Resolves positive if the outflow of funds was done or ordered by FTX leadership or a close ally.
Related questions
I think there's a high likelyhood this was the $400MM in digital currency stolen by the sim swapping outfit that were recently charged.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68192231/1/united-states-v-powell/
Not to say it wasn't an inside job and definitely not proposing a NO resolution at this point, but it seems likely there was an outside element involved...
https://blockworks.co/news/ftx-hack-wired-bankruptcy-chaos
"“In the few instances in which the FTX Group even attempted to employ these controls, it misapplied them: For each wallet, the FTX Group stored together, in one place, all three private keys required to authorize a transfer such that any individual who had access to one had access to all the keys required to transfer the contents of the wallet, thus defeating the purpose of the controls,” FTX CEO John J. Ray wrote in an April court filing.
The 45-page document laid out the “control failures at the FTX exchange.”
“While crypto exchanges are notoriously targeted by hackers, the FTX Group had poor or, in some cases, no “visibility” controls to detect and respond to cybersecurity threats,” Ray continued.
When the FTX hack took place, there was confusion around whether or not the bankrupt crypto firm had actually been hacked.
However, it later became clear that roughly $500 million in digital assets from both the international and the US exchanges were stolen."
@RobertCousineau Much better, original reporting: https://www.wired.com/story/ftx-1-billion-crypto-heist/
@RobertCousineau are you claiming the article shows this market should resolve NO? If so, could you point me to the relevant quotes? I've only skimmed it, but my impression of that it doesn't rule out an inside job where only higher ups were involved.
@JavierPrieto nope - it should definitely stay open until 2027. I think it is several points of evidence going against it being an inside job though, so I bet it down accordingly.
