[Cryptography] In the latest unexpected ransomware twist ...

[Florian Weimer]

* Phillip Hallam-Baker:

> Another very plausible explanation is that Putin's people were not amused
> by the possibility of the US doing some retaliatory hacking in response to
> an attack coming from their territory. There might even have been some sort
> of 'warning shot' given.  Putin's people know the vast majority of the
> malefactors in their lands because its a mafia state and Putin's people
> have to wet their beaks if they are going to look the other way. And the
> money flows up, Putin didn't buy that billion dollar palace from money he
> saved from his Presidential salary. So I can well believe that the hackers
> had a visitation from Putin's people and were 'gently' persuaded to
> disgorge the key.

Or they transferred Bitcoin funds to a party that has exposure to the
U.S. legal system.

My understanding of Bitcoin is somewhat limited, but I think Bitcoin
tokens aren't fungible.  They are tied to the history that proves
their validity.  Once that history is tainted, the tokens could be
subject to forfeiture.

I expect that pretty much anyone accepting Bitcoin will soon be
required to check against lists of coins used in criminal activity, in
addition to the blockchain-based validity check.  Those lists don't
have to be issued by governments.  Anyone could start one, and once
there is a single reputable one, there is just no way you can't use it
because you risk acquiring useless coins you can't spend anywhere.  At
this point, it would require government regulation to *prevent* this
from happening (basically the government saying that checking
provenance is illegal).