guarantee that this alternative will benefit the community, ”he says.
It will already be too late to dismiss that scenario. In September, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission launched a study on Uniswap Labs, Developer of Uniswap in exchange for DeFi. SEC President Gary Gensler said there could be some protocols to DeFi in the end subject to securities regulation.
“The question is, do we use an open system created by people themselves? Or do we use the long arm of the State? ‘ says Amador. “In any case, we will end with some kind of regulation, there is no doubt about that result. Right now, we are still in that time of adaptation. ”
WIRED More great stories
[ad_2]
Source link