https://twitter.com/qrs/status/1395784294451265536
> Smart contracts should be considered self-funded bug-bounty platforms.
> Smart contracts should be considered self-funded bug-bounty platforms.
[1] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/08/20/how-bill-browd...
There's a reason why "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" is not the guiding principle for Western society.
So the true spirit of cryptocurrencies is that if there's a flaw in the smart contract, it's okay to exploit it.
In a way, every security measure at a bank is because of a previous attack. Those “undocumented pen testers” did help create the security.
these crypto heists exploit loose rules.
That's the point. It isn't, except in some fantasy world that does not exist.
Let me put it this way: if you don’t think you could tell a judge this without getting laughed at, while you’re wearing an orange jumpsuit and ankle bracelets and chains, it’s probably not real.
I also can't help but wonder whether these sorts of activities would be prohibited conduct under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(4), as the elements seem to be met:
"[Whoever] knowingly and with intent to defraud, accesses a protected computer without authorization, or exceeds authorized access, and by means of such conduct furthers the intended fraud and obtains anything of value" - where "authorized access" is liberally construed to mean the intent of the author of the mechanism in question.