The bitcoin security specialists Wizsec has recently explained to the public that the wallet that held more than 111,000 BTC did not derive from the Silk Road marketplace, and it’s also not one of the Mt Gox wallets. Further Wizsec detailed today that a recent article had quoted the organization by cherry-picking quotes which in […]
The bitcoin security specialists Wizsec has recently explained to the public that the wallet that held more than 111,000 BTC did not derive from the Silk Road marketplace, and it’s also not one of the Mt Gox wallets. Further Wizsec detailed today that a recent article had quoted the organization by cherry-picking quotes which in turn created an editorial that has bolstered unneeded fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD).
Also Read: North Queensland is Becoming a Hub of BCH Accepting Businesses
With All the Hype Over the Last few Weeks, the 111,000 BTC Wallet Could Be Meaningless
Over the last few weeks, cryptocurrency enthusiasts have been discussing a large amount of BTC that has moved from an old wallet onto a few popular trading platforms. Many people including the person who reported the coin movements have alleged the funds either stemmed from the Silk Road marketplace or it was one of the wallets owned by the now-defunct exchange Mt Gox. The unknown armchair detective and Reddit user u/sick_silk created more than two weeks worth of wild Silk Road fantasies and Mt Gox theories concerning the wallet that once had 111,000 BTC. Then a few Twitter personalities asked the well-known security specialists Wizsec if they had an opinion about the funds and whether or not they derived from the Silk Road or Mt Gox.
“Curious if Wizsecurity has any thoughts on the origin of the BTC at this address?” Tuur Demeester asks the group over Twitter.
“It’s an old Mt Gox whale, unrelated to Silk Road,” explains Wizsec. The security group further notes to another person on Twitter asking about the wallet stating:
An old Mt Gox whale — Not suspicious in itself, just someone who made a very good investment — Not belonging to Mt Gox, just someone who bought them on Mt Gox back in the day.
Another Case of FUD Consumes the Crypto-Community
Additionally, on Sunday, September 16 the publication, The Telegraph published an article that allegedly quotes the Wizsec analyst Kim Nilsson. According to the publication’s story, Nilsson was quoted as saying a flood of Mt Gox payouts threatens to “completely crash the market.” However, Wizsec says that the article cherry-picked quotes to create FUD and sensationalism within the crypto-community.
“A recent article quotes me as predicting an imminent BTC market crash due to Mt Gox payouts,” explains Wizsec on Twitter.
This is FUD with cherry-picked quotes. Mt Gox is nowhere near payouts and the eventual market impact can be greatly mitigated depending on the trustee’s actions.
The story follows the hundreds of other stories involving large bitcoin wallets that some random internet detective found that are also tied to tales of market crashes. Even though nobody can verify the expertise of these random Reddit and Bitcointalk.org sleuths many crypto-luminaries on Twitter and news outlets spew out these rumors like they are fact. We’ve seen time and time again that these rumors involving things like the PBOC banning bitcoin, and random Silk Road or Mt Gox funds dumping on the markets are usually greatly exaggerated. It seems relying on rumors stemming from some random Joe on the internet might not be a good idea.
What do you think about the random people spreading stories about large bitcoin addresses? Let us know what you think about this story in the comment section below.
Images via Shutterstock, Twitter, Wizsec, and Pixabay.
Want to create your own secure cold storage paper wallet? Check our tools section.
The post Security Specialist Wizsec Gives Insight on the Billion Dollar BTC Wallet appeared first on Bitcoin News.
When societies discuss cryptocurrencies, the argument that the decentralized and unregulated nature of the crypto space leaves the door open to abuse, like money laundering and financial fraud, is often put forward by officials and authorities. However, a string of cases involving precisely these sins, and many, many banks, show that regulations are largely ineffective […]
Affairs, probes, fines, resignations – over the past weeks, we’ve often seen these words in headlines, right next to some of the most recognizable names in the financial industry, including 
Indian regulators, however, are not so benevolent when it comes to dealing with this kind of violations. The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has recently imposed monetary penalties on three state-run banks which have failed to detect and report on time accounts associated with fraud. In early September, Indian media reported that the central bank has fined the Union Bank of India, Bank of India and Bank of Maharashtra 10 million rupee each (~$138,000). They have been accused of contravention of RBI’s instructions contained in a document titled Master Circular on Fraud – Classification and Reporting. According to the released separate statements, the penalties have been imposed under the provisions of the Indian Banking Regulation Act, taking into account the delay on the part of the banks to report fraud.
Cryptocurrencies are often criticized for offering organized crime syndicates, terrorist organizations and rogue states the opportunity to transfer funds internationally and circumvent sanctions imposed by First World governments and international financial organizations. But as it has been revealed recently, banks have been also tempted to facilitate the needs of such actors.