Connect with us

Published

on

When the Justice Department announced it seized billions in stolen cryptocurrency earlier this year, it seemed like great news for victims of a hack that drained around $70 million from customers’ accounts on the Bitfinex trading platform in 2016. 

“It was the biggest relief of my life,” said Frankie Cavazos, who lost 15 bitcoins in the hack. 

Over the course of the last six years, the value of the stolen crypto skyrocketed. At the time of the hack, a single bitcoin was worth less than a thousand dollars. Today it would be trading for around $20,000. 

For Cavazos, getting his bitcoins back would be “a life-changing amount of money.” 

But so far thousands of victims like him haven’t experienced the happy ending they were hoping for. Instead, they’re embroiled in a battle over who is the legal owner of all that stolen crypto.

On the day the news broke that the funds had been recovered, Bitfinex publicly asserted that the stolen bitcoins should be returned to the platform in a statement: “Bitfinex will work with the DOJ and follow appropriate legal processes to establish our rights to a return of the stolen bitcoin.”

That’s because the company believes it’s already made its customers whole by providing them with a variety of digital tokens that customers could sell in exchange for cash after the hack. A company spokesperson told CNBC that Bitfinex customers could have sold the tokens for cash and then used the cash to buy more bitcoins at the time.

The decision to offer customers tokens came after the company decided to generalize its losses across all account holders by 36%. That meant everyone who had a Bitfinex account lost 36% of their assets – not just users whose accounts were hacked.

The first token the company created was called a BFX token. Customers received one BFX token for each dollar they lost.

Bitfinex hack victim Frankie Cavazos

CNBC’s “Crocodile of Wall St” YouTube documentary

Cavazos told CNBC he felt like Bitfinex just “dumped” those tokens on its customers and said he was not given the option to decline the BFX token.

He and several other Bitfinex hack victims spoke exclusively to CNBC for the documentary “Crocodile of Wall Street,” which reports on the theft of the bitcoins and the alleged attempt to launder the stolen crypto.

One issue customers brought up to CNBC is that when they decided to sell their tokens they were actually worth pennies on the dollar.

“They pegged ’em to $1 per BFX token,” Cavazos said. “They put ’em on the open market and it went from $1 to, like, 20 cents, so they were essentially allowed to basically FOMO everyone out of their debt.” 

Rafal Bielenia, who had 91 bitcoins on the platform said: “I sold those tokens as fast as possible immediately when they became available. And I was only able to get like 25% of their value.” He believes, “there was no point in time that they refunded me – not in dollar terms, and not in bitcoin terms.”

Bitfinex hack victim Rafal Bielenia.

CNBC’s “Crocodile of Wall Street” YouTube documentary

For customers who didn’t sell the tokens immediately, the company later gave BFX token holders a chance to convert their tokens into equity shares of iFinex, the corporate entity behind Bitfinex through other tokens the company created called RRT and LEO.

To put it simply, Bitfinex feels the customers have already been compensated fairly and if they chose to sell the tokens before their value reached a dollar, that was their choice to make. In a statement, the company told CNBC, “Upon receipt of the bitcoins recovered from the 2016 security breach, Bitfinex has pledged to use 80 percent of the proceeds to buy back and burn LEO tokens, after all RRTs are redeemed.”

Essentially, Bitfinex wants the bitcoins that were stolen in the 2016 hack returned to the company and it will give a portion of that back to some of their customers in cash, not in bitcoins.

But some of the hack victims still assert the bitcoins belong to them. And the idea that they could lose their bitcoins not once, but twice, seems impossible.

“Why would anybody question that I should get my money back? That was my property,” Bielenia said.

“I still am going to be trying to get ahold of these 15 bitcoins because I truly believe they are mine,” Cavazos said. “I can prove it through the blockchain explorers.” 

Will Hogarth, who also had his crypto stolen in the Bitfinex hack, told CNBC, “I still expect my bitcoin back and I don’t see any reason why they would keep it.”

U.S. Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco told CNBC, “Victims, individuals and entities whose money, who claimed that’s their money, that they were victimized by this money laundering scheme will submit claims ultimately to a court who will decide how that money is dispersed.” However, no further details about that process have been released. 

Booking photos for Heather Morgan and Ilya Lichtenstein.

Courtesy: Alexandria Adult Detention Center.

For now, the holdup seems to be that there has been no resolution in the court case involving the couple investigators say got caught holding the stolen cryptocurrency. Heather Morgan and Ilya Lichtenstein have been charged with conspiring to launder billions in bitcoin.

Morgan is an aspiring rapper who called herself “the Crocodile of Wall Street” and Lichtenstein a self-described “tech entrepreneur, explorer and part time magician.” The duo is facing more than two decades in prison if they’re found guilty. They have not yet entered a plea. CNBC reached out to Morgan and Lichtenstein to hear their side of the story, neither agreed to an interview. So far, no one has been charged with hacking Bitfinex in the first place.

As their case makes its way through the court system, a multibillion-dollar battle over what happens to the money is brewing.

“Ultimately, it’s going to be a dog fight as to who gets this money. Whether or not the government gets to keep it, whether or not Bitfinex gets to keep it, whether or not the customers get it back — anyone who tells you there’s a clear answer is lying for their own benefit,” said cryptocurrency attorney David Silver.

David Silver cryptocurrency attorney at Silver Miller

CNBC’s “Crocodile of Wall Street” YouTube documentary

With billions of dollars on the line, Silver expects “people are going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to get their hands on that pot of gold.”

“I do think it’s going to be a fight,” Cavazos agreed,

“The end of this story — we don’t know yet,” he said. “But you can’t just simply walk away with a hack like this. There’s someone that’s going to be caught up in this that has to tell the truth and when that shoe drops, it’s going to be really interesting and it’s going to impact who gets the money.”

Continue Reading

Technology

Amazon was questioned by House China committee over ‘dangerous and unwise’ TikTok partnership

Published

on

By

Amazon was questioned by House China committee over 'dangerous and unwise' TikTok partnership

Amazon logo on a brick building exterior, San Francisco, California, August 20, 2024.

Smith Collection | Gado | Archive Photos | Getty Images

Amazon representatives met with the House China committee in recent months to discuss lawmaker concerns over the company’s partnership with TikTok, CNBC confirmed.

A spokesperson for the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party confirmed the meeting, which centered on a shopping deal between Amazon and TikTok announced in August. The agreement allows users of TikTok, owned by China’s ByteDance, to link their account with Amazon and make purchases from the site without leaving TikTok.

“The Select Committee conveyed to Amazon that it is dangerous and unwise for Amazon to partner with TikTok given the grave national security threat the app poses,” the spokesperson said. The parties met in September, according to Bloomberg, which first reported the news.

Representatives from Amazon and TikTok did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

TikTok’s future viability in the U.S. is uncertain. In April, President Joe Biden signed a law that requires ByteDance to sell TikTok by Jan. 19. If TikTok fails to cut ties with its parent company, app stores and internet hosting services would be prohibited from offering the app.

President-elect Donald Trump could rescue TikTok from a potential U.S. ban. He promised on the campaign trail that he would “save” TikTok, and said in a March interview with CNBC’s “Squawk Box” that “there’s a lot of good and there’s a lot of bad” with the app.

In his first administration, Trump had tried to implement a TikTok ban. He changed his stance around the time he met with billionaire Jeff Yass. The Republican megadonor’s trading firm, Susquehanna International Group, owns a 15% stake in ByteDance, while Yass has a 7% stake in the company, NBC and CNBC reported in March.

— CNBC’s Jonathan Vanian contributed to this report.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

TikTok is 'digital nicotine' for young people, says D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb

Continue Reading

Technology

Amazon launches fixed pricing for treatment of conditions such as hair loss. Hims & Hers stock drops 15%

Published

on

By

Amazon launches fixed pricing for treatment of conditions such as hair loss. Hims & Hers stock drops 15%

A worker delivers Amazon packages in San Francisco on Oct. 24, 2024.

David Paul Morris | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Amazon on Thursday announced Prime members can access new fixed pricing for treatment of conditions like erectile dysfunction and men’s hair loss, its latest effort to compete with other direct-to-consumer marketplaces such as Hims & Hers Health and Ro.

Shares of Hims & Hers fell as much as 17% on Thursday, on pace for its worst day.

Amazon said in a blog post that Prime members can see the cost of a telehealth visit and their desired treatment before they decide to proceed with care for five common issues. Patients can access treatment for anti-aging skin care starting at $10 a month; motion sickness for $2 per use; erectile dysfunction at $19 a month; eyelash growth at $43 a month, and men’s hair loss for $16 a month by using Amazon’s savings benefit Prime Rx at checkout.

Amazon acquired primary care provider One Medical for roughly $3.9 billion in July 2022, and Thursday’s announcement builds on its existing pay-per-visit telehealth offering. Video visits through the service cost $49, and messaging visits cost $29 where available. Users can get treatment for more than 30 common conditions, including sinus infection and pink eye.

Medications filled through Amazon Pharmacy are eligible for discounted pricing and will be delivered to patients’ doors in standard Amazon packaging. Prime members will pay for the consultation and medication, but there are no additional fees, the blog post said.

Amazon has been trying to break into the lucrative health-care sector for years. The company launched its own online pharmacy in 2020 following its acquisition of PillPack in 2018. Amazon introduced, and later shuttered, a telehealth service called Amazon Care, as well as a line of health and wellness devices.

The company has also discontinued a secretive effort to develop an at-home fertility tracker, CNBC reported Wednesday.

— CNBC’s Annie Palmer contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Technology

WikiLeaks whistleblower Chelsea Manning says censorship is still ‘a dominant threat’

Published

on

By

WikiLeaks whistleblower Chelsea Manning says censorship is still 'a dominant threat'

Chelsea Manning: Censorship still a dominant threat

Former U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning says censorship is still “a dominant threat,” advocating for a more decentralized internet to help better protect individuals online.

Her comments come amid ongoing tension linked to online safety rules, with some tech executives recently seeking to push back over content moderation concerns.

Speaking to CNBC’s Karen Tso at the Web Summit tech conference in Lisbon, Portugal, on Wednesday, Manning said that one way to ensure online privacy could be “decentralized identification,” which gives individuals the ability to control their own data.

“Censorship is a dominant threat. I think that it is a question of who’s doing the censoring, and what the purpose is — and also censorship in the 21st century is more about whether or not you’re boosted through like an algorithm, and how the fine-tuning of that seems to work,” Manning said.

“I think that social media and the monopolies of social media have sort of gotten us used to the fact that certain things that drive engagement will be attractive,” she added.

“One of the ways that we can sort of countervail that is to go back to the more decentralized and distribute the internet of the early ’90s, but make that available to more people.”

Nym Technologies Chief Security Officer Chelsea Manning at a press conference held with Nym Technologies CEO Harry Halpin in the Media Village to present NymVPN during the second day of Web Summit on November 13, 2024 in Lisbon, Portugal. 

Horacio Villalobos | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Asked how tech companies could make money in such a scenario, Manning said there would have to be “a better social contract” put in place to determine how information is shared and accessed.

“One of the things about distributed or decentralized identification is that through encryption you’re able to sort of check the box yourself, instead of having to depend on the company to provide you with a check box or an accept here, you’re making that decision from a technical perspective,” Manning said.

‘No longer secrecy versus transparency’

Manning, who works as a security consultant at Nym Technologies, a company that specializes in online privacy and security, was convicted of espionage and other charges at a court-martial in 2013 for leaking a trove of secret military files to online media publisher WikiLeaks.

She was sentenced to 35 years in prison, but was later released in 2017, when former U.S. President Barack Obama commuted her sentence.

Asked to what extent the environment has changed for whistleblowers today, Manning said, “We’re at an interesting time because information is everywhere. We have more information than ever.”

She added, “Countries and governments no longer seem to invest the same amount of time and effort in hiding information and keeping secrets. What countries seem to be doing now is they seem to be spending more time and energy spreading misinformation and disinformation.”

Manning said the challenge for whistleblowers now is to sort through the information to understand what is verifiable and authentic.

“It’s no longer secrecy versus transparency,” she added.

Continue Reading

Trending