Hackers Steal Millions in Carbon Credits

Carbon credits are an attractive target for all forms of deception because they're modeled on an institution that has a couple of hundred years worth of bullet-proofing but do not themselves use the same, battle-tested institutions.

For example, if I tell you "I've got here a number which represents a one millionth part ownership in a company in a country you've never been to -- will you pay me $600 for it?", as insane as that might sound it is actually pretty routine. You can trust that paying me $600 will effect the transfer for the number, that the number does indeed represent a one millionth part ownership in a company, and that the company actually exists. This is guaranteed by an interlocking web of regulations, trusted relationships, and whatnot which is one of the wonders of the modern era.

By comparison, carbon credits are, well, is magic a strong word? With stock you're paying for partial ownership in something which doesn't exist but is convenient to think about for illustrative purposes. With carbon credits you're paying for partial ownership in something which might have existed but didn't, and potential-but-crucially-not-actual existence is convenient to think about for illustrative purposes.

My private suspicion is that carbon credits probably involve outright fraud on a scale that would shame Communist agricultural ministers.

Why the talk about politics in the comments here when this is nothing but a plain old phishing attack? Isn't this about phishing, not regulations, good governance, climate change or any such thing? This has nothing to do with whether in principle carbon credits are good or bad, does it? Sure, it might tell you something about the security of their online trading system (or about the stupidity of the workers who fell for the phishing), but nothing else. I don't get it. Please tell me.

It reminds me of a Rolling Stone article about how Goldman-Sachs has been behind the regulations and systems that made the last bubbles possible. It finishes with explaining how the next market would be carbon emissions. The fact that carbon emissions tickets are now an item to steal is a bit worrying.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29127316/the_grea...

I'm getting some serious future shock here - two weird science-fictional ideas, combined in an unexpected manner, seem to result in weird^2 rather than the expected 2weird.

It's apt that someone should mention Terry Gilliam's Brazil; This news item seems to evoke the same general feeling - being awestruck by a society that resembles a perpetual-bureaucracy machine.

In the past, I wished for a sane and cautious government. I wished for a government run by intelligent and cautious people who believe in incremental progress and are skeptical of new bureaucracy. I wanted a government where leaders are accountable and individuals are protected first as individuals. I wanted the primary job of politicians to be to role models and advocates, looking to encourage voluntary good behavior rather than legislating it.

I'm starting to think that's impossible.

And if it is impossible, then I want the biggest, most ridiculous frigging circus imaginable. I want more regulation, regulations contradicting other regulations, courts getting into feuds with other courts, criminals stealing bureaucratic credits. If good governance is impossible, then at least let the bureaucracy be entertaining. Bring on the circus. More bailouts, more surveillance, more legislation, more courts, more politicians, more taxes, more programs, more agencies. Bring on the circus - if good government is impossible, then at least let us be entertained.

this just goes to show that social engineering is the most important part of being a hacker. That is a good payout 4 million in one day for a simple phishing site.

I know stealing is wrong, but I am impressed with their execution.

It also enforces the belief that network security is more dependent now on educating the people that use it.