crypto scams

gop’s-pro-industry-crypto-bills-could-financially-ruin-millions,-lawmaker-warns

GOP’s pro-industry crypto bills could financially ruin millions, lawmaker warns


Trump’s crypto bills could turn trusted Big Tech companies into the next FTX.

It’s “Crypto Week” in Congress, and experts continue to warn that legislation Donald Trump wants passed quickly could give the president ample opportunities to grift while leaving Americans more vulnerable to scams and financial ruin.

Perhaps most controversial of the bills is the one that’s closest to reaching Trump’s desk, the GENIUS Act, which creates a framework for banks and private companies to issue stablecoins. After passing in the Senate last month, the House of Representatives is hoping to hold a vote as soon as Thursday, insiders told Politico.

Stablecoins are often hyped as a more reliable form of cryptocurrency, considered the “cash of the blockchain” because their value can be pegged to the US dollar, Delicia Hand, Consumer Reports’ senior director monitoring digital marketplaces, told Ars.

But the GENIUS Act doesn’t require stablecoins to be pegged to the dollar, and that’s a problem, critics say. The law’s alleged flaws allow large technology companies to peg their stablecoins to riskier assets that could make both their cryptocurrency tokens and, ultimately, the entire global financial system less stable.

For Americans, the stakes are high. In June, Hand warned that Consumer Reports had “a number of concerns about the GENIUS Act.” Chief among them were “insufficient consumer protections” that Americans expect when conducting financial transactions.

Stablecoin issuers will likely include every major payment app, social media app, and e-commerce platform. There is already interest from Amazon, Meta, PayPal, and Shopify. But unlike companies providing traditional bank services, stablecoin providers will not be required to provide clear dispute-resolution processes, offer deposit insurance, or limit liability for unauthorized transactions on their customers’ accounts.

Additionally, with limited oversight, big tech companies could avoid scrutiny while potentially seizing sensitive financial data for non-bank purposes, pushing competition out of markets, and benefiting from other conflicts of interest from other areas of their businesses. Last month, Congressional researchers highlighting key issues with the GENIUS Act advised that possibly restricting stablecoin regulation to only apply to financial institutions would likely have required big tech firms to divest chunks of their business to prevent them from using stablecoins to illegally dominate the digital payments industry. But Republicans have not yet adopted any recommendations.

Most ominously in light of recent collapses of crypto exchanges like FTX—which made it difficult for customers to recover billions—”the bill does not provide adequate authority to federal and state regulators to ensure consumers have full protection and redemption rights for stablecoin transactions,” Consumer Reports warned. Hand reiterated this concern to Ars as the House mulls the same bill this week.

“I think one major concern that we have is if the bill doesn’t guarantee that consumers can redeem their stablecoins quickly or at all in a crisis, and that’s kind of what is the irony is that at its core, the notion of a stablecoin is that there’s some stability,” Hand said.

Pro-industry crypto bills could financially ruin millions

House Republicans are hoping to pass the bill as is, Politico reported, but some Democrats are putting up a fight that could possibly force changes. Among them is Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), who penned an op-ed this week, alleging that “Crypto Week” legislation was written “by and for the crypto industry” and “will open the floodgates to massive fraud and financial ruin for millions of American families.”

“All they really do is replicate the same mess that led to past financial crises: They call for few regulations, minimal enforcement, weak consumer protections, and more industry consolidation,” Waters wrote. And “on top of that, these bills have a special, intentional wrinkle that makes them especially dangerous: They would legitimize and legalize the unprecedented crypto corruption by the president of the United States.”

Waters joined critics warning that the GENIUS Act is deeply flawed, with “weak consumer protections” and “no funding provided to regulators to implement the law.” Additionally, the CLARITY Act—which seeks to create a regulatory framework for digital assets and cryptocurrencies to allow for more innovation and will likely come to a House vote on Wednesday before heading to the Senate—”actually creates space for similar schemes” to Sam Bankman-Fried’s stunning fraud that caused FTX’s collapse.

She accused Republicans of rushing the votes on these bills to benefit Trump, whose “shady crypto ventures” have allegedly enriched Trump by $1.2 billion. (The White House has said that Trump has no conflicts of interest, as the crypto ventures are managed by his children.)

Further, “the GENIUS Act opens the floodgates to foreign-controlled crypto that poses serious national security risks, all to appease Trump’s inner circle, which has ties to crypto,” Waters wrote.

Waters has so far submitted amendments that would “block any US president, vice president, members of Congress and their immediate families from promoting or holding crypto” and stop the US from deeming “a foreign country to have a stablecoin regime comparable to that of the US if the current leader of that country has described themselves as a dictator,” CoinTelegraph reported.

Pushback from Democrats may not be enough, as White House crypto advisor Bo Hines seemed to predict on X that the GENIUS Act would be signed into law without much debate this week.

Tim Scott, a chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, counted concerns about consumer protections among “myths” he claims to have busted in advocating for the bill. Scott suggested that “simple monthly disclosure” of reserves backing stablecoins and annual statements from the biggest companies issuing stablecoins would be enough to protect consumers from potential losses, should stablecoins be mismanaged.

He also defended not requiring “essential insolvency protections for consumers” by noting that customers will be “explicitly” prioritized above creditors in any insolvency proceedings.

But Waters did not buy that logic, warning that the “Crypto Week” bills becoming law without any amendments will “eventually” trigger the first American crypto financial crisis.

Widespread stablecoin adoption will take time, bank says

If these bills pass without meaningful changes, Hand told Ars that consumers should be wary of stablecoins, no matter what trusted brand is pushing a new token.

In a post detailing risks of allowing big tech companies to “open banks without becoming banks,” Brian Shearer, the director of competition and regulatory policy at the Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator, provided an example.

Imagine if Apple—which “already has quite a bit of power to force adoption of ApplePay”—issues a stablecoin through a competing “payment card” accessed through its popular devices. Apple could possibly lure merchants to adopt the payment form by charging lower fees, and customers “probably wouldn’t revolt because it would be free for them.” Eventually, Apple could be motivated to force all payments through stablecoins, cutting banks entirely out, then potentially raising fees to merchants.

“It’s not a stretch to imagine a scenario where Google, Apple, Amazon, PayPal, Block, and Meta all do something like this and quickly become the largest payment networks and banks in the world,” Shearer wrote. And Hand told Ars that these trusted brands “could kind of imbue some sort of confidence that may be not necessarily yet earned” when rolling out stablecoins.

Bank of America’s head of North American banks research, Ebrahim Poonawala, told Business Insider that “it could take between three to five years to fully build out the infrastructure needed for widespread stablecoin adoption.”

Mastercard’s chief product officer, Jorn Lambert, agreed, telling Bloomberg that stablecoins have a “long road to mainstream payments.” Specifically, Lambert suggested that consumers broadly won’t embrace stablecoins without “a seamless and predictable user experience” and current “friction” causing online checkout hurdles—even for an experienced company like Shopify—”will be difficult to clear in the near-term.”

In the meantime, customers will likely be pushed to embrace stablecoins as being more reliable than other cryptocurrencies. Hand advised that anyone intrigued by stablecoins should proceed cautiously in an environment lacking basic consumer protections, conditions which one nonpartisan, nonprofit coalition, Americans for Financial Reform, suggested could create “an incubator for even more predatory and scammy activity” plaguing the entire crypto industry.

Hand told Ars she is not “anti-digital assets or crypto,” but she recommends that customers “start conservatively” with stablecoin investments. Consider who is advertising the stablecoin, Hand recommended, suggesting that celebrity endorsements should be viewed as red flags without more research. At least to start, treat any stablecoins acquired “more like a prepaid card than a bank account,” using it for certain payments but keeping life savings in less volatile accounts until you learn more about the risks of holding stablecoins.

Possibly most critically, customers should explore companies’ promised resolution processes before investing in stablecoins, Hand said, and fully vet customer support. In China, regulators are already struggling with stablecoin scams, where “a group of semi-informed people is being deceived by ill-intentioned people” luring them into stablecoin deposits that cannot be withdrawn, the South China Morning Post reported.

“Just because something is called a coin or digital dollar doesn’t mean it’s regulated like cash,” Hand said. “Don’t wait until you get in trouble to know what you can expect.”

In this potential future, stablecoin issuers could never really be considered “stable institutions,” Shearer said. Shearer referenced a possible “sci-fi disaster” that could end in bank runs, leading the government to one day bail out tech companies who bungle stablecoin investments but become “too big to fail.”

Hand told Ars that Consumer Reports will work with other consumer advocates and the implementing regulator to try to close any gaps that would leave Americans vulnerable. Those groups would submit comments and feedback to help with rule-making around implementation and monitoring and provide consumer education resources.

However, these steps may not be enough to protect Americans, as the crypto industry continues to be deregulated under self-described “pro-crypto President” Trump.

“Sometimes if something is just fundamentally flawed, I’m not quite sure, particularly in the current regulatory or deregulatory environment, whether any amount of guidance or rulemaking could really fix a flawed framework,” Hand told Ars.

At the same time, Trump’s Justice Department has largely backed off crypto lawsuits and probes, creating an impression of Wild West-like lawlessness where even a proven fraudster like Bankman-Fried dares hope he may be pardoned for misdeeds.

“The CLARITY Act handcuffs the Securities and Exchange Commission, preventing it from proactively protecting people against fraud,” Waters wrote. “Regulators would have to wait until after investors have already been harmed to act—potentially after a company has collapsed and life savings have vanished. We’ve seen this before. FTX collapsed because insiders illegally operated the exchange, controlled customer funds and traded against their own clients. The CLARITY bill does nothing to address that.”

Photo of Ashley Belanger

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

GOP’s pro-industry crypto bills could financially ruin millions, lawmaker warns Read More »

incorporated-in-us:-$8.4b-money-launderer-for-chinese-speaking-crypto-scammers

Incorporated in US: $8.4B money launderer for Chinese-speaking crypto scammers


Before crackdown, this was one of the ‘Net’s biggest markets for Chinese-speaking scammers.

As the underground industry of crypto investment scams has grown into one of the world’s most lucrative forms of cybercrime, the secondary market of money launderers for those scammers has grown to match it. Amid that black market, one such Chinese-language service on the messaging platform Telegram blossomed into an all-purpose underground bazaar: It has offered not only cash-out services to scammers but also money laundering for North Korean hackers, stolen data, targeted harassment-for-hire, and even what appears to be sex trafficking. And somehow, it’s all overseen by a company legally registered in the United States.

According to new research released today by crypto-tracing firm Elliptic, a company called Xinbi Guarantee has since 2022 facilitated no less than $8.4 billion in transactions via its Telegram-based marketplace prior to Telegram’s actions in recent days to remove its accounts from the platform. Money stolen from scam victims likely represents the “vast majority” of that sum, according to Elliptic’s cofounder Tom Robinson. Yet even as the market serves Chinese-speaking scammers, it also boasts on the top of its website—in Mandarin—that it’s registered in Colorado.

“Xinbi Guarantee has served as a giant, purportedly US-incorporated illicit online marketplace for online scams that primarily offers money laundering services,” says Robinson. He adds, though, that Elliptic has also found a remarkable variety of other criminal offerings on the market: child-bearing surrogacy and egg donors, harassment services that offer to threaten or throw feces at any chosen victim, and even sex workers in their teens who are likely trafficking victims.

Xinbi Guarantee is the second such crime-friendly Chinese-language market that Robinson and his team of researchers have uncovered over the past year. Last July, they published a report on Huione Guarantee, a similar Cambodia-based service that Elliptic said in January had facilitated $24 billion in transactions—largely from crypto scammers—making it the biggest illicit online marketplace in history by Elliptic’s accounting. That market’s parent company, Huione Group, was added to a list of known money laundering operations by the US Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network earlier this month in an attempt to limit its access to US financial institutions.

Telegram bans

After WIRED reached out to Telegram last week about the illicit activity taking place on Xinbi Guarantee’s and Huione Guarantee’s channels on its messaging platform, Telegram appears to have responded Monday by banning many of the central channels and administrator accounts used by both Xinbi Guarantee and Huione Guarantee. “Criminal activities like scamming or money laundering are forbidden by Telegram’s terms of service and are always removed whenever discovered,” Telegram spokesperson Remi Vaughn wrote to WIRED in a statement. “Communities previously reported to us by WIRED or included in reports published by Elliptic have all been taken down.”

Telegram had banned several of Huione Guarantee’s channels in February following an earlier Elliptic report on the marketplace, but Huione Guarantee quickly re-created them, and it’s not clear whether the new removals will prevent the two companies from rebuilding their presence on Telegram again, perhaps with new accounts or even new branding. “These are very lucrative businesses, and they’ll attempt to rebuild in some way,” Robinson said of the two marketplaces following Telegram’s latest purge.

Elliptic’s accounting of the total lifetime revenue of the biggest online black markets.Courtesy of Elliptic

Xinbi Guarantee didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment on Elliptic’s findings that WIRED sent to the market’s administrators on Telegram.

Like Huione Guarantee, Xinbi Guarantee has offered a similar “guarantee” model of enabling third-party vendors to offer services by requiring a deposit from them to prevent fraud. Yet it’s flown under the radar, even as it grew into one of the biggest hubs for crypto crime on the Internet. In terms of scale of transactions prior to Telegram’s crackdown, it was second only to Huione’s market, according to Elliptic.

Both services “offer a window into the China-based underground banking network,” Robinson says. “It’s another example of these huge Chinese-language ‘guaranteed’ marketplaces that have thrived for years.”

On Xinbi Guarantee, Elliptic found numerous posts from vendors offering to accept funds related to “quick kills,” “slow kills,” and “pig butchering” transactions, all different terms for crypto investment scams and other forms of fraud. In some cases, Robinson explains, these Xinbi Guarantee vendors offer bank accounts in the same country as the victim so that they can receive whatever payment they’re tricked into making, then pay the scammer in the cryptocurrency Tether. In other cases, the Xinbi Guarantee merchants offer to receive cryptocurrency payments and cash them out in the scammer’s local currency, such as Chinese renminbi.

Not just money laundering

Aside from Xinbi Guarantee’s central use as a cash-out point for crypto scammers, Elliptic also found that the market’s vendors offered other wares for scammers such as stolen data that could be used for finding victims, as well as services for registering SIM cards and Starlink Internet subscriptions through proxies.

North Korean state-sponsored cybercriminals also appear to have used the platform for money laundering. Elliptic found through blockchain analysis, for instance, that about $220,000 stolen from the Indian cryptocurrency exchange WazirX—the victim of a $235 million theft in July 2024, widely attributed to North Korean hackers—had flowed into Xinbi Guarantee in a series of transactions in November.

Those money-laundering and scam-enabling services, however, are far from the only shady offerings found on Xinbi Guarantee’s market. Elliptic also found listings for surrogate mothers and egg donors, with one post showing faceless pictures of the donor’s body. Other accounts have offered services that will, for a payment in Tether, place a funeral wreath at a target’s door, deface their home with graffiti, post damaging statements around their home, have someone verbally threaten them, throw feces at them, or even, most bizarrely, surround their home with AIDS patients. One posting suggested these AIDS patients would carry “case reports and needles for intimidation.”

Other listings have offered sex workers as young as 18 years old, noting the specific sex acts that are allowed and forbidden. Elliptic says that one of its researchers was even offered a 14-year-old by a Xinbi Guarantee merchant. (The account holder noted, however, that no transaction for sex with someone below the age of 18 would be guaranteed by Xinbi. The legal age of consent in China is 14.)

Exactly why Xinbi Guarantee is legally registered in the US remains a mystery. Its incorporation record on the Colorado Secretary of State’s website shows an address at an office park in the city of Aurora that has no external Xinbi branding. The company appears to have been registered there in August of 2022 by someone named “Mohd Shahrulnizam Bin Abd Manap.” (WIRED connected that name with several people in Malaysia but couldn’t determine which one might be Xinbi Guarantee’s registrant.) The listing is currently marked as “delinquent,” perhaps due to failure to file more recent paperwork to renew it.

For fledgling Chinese companies—legitimate and illegitimate—incorporating in the US is an increasingly common tactic for “projecting legitimacy,” says Jacob Sims, a visiting fellow at Harvard’s Asia Center who focuses on transnational Chinese crime. “If you have a US presence, you can also open US bank accounts,” Sims says. “You could potentially hire staff in the US. You could in theory have more formalized connections to US entities.” But he notes that the registration’s delinquent status may mean Xinbi Guarantee tried to make some sort of inroads in the US in the past but gave up.

While Telegram has served as the chief means of communication for the two markets, the stablecoin cryptocurrency Tether has served as their primary means of payment, Elliptic found. And despite Telegram’s new round of removals of their channels and accounts, Xinbi Guarantee and Huione Guarantee are far from the only companies to use Tether and Telegram to create essentially a new, largely Chinese-language darknet: Elliptic is tracking close to 30 similar marketplaces, Robinson says, though he declined to name others in the midst of the company’s investigations.

Just as Telegram shows new signs of cracking down on that sprawling black market, Tether, too, has the ability to disrupt criminal use of its services. Unlike other more decentralized cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, Tether can freeze payments when it identifies bad actors. Yet it’s not clear to what degree Tether has taken measures to stop Chinese-language crypto scammers and others on Xinbi Guarantee and Huione Guarantee from using its currency.

When WIRED wrote to Tether to ask about its role in those black markets, the company responded in a statement that it encourages “firms like Elliptic and other blockchain intelligence providers to share critical data with law enforcement so we can act swiftly and in coordination.”

“We are not passive observers—we are active players in the global fight against financial crime,” the Tether statement continued. “If you’re considering using Tether for illicit purposes, think again: it is the most traceable asset in existence. We will identify you, and we will work to ensure you are brought to justice.”

Despite that promise—and Telegram’s new effort to remove Huione Guarantee and Xinbi Guarantee from its platform—both tools have already been used to facilitate tens of billions of dollars in theft and other black market deals, much of it occurring in plain sight. The two largely illegal and very public markets have been “remarkable for both the scale at which they’re operating and also the brazenness,” says Harvard’s Jacob Sims.

Given that brazenness and the massive criminal fortunes at stake, expect both markets to attempt a revival in some form—and plenty of competitors to try to take their place atop the Chinese-language crypto crime economy.

This story originally appeared on wired.com.

Photo of WIRED

Wired.com is your essential daily guide to what’s next, delivering the most original and complete take you’ll find anywhere on innovation’s impact on technology, science, business and culture.

Incorporated in US: $8.4B money launderer for Chinese-speaking crypto scammers Read More »

bitcoin-hits-record-high-as-trump-vows-to-end-crypto-crackdown

Bitcoin hits record high as Trump vows to end crypto crackdown

Bitcoin hit a new record high late Monday, its value peaking at $89,623 as investors quickly moved to cash in on expectations that Donald Trump will end a White House crackdown that intensified last year on crypto.

While the trading rally has now paused, analysts predict that bitcoin’s value will only continue rising following Trump’s win—perhaps even reaching $100,000 by the end of 2024, CNBC reported.

Bitcoin wasn’t the only winner emerging from the post-election crypto trading. Crypto exchanges like Coinbase also experienced surges in the market, and one of the biggest winners, CNBC reported, was dogecoin, a cryptocurrency linked to Elon Musk, who campaigned for Trump and may join his administration. Dogecoin’s value is up 135 percent since Trump’s win.

On the campaign trail, Trump began wooing the cryptocurrency industry, seeking donations and votes by promising to make the US the “crypto capital of the planet,” Fortune reported. He announced the launch of his own crypto platform, World Liberty Financial (WLFI), and vowed to “fire” Gary Gensler—the Securities and Commission Exchange (SEC) chair leading the US crypto crackdown—on “day one” in office, Al Jazeera reported.

Whether Trump can actually fire Gensler is still up in the air, The Washington Post reported. It seems more likely that Trump may demote Gensler, The Post reported, since people familiar with the matter suggested that “fully outing” the current SEC chair “could trigger a novel and complicated legal battle over the president’s authorities.” So far, Gensler has made no indications that he will step down once Trump takes office, although The Post noted that wouldn’t be considered unusual.

Sources told The Post that Trump is considering “a mix of current regulators, former federal officials, and financial industry executives,” for leadership positions, “many of whom have publicly expressed pro-crypto views.”

Reportedly under consideration to replace Gensler are Daniel Gallagher, a former SEC official currently serving as chief legal officer for the financial technology firm Robinhood, and two Republican SEC commissioners, Hester Peirce and Mark Uyeda, The Post’s sources said. Other names in the mix include a former SEC commissioner, Paul Atkins, and a former commissioner at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Chris Giancarlo.

Bitcoin hits record high as Trump vows to end crypto crackdown Read More »

google-sues-two-crypto-app-makers-over-allegedly-vast-“pig-butchering”-scheme

Google sues two crypto app makers over allegedly vast “pig butchering” scheme

Foul Play —

Crypto and other investment app scams promoted on YouTube targeted 100K users.

Google sues two crypto app makers over allegedly vast “pig butchering” scheme

Google has sued two app developers based in China over an alleged scheme targeting 100,000 users globally over four years with at least 87 fraudulent cryptocurrency and other investor apps distributed through the Play Store.

The tech giant alleged that scammers lured victims with “promises of high returns” from “seemingly legitimate” apps offering investment opportunities in cryptocurrencies and other products. Commonly known as “pig-butchering schemes,” these scams displayed fake returns on investments, but when users went to withdraw the funds, they discovered they could not.

In some cases, Google alleged, developers would “double down on the scheme by requesting various fees and other payments from victims that were supposedly necessary for the victims to recover their principal investments and purported gains.”

Google accused the app developers—Yunfeng Sun (also known as “Alphonse Sun”) and Hongnam Cheung (also known as “Zhang Hongnim” and “Stanford Fischer”)—of conspiring to commit “hundreds of acts of wire fraud” to further “an unlawful pattern of racketeering activity” that siphoned up to $75,000 from each user successfully scammed.

Google was able to piece together the elaborate alleged scheme because the developers used a wide array of Google products and services to target victims, Google said, including Google Play, Voice, Workspace, and YouTube, breaching each one’s terms of service. Perhaps most notably, the Google Play Store’s developer program policies “forbid developers to upload to Google Play ‘apps that expose users to deceptive or harmful financial products and services,’ including harmful products and services ‘related to the management or investment of money and cryptocurrencies.'”

In addition to harming Google consumers, Google claimed that each product and service’s reputation would continue to be harmed unless the US district court in New York ordered a permanent injunction stopping developers from using any Google products or services.

“By using Google Play to conduct their fraud scheme,” scammers “have threatened the integrity of Google Play and the user experience,” Google alleged. “By using other Google products to support their scheme,” the scammers “also threaten the safety and integrity of those other products, including YouTube, Workspace, and Google Voice.”

Google’s lawsuit is the company’s most recent attempt to block fraudsters from targeting Google products by suing individuals directly, Bloomberg noted. Last year, Google sued five people accused of distributing a fake Bard AI chatbot that instead downloaded malware to Google users’ devices, Bloomberg reported.

How did the alleged Google Play scams work?

Google said that the accused developers “varied their approach from app to app” when allegedly trying to scam users out of thousands of dollars but primarily relied on three methods to lure victims.

The first method relied on sending text messages using Google Voice—such as “I am Sophia, do you remember me?” or “I miss you all the time, how are your parents Mike?”—”to convince the targeted victims that they were sent to the wrong number.” From there, the scammers would apparently establish “friendships” or “romantic relationships” with victims before moving the conversation to apps like WhatsApp, where they would “offer to guide the victim through the investment process, often reassuring the victim of any doubts they had about the apps.” These supposed friends, Google claimed, would “then disappear once the victim tried to withdraw funds.”

Another strategy allegedly employed by scammers relied on videos posted to platforms like YouTube, where fake investment opportunities would be promoted, promising “rates of return” as high as “two percent daily.”

The third tactic, Google said, pushed bogus affiliate marketing campaigns, promising users commissions for “signing up additional users.” These apps, Google claimed, were advertised on social media as “a guaranteed and easy way to earn money.”

Once a victim was drawn into using one of the fraudulent apps, “user interfaces sought to convince victims that they were maintaining balances on the app and that they were earning ‘returns’ on their investments,” Google said.

Occasionally, users would be allowed to withdraw small amounts, convincing them that it was safe to invest more money, but “later attempts to withdraw purported returns simply did not work.” And sometimes the scammers would “bilk” victims out of “even more money,” Google said, by requesting additional funds be submitted to make a withdrawal.

“Some demands” for additional funds, Google found, asked for anywhere “from 10 to 30 percent to cover purported commissions and/or taxes.” Victims, of course, “still did not receive their withdrawal requests even after these additional fees were paid,” Google said.

Which apps were removed from the Play Store?

Google tried to remove apps as soon as they were discovered to be fraudulent, but Google claimed that scammers concocted new aliases and infrastructure to “obfuscate their connection to suspended fraudulent apps.” Because scammers relied on so many different Google services, Google was able to connect the scheme to the accused developers through various business records.

Fraudulent apps named in the complaint include fake cryptocurrency exchanges called TionRT and SkypeWallet. To make the exchanges appear legitimate, scammers put out press releases on newswire services and created YouTube videos likely relying on actors to portray company leadership.

In one YouTube video promoting SkypeWallet, the supposed co-founder of Skype Coin uses the name “Romser Bennett,” which is the same name used for the supposed founder of another fraudulent app called OTCAI2.0, Google said. In each video, a completely different presumed hired actor plays the part of “Romser Bennett.” In other videos, Google found the exact same actor plays an engineer named “Rodriguez” for one app and a technical leader named “William Bryant” for another app.

Another fraudulent app that was flagged by Google was called the Starlight app. Promoted on TikTok and Instagram, Google said, that app promised “that users could earn commissions by simply watching videos.”

The Starlight app was downloaded approximately 23,000 times and seemingly primarily targeted users in Ghana, allegedly scamming at least 6,000 Ghanian users out of initial investment capital that they were told was required before they could start earning money on the app.

Across all 87 fraudulent apps that Google has removed, Google estimated that approximately 100,000 users were victimized, including approximately 8,700 in the United States.

Currently, Google is not aware of any live apps in the Play Store connected to the alleged scheme, the complaint said, but scammers intent on furthering the scheme “will continue to harm Google and Google Play users” without a permanent injunction, Google warned.

Google sues two crypto app makers over allegedly vast “pig butchering” scheme Read More »

from-cz-to-sbf,-2023-was-the-year-of-the-fallen-crypto-bro

From CZ to SBF, 2023 was the year of the fallen crypto bro

From CZ to SBF, 2023 was the year of the fallen crypto bro

Aurich Lawson | Getty Images (Bloomberg/Antonio Masiello)

Looking back, 2023 will likely be remembered as the year of the fallen crypto bro.

While celebrities like Kim Kardashian and Matt Damon last year faced public backlash after shilling for cryptocurrency, this year’s top headlines traced the downfalls of two of the most successful and influential crypto bros of all time: FTX co-founder Sam Bankman-Fried (often referred to as SBF) and Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (commonly known as CZ).

At 28 years old, Bankman-Fried made Forbes’ 30 Under 30 list in 2021, but within two short years, his recently updated Forbes profile notes that the man who was once “one of the richest people in crypto” in “a stunning fall from grace” now has a real-time net worth of $0.

In November, Bankman-Fried was convicted by a 12-member jury of defrauding FTX customers, after a monthlong trial where federal prosecutors accused him of building FTX into “a pyramid of deceit.” The trial followed months of wild headlines—comparing Bankman-Fried to a cartoon villain, accusing Bankman-Fried of stealing $2.2 billion from FTX customers to buy things like a $16.4 million house for his parents, and revealing that Bankman-Fried casually joked about losing track of $50 million.

Defending against his crimes at FTX, Bankman-Fried argued that “dishonesty and unfair dealing” aren’t fraud and even claimed that he couldn’t recall what he did at FTX, while FTX scrambled to recover $7.3 billion and put out the “dumpster fire.”

Ultimately, Bankman-Fried’s former FTX/Alameda Research partners, including his ex-girlfriend Caroline Ellison, testified against him. Ellison’s testimony led to even weirder revelations about SBF, like Bankman-Fried’s aspirations to become US president and his professed rejection of moral ideals like “don’t steal.” By the end of the trial, it seemed like very few felt any sympathy for the once-FTX kingpin.

Bankman-Fried now faces a maximum sentence of 110 years. His exact sentence is scheduled to be determined by a US district judge in March 2024, Reuters reported.

While FTX had been considered a giant force in the cryptocurrency world, Binance is still the world’s biggest cryptocurrency exchange—and considered more “systemically important” to crypto enthusiasts, Bloomberg reported. That’s why it was a huge deal when Binance was rocked by its own scandal in 2023 that ended in its founder and CEO, Zhao, admitting to money laundering and resigning.

Arguably Zhao’s fall from grace may have been more shocking to cryptocurrency fans than Bankman-Fried’s. Just one month prior to Zhao’s resignation, after FTX collapsed, The Economist had dubbed CZ as “crypto’s last man standing.”

Zhao launched Binance in 2017 and the next year was featured on the cover of Forbes’ first list of the wealthiest people in crypto. Peering out from under a hoodie, Zhao was considered by Forbes to be a “crypto overlord,” going from “zero to billionaire in six months,” where other crypto bros had only managed to become millionaires.

But 2023 put an abrupt end to Zhao’s reign at Binance. In March, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) sued Binance and Zhao over suspected money laundering and sanctions violations, triggering a Securities and Exchange Commission lawsuit in June and a Department of Justice (DOJ) probe. In the end, Binance owed billions in fines to the DOJ and the CFTC, which Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen called “historic penalties.” For personally directing Binance employees to skirt US regulatory compliance—and hide more than 100,000 suspicious transactions linked to terrorism, child sexual abuse materials, and ransomware attacks—Zhao now personally owes the CFTC $150 million.

On the social media platform X (formerly Twitter), Zhao wrote that after stepping down as Binance’s CEO, he will be taking a break and likely never helming a startup ever again.

“I am content being [a] one-shot (lucky) entrepreneur,” Zhao wrote.

From CZ to SBF, 2023 was the year of the fallen crypto bro Read More »