Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by insomniacity | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

insomniacity

So, is this an admission? Or a theoretical? Or only part of the story?

Is the writer using a pseudonym?

View on HN

he is claiming to be the multi-sig exploit hacker:

https://etherscan.io/tx/0xff261a49c61861884d0509dac46ed67577...

he is probably role playing because i doubt whoever did this would put themselves at risk by claiming they did it publicly

I agree this reads like fiction, and it would be idiotic to admit it.

If real, the people he stole from may be even less ethical than he is (and they must have noticed the ETH were gone, and at what time). This could paint him as a murder target, a position I wouldn't want to be in...

except it is possibly a grey area, the contracts are written such that extracting the money is only possible if you fulfill the contract, if you find a loophole and fullfill the contract and take the money did you really steal it?

It's unlikely that someone motivated enough to hire an assassin on darknet cares about the technical legality of the exploit.

It's very easy to piss people off within the confines of a system's rules. The general advice is not to do so.

With the usual caveats (IANAL, this may vary per country/jurisdiction) laws and contracts are usually about intent, not pure semantics. And you'd probably have a hard time to argue that this way of 'fulfilling' the contract was the intended way.

I understand that contracts are usually written this way but an ethereum smart contract is a different kettle of fish. It is written to be a program so if you can get the program to respond to your inputs then you have fulfilled the requirements of the smart contract as it was written. Of course it may be that it was poorly worded but that is an issue for the contract writer.

Because whoever invented them called them "smart contracts" doesn't mean they're considered as such in the jurisdiction where people using the said "smart contract" are living. Matt Levine has written extensively about the subject.

They must be very angry and powerful to do that, because the common criminal rule is that you pay all debts of the person you killed. Otherwise it would be too easy to take money from the debitor/thief at the right moment and then send someone bury him in the basement without any consequence.

I have a hunch that this is a parody of the DAO token theft.

Don't have the technical knowledge, nor do I care to put in the hours to figure it all out.

It certainly seems to have elements of parody, though if it were about the DAO specifically, I would think he might have said something about hard forks.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com