[HN Gopher] North Korea Launders Billions in Stolen Crypto
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       North Korea Launders Billions in Stolen Crypto
        
       Author : PaulHoule
       Score  : 123 points
       Date   : 2025-03-18 13:25 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.coindesk.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.coindesk.com)
        
       | permo-w wrote:
       | do we really think that an entire nation state is unable to set
       | up the apparatus to cheat a few measly KYC checks?
       | 
       | coin to coin exchanges do not require KYC, so hypothetically if
       | they can beat KYC (which surely they can) they wouldn't even need
       | to be depositing the actual coins they stole.
        
         | adgjlsfhk1 wrote:
         | The point of KYC isn't to make fraud impossible, but to make it
         | expensive.
        
           | Scoundreller wrote:
           | Isn't "expensive" only a problem if your cost basis is >$0 ?
        
             | colejohnson66 wrote:
             | still requires upfront cost. If that's priced out of reach
             | for most people, it's still a deterrent.
        
               | permo-w wrote:
               | right but N Korea is not most people. hacking is one of
               | their primary industries. they almost certainly already
               | have systems in place for this
        
               | adgjlsfhk1 wrote:
               | Systems are expensive. That's the point.
        
               | permo-w wrote:
               | yes, but they're not expensive if you already have them
               | in place and you're a nation state with essentially free
               | labour.
               | 
               | once again, we're not talking about some random clowns
               | who've accidentally stolen a usb stick with these coins
               | on it, we're talking about _this article_ assuming that
               | North Korea cannot circumvent KYC
        
             | rtkwe wrote:
             | It cost them something to train the groups that stole those
             | coins; training, their higher standard of living, etc.
        
               | permo-w wrote:
               | your guess as to what % of $1.5bn that would be?
        
             | adgjlsfhk1 wrote:
             | North Korea's cost basis is >$0. They have limited numbers
             | of hacks per year that they can perform, and every road
             | block in between the hack and unrestricted dollars will
             | drain a couple percent of the profit, add a couple percent
             | chance that they get caught or scammed while trying to
             | launder the money. All or these have costs and reduce the
             | take-home profit for Russia.
        
               | permo-w wrote:
               | even if you conscion the frankly risible assumption that
               | they don't already have systems in place to do this, are
               | you seriously trying to suggest that setting up a system
               | to beat some KYC checks is going to put any kind of a
               | dent into _billions of dollars_?
               | 
               | I feel like you're struggling to grasp that I'm not
               | saying "muh KYC is useless", I'm saying that _this
               | article doesn 't seem to understand_ that it's useless in
               | the face of a nation state for whom hacking is a major
               | industry
        
         | anonym29 wrote:
         | Of course not. But it's still more work than passing the KYC
         | checks on US Federal Reserve notes (there are none at all), or
         | just printing fake US Federal Reserve notes that are so good it
         | forces the Bureau of Printing and Engraving has to do expensive
         | redesigns. Of course, America's own CIA has been long suspected
         | of doing the exact same thing.
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdollar if you want to
         | learn more.
        
           | magnuspaaske wrote:
           | The problem with counterfeiting dollars is that it only works
           | until the design is changed and it's hard to transfer your
           | capabilities. On the other hand hacking is convenient since
           | it can be use for political leverage, espionage and similar.
        
             | bilekas wrote:
             | Also I'm not expert but washing a significant amount of
             | cash seems extremely more difficult than the Hacking
             | enterprises?
        
             | anonym29 wrote:
             | The problem with hacking is that it's far easier to patch a
             | vulnerability than it is to redesign a currency note and
             | reissue new batches of them across an entire printing press
             | while removing the old ones (some real, some fake) from
             | circulation very slowly.
             | 
             | Also, Bitcoin has never had the counterfeiting problem of
             | currency notes, largely because there's no such capacity
             | for bad actors to create or issue counterfeit Bitcoin, as
             | Bitcoin backed by mathematical work that must be performed
             | to in order to mine/"mint" new Bitcoin, unlike US Federal
             | Reserve Notes, which are backed by nothing more than an
             | Intaglio printing press, some engraving plates with
             | publicly-available designs, and 3D security ribbons,
             | ribbons featuring ink that is visible under a blacklight
             | (you can find which chemicals exhibit this property on
             | Wikipedia), some paper, and some linen. Oh, and every
             | single one of those ingredients are are produced by a third
             | party (NOT the US Bureau of Printing and Engraving), who
             | all solemnly pinky promise they don't secretly keep and
             | distribute any extras :)
        
             | IncreasePosts wrote:
             | America doesn't rescind or invalidate old money from
             | circulation when a new design comes out though. No one is
             | going to bat an eye at a 10 year old $100 bill coming
             | through.
        
               | anonym29 wrote:
               | Well then I guess it's settled - the US Federal Reserve
               | notes are truly inferior to Bitcoin in terms of
               | counterfeit resistance!
               | 
               | Humor aside, "When currency is deposited with a Federal
               | Reserve Bank, the quality of each note is evaluated by
               | sophisticated processing equipment. Notes that meet our
               | strict quality criteria--that is, that are still in good
               | condition--continue to circulate, _while those that do
               | not are taken out of circulation and destroyed_. This
               | process determines the lifespan of a Federal Reserve
               | note. "
               | 
               | Not only does the Federal Reserve routinely remove
               | counterfeit notes from circulation, they even routinely
               | remove non-counterfeit notes that are older or have
               | physical damage from circulation!
               | 
               | You'll also find on the source link below, typical
               | lifespans of circulation for various notes, as follows:
               | 
               | Denomination - Estimated Lifespan
               | 
               | $1 - 6.6 years
               | 
               | $5 - 4.7 years
               | 
               | $10 - 5.3 years
               | 
               | $20 - 7.8 years
               | 
               | $50 - 12.2 years
               | 
               | $100 - 22.9 years
               | 
               | So no, nobody is going to bat an eye at a 10-year-old
               | 100-dollar federal reserve note, but by 25 years old, it
               | would be likely to have already been removed from
               | circulation. The 10-year timeframe you mention is more
               | appropriate for $20 and below, but those notes tend to be
               | counterfeited less than larger notes.
               | 
               | Source: https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/how-long-is-
               | the-life-spa...
        
               | lesuorac wrote:
               | > No one is going to bat an eye at a 10 year old $100
               | bill coming through.
               | 
               | Within the US mostly. Although sometimes you can have
               | trouble with a $2.
               | 
               | Outside the states you might.
        
       | lupusreal wrote:
       | If the Kim family suddenly decided to take the money and run to
       | Dubai (or where-ever crypto scammers retire to), I wonder if
       | anything in North Korea would even change.
        
         | metalman wrote:
         | crypto? Emperor Rocket Boy, has everything needed to go full
         | ICBM NUKE, on a thumb drive, the crypto thing is just a side
         | hobby, that shares time on whatever small mountain of GPU's
         | that are used for all the rocket and submarine, nuke
         | engineering that is going on in NK, which is his main hobby.
        
         | arrosenberg wrote:
         | If he took all the money and ran? Yeah, there would be a
         | nuclear power vacuum and a massive migration crisis towards the
         | south that requires the US, China and Russia to be cooperative
         | on to deal with. It would be the most hilarious way to start
         | WW3.
        
           | giancarlostoro wrote:
           | Well there was the time someone wanted to stop for a
           | sandwich...
        
         | throwawayffffas wrote:
         | Riding a tiger is dangerous, climbing down is even more so.
        
         | maeil wrote:
         | Dubai is indeed where crypto scammers retire to.
        
         | thrance wrote:
         | They actually have an escape plan, with a base in Switzerland.
         | Look it up, it's not even a secret.
         | 
         | EDIT: OK, turns it it's not that easy to find. I saw it in a
         | documentary from a pretty serious source [1]. Unfortunately for
         | you, it's in French (there should be a German version too).
         | 
         | [1] https://youtu.be/LdH7WYVYF8s
        
           | yorwba wrote:
           | Do you have a timestamp? Searching through the transcript
           | doesn't produce any hits for "Suisse" at all.
        
             | thrance wrote:
             | Found it! I linked the wrong video. The correct one is
             | https://youtu.be/1CsRF3XLRLg, and you can find the info
             | around the 14th minute.
        
         | Nasrudith wrote:
         | There may be an awkward power vacuum as always with dictators
         | setting up deliberately unclear lines of secession but chances
         | are someone else with the most claim to 'legitimacy' would grab
         | power. Just like how the royal bloodline dying out alone didn't
         | mean there were no more kings.
        
         | wnc3141 wrote:
         | that's a really interesting question! My only $0.02 is that
         | there isn't a coherent political apparatus to transition
         | political power - as I imagine that the power dynamics among
         | the secondary rank is adversarial.
        
           | jandrese wrote:
           | In short: the power vacuum would result in a bloodbath.
        
             | wnc3141 wrote:
             | Unless the international community jumps on it in a
             | multilateral fashion(a la Balkans)
        
         | codedokode wrote:
         | What's the merit of doing this?
        
       | dist-epoch wrote:
       | They could sell it at market price (or slightly below) to the US
       | strategic bitcoin reserve. I'm sure no one in the Trump
       | administration would have any moral conundrums about this.
        
       | ricardobeat wrote:
       | How long until they get their hands on the US "strategic bitcoin
       | reserve"?
        
         | spraveenitpro wrote:
         | learn about Bitcoin Multisig security and then you tell me how
         | long it will take
        
           | tenyrsmaxfrmnw wrote:
           | No present security will be suficient once IBM or others
           | breaksthrough with Quantum. This will happen for sure.
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I20KgRZCZEI
        
             | rtkwe wrote:
             | There's no guarantees that breakthrough is coming anytime
             | soon. Scaling up the number of qubits in a processor is
             | very hard and it's why progress has been pretty slow over
             | the last decade.
        
               | aorloff wrote:
               | Crypto is your guarantee that a quantum breakthrough has
               | not already occurred
        
             | snapcaster wrote:
             | Unclear this will "happen for sure", but even if it did
             | there are quantum-proof encryption techniques
        
         | BiteCode_dev wrote:
         | Maybe the strategic reserve constitution will be a way to
         | actually give money to them in exchange for crypto.
         | 
         | These days it feels anything is possible.
        
         | m3kw9 wrote:
         | Maybe the reserve will buy wBtc that is on a L2 chain.
        
         | pessimizer wrote:
         | They don't have to. The creation of such a direct government
         | subsidy to bitcoin holders will drive the price up anyway.
        
           | abirch wrote:
           | Until the NSA or Google uses a sufficiently powerful quantum
           | computer: https://www.coinbase.com/learn/crypto-basics/is-
           | quantum-comp... Then you can take anyone's crypto that you'd
           | like.
        
             | realharo wrote:
             | If there's a strong enough consensus, everyone can just
             | agree to migrate to some new technology and let the
             | original go to zero.
        
             | drdeca wrote:
             | I believe, for bitcoin, that only works to spend coins from
             | addresses that have already been used to spend coins,
             | which, is therefore discouraged as a way to hold bitcoins?
             | Instead, best practices are to, when sending from an
             | address, to send all the unspent coins to addresses that
             | have not been sent from yet. This does make things
             | marginally harder for providing an address for people to
             | send to though, because one has to change the address they
             | are to send to at least every time one wants to spend what
             | one has received.
             | 
             | For chains where one uses one persistent address, in order
             | to allow other important features, then it could be more of
             | an issue.
             | 
             | Still, I think solutions will probably be put in place
             | before it becomes a real issue.
             | 
             | ... hm, come to think of it, the use of public/private key
             | pairs in cryptocurrencies, is, I think, pretty much
             | exclusively used for signing, not for encrypting, right? In
             | that case, it seems like an option based on hashes and
             | ZKSNARKs should be able to play much the same role? So,
             | even if all the purportedly quantum-safe alternatives to
             | RSA and ECC end up vulnerable for the same reasons, I think
             | probably something that only does the signing part should
             | be possible? Or, hm, at least in the interactive setting...
        
         | CobrastanJorji wrote:
         | You have it backwards. The purpose of the reserve is to turn
         | their crypto into money.
        
       | schainks wrote:
       | So, they are banking with HSBC?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-03-18 23:01 UTC)