FTX Used Python Code To Fake Its Insurance Fund Figure (cointelegraph.com) 104
Tom Mitchelhill reports via CoinTelegraph: Crypto exchange FTX used hidden Python code to misrepresent the value of its insurance fund -- a pool of funds meant to prevent user losses during huge liquidation events -- according to testimony from FTX co-founder Gary Wang. In a damning testimony on Oct. 6, FTX's former chief technology officer, Gary Wang, said that FTX's so-called $100 million insurance fund in 2021 was fabricated and never contained any of the exchanges' FTX tokens (FTT) as claimed. Instead, the figure shown to the public was calculated by multiplying the daily trading volume of the FTX Token by a random number close to 7,500.
When the prosecution surfaced the above tweet -- among other public statements of its value -- and asked Wang whether this amount was accurate, he replied with a single word: "No." "For one, there is no FTT in the insurance fund. It's just the USD number. And, two, the number listed here does not match what was in the database." An exhibit in the Oct. 6 trial shows the alleged code used to generate the size of the so-called "Backstop Fund" or public insurance fund.
FTX's insurance fund was designed to protect user losses in case of huge, sudden market movements and its value was often touted on its website and social media. According to Wang's testimony, however, the amount contained within the fund was often insufficient to cover these losses. [...] In addition to revealing the allegedly fraudulent nature of FTX's insurance fund, Wang claimed that Bankman-Fried prompted him and Nishad Singh to implement an "allow_negative" balance feature in the code at FTX, which allowed Alameda Research to trade with near-unlimited liquidity on the crypto exchange.
When the prosecution surfaced the above tweet -- among other public statements of its value -- and asked Wang whether this amount was accurate, he replied with a single word: "No." "For one, there is no FTT in the insurance fund. It's just the USD number. And, two, the number listed here does not match what was in the database." An exhibit in the Oct. 6 trial shows the alleged code used to generate the size of the so-called "Backstop Fund" or public insurance fund.
FTX's insurance fund was designed to protect user losses in case of huge, sudden market movements and its value was often touted on its website and social media. According to Wang's testimony, however, the amount contained within the fund was often insufficient to cover these losses. [...] In addition to revealing the allegedly fraudulent nature of FTX's insurance fund, Wang claimed that Bankman-Fried prompted him and Nishad Singh to implement an "allow_negative" balance feature in the code at FTX, which allowed Alameda Research to trade with near-unlimited liquidity on the crypto exchange.
So, If You Lie Big And Often Enough... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So, If You Lie Big And Often Enough... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Far more worrisome is a weaponized legal system going all Mafia and shaking people down. Sooner or later you and I will become targets, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Had Trump been accurate on his financial disclosures, the lenders might not have made the loans or demanded a higher interest rate.
Counterfactual
"No harm, no found" does not work in fraud cases. If SBF has managed to pull of his heist and replay customers (due to some extremely good fortune in crypto-currency prices, perhaps), that would make the fraudulent behavior okay?
Counterfactual
If three drunk drivers have a drag race through a school zone and one of the kills a child, the other two can absolve themselves of guilt by backing up to the starting line? Your statement defies all logic.
Red herring
The difference between assault with a deadly weapon and murder is aim.
Red herring
I take your "wall of garbage" approach to mean that you understand that this lawfare is so much farce.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If it is the truth than it is good business.
They ask you the value for a reason; because their business model requires them to properly assess their value so that their interests are covered. If Trump lies than he illegally puts them at greater risk. I don't agree with the amount of money a lot of corporations make, but for crying out loud at least draw the line at a bold faced lie.
Re: (Score:2)
their business model requires them
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
customers are not entitled to dictate what they will pay
If only there were some...system of exchange...in which participants in a transaction exchange valuables for other goods or services.
To be successful, such a mechanism would require the ubiquity of barter, or currency, possibly involving interest.
Re: So, If You Lie Big And Often Enough... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why is it so hard to convince Americans that robbing people of money is bad??
Robbing someone appears to be the purpose of this suit, yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Had Trump been accurate on his financial disclosures, the lenders might not have made the loans or demanded a higher interest rate.
And I replied:
Counterfactual
You say:
Not a single one of my statements is counterfactual.
Now, look at the bolded words. THEY LOANED. Loans were made and repaid promptly. The proposition that the loans "might not have made" is counterfactual. It did not happen. This is the meaning of "counterfactual". You are attempting to find harm where none occurred. This is a creepy precedent. If allowed to stand, the state will logically be capable of shaking down anyone, anywhere, anytime. I guess that as long as it's someone you disdain, this sort of
Re: (Score:1)
Heh, you really are a Trump fan, saying lying is ok (but not when Clinton does it), so partisan you are. You should be his lawyer. I would love to see how the judge would react to your line of defense.
Well, maybe the real sin is that this guy used Python. I hope the developers don't get strung up
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
lying is ok
I would not accuse Trump of anything but engaging in business. Are you asserting that there is some objective standard whereby Trump could be judged, and falsehood discerned?
Re: (Score:2)
Again if I go to Walmart and put a fake barcode on a iPhone and scan it at the self checkout for $5 and then decide I don't like it and return it, I'm still guilty of the original fraud.
So, the contention is that there is some barcode database for real estate properties, which Trump hacked? I'm really, really pretty sure that this is not how the system works. Really.
Re: (Score:1)
Are you asserting that there is some objective standard whereby Trump could be judged, and falsehood discerned?
The court has already decided he committed fraud, you just refuse to see the truth about your guy. Is there something about your own past that relates perhaps? The doctor is in :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you really not understand the idea that things have a price and especially bank loans have a price that's based on the financial condition of the borrower?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The court has already decided he committed fraud,
I'm old enough to remember the pre-show trial days, when juries decided matters.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not pretending anything as the statements that I've made have already been decided in a trial. The prosecution offered a case that
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
... when juries decided matters.
Well, maybe they'll remember to request one next time, not that he won't claim they're all tainted, like he always does when he loses. Your hero is a fraud. Why you sacrificed your faith to support him shall remain a mystery
Re: (Score:2)
Why you sacrificed your faith to support him shall remain a mystery
Sweet, sweet troll. You are a beautiful man, no matter what damn_registrars was saying about you.
Re: (Score:1)
:-) Not trolling when telling the truth
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
We, you are the establishment. You can't blame others for your choice to follow. That is the truth that apparently you can't handle
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
One can only be responsible for one's own choices.
Right, and your choice to follow makes you just as guilty as all the others of all the government's problems. It is silly for you to complain about the people/party you reelect
My quibble with you is your meaningless logical "or" between "Christ or Trump". Simply unrelated.
Not at all, you are the one always professing your faith while refusing to acknowledge the conflict with your choice to support and defend Trump. It's very relevant. You can't be taken seriously until/unless you resolve that conflict. Between "Christ or Trump" there is only "or", there is no "and". So, what's it gonna be?
Re: (Score:2)
your choice to follow makes you just as guilty as all the others of all the government's problems
This is a tinker-toy causal analysis, unless "follow" means shag-all. Have you bought anything or paid taxes? You have followed, and Romans3:23 is a bloody-minded axe, unless we grasp that it is a theological point.
there is only "or"
OK, Mani [wikipedia.org], i.e. "dualist".
Re: (Score:1)
Have you bought anything or paid taxes?
Totally irrelevant distraction, another attempt at waving off the consequences of your choice to follow along. We are talking about your vote, not your money habits. You don't have to change anything if you don't want. Just acknowledge the part you play, conscious or not, is just as important as everybody elses. Let's not sweat it, free will really is very much in doubt.
So, back on topic, is everybody who uses Python (and ReiserFS) a criminal now?
Re: (Score:2)
Have you bought anything or paid taxes?
Totally irrelevant distraction, another attempt at waving off the consequences of your choice to follow along.
Why do you label this a 'totally irrelevant distraction', beside its inconvenience to your argument?
My goal here is to nail down exactly where the conformity line is drawn.
How much non-conformity is required to be justified in your eyes?
Are we blowing off taxes? Are we driving against traffic? Are we only voting for write-in candidates who cannot possibly prevail in an election?
Re: (Score:1)
:-) There's a word for the absurdities you present, can't remember what it's called, but it's just more distraction. Your choices make the government what it is. Your denials just don't hold up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
So, "follow the herd" is best, eh? Failure to conform is "feckless"? And complaining about the people you choose will solve everything, right? Isn't that called passive-aggressive? And really, a bit cowardly?
Re: (Score:2)
Politically, I've told you the only thing in view that I think likely to have substantive effect, and you managed to wet yourself. Cowardly, indeed.
Re: (Score:1)
No, I merely told you that you're wrong, it still up to the voters to decide who handles the process
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
gun down any practical inputs as "distractions" and "excuses".
Because they aren't practical for all the extremely obvious reasons that you prefer to wave off, you're looking for a one sided deal
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, isn't that funny how the middle class votes for the same thing? Is that pragmatism too? Personally I call it "foolish", but, you know, it's the "system's" fault
Re: (Score:2)
it's the "system's" fault
And what is the "system", if not a collection of people? While you've sought to say that I'm attempting to externalize EVERYTHING, an actual, serious analysis would find that there is some breakdown, e.g. 80/20, between internal and external.
Honest people need to own the internals they can control, and affect positively the externals that are generally harder to control.
What is valuable in these back-and-forth discussion on here is that they help clarify these points.
Which is how I can justify the yea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So, If You Lie Big And Often Enough... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
won't get what they are owed through criminal cases
Possibly due to the lack of law breakage?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...you can go a long way, if you have the proper friends.
The problem with lies is remember which lie you told to which person and in what context the lie was used.
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that it's python code is relevant how? (Score:4, Insightful)
A random number generator is pretty standard in all languages
Re: (Score:1)
Re:The fact that it's python code is relevant how? (Score:4)
What I do care about is how anyone thought SBF was worthy of investing in. Who are these dumb ass people with millions of dollars to throw around to strange men with poor social skills? And does anyone have their number? I have a project they might be interested in, and unruly trademarkable hair.
Re: (Score:2)
What does matter? The code was actually 'clean code' (shocker!)
It was written by the CFO ?????
THey even named the fields well ???
What parallel universe is this for a 'Startup' to have such clean code, and obvious to see glaring issue upon prosecution? And from a Block Chain company no less. I could not stop laughing as I read this one. Its so very, very sad.
Re: (Score:2)
Technically minded people won't give a shit. At least until some tech illiterates run with the "python is used for illegal things, ban it!" bullshit story.
Re: The fact that it's python code is relevant how (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe it has zero relevance and it's just supposed to troll Python fans. I'm quite sure Enron used COBOL somewhere...or Clipper.
Re: (Score:2)
I had the depressing thought that since I wrote amateurish COBOL in a class in the 1980s...I may be the last COBOL programmer standing. Ugh.
Re: (Score:2)
Python is a good scripting language, despite me hating a few aspects of it (many the same ones I hate about Makefiles - spaces and tabs are significant). The attempt to make it into a full programming language has had some huge hiccups. The way people code to it is more how Perl programmers attack problems, and Perl never should've been a programming language. COBOL was actually meant to be a programming language at least, but requires programmers to enter words business user understand as text, like TRANSF
Re: (Score:3)
Because it shows the author never intended it to run past the upgrade to the next Python version?! That is, that the fraudsters had no intention of continuing the business indefinitely, but realized they would have to bail at some point in the future.
Had they intended it to run indefinitely, they would have bought an IBM mainframe and written it in COBOL. But in that case, the prosecution would allege obstruction of justice on the grounds that the DOJ wouldn't be able to find a COBOL programmer to take
Re: (Score:2)
of course it's relevant... If it's in Python then Guido is in on it too!!!
pip install figureManipulator fraudHider (Score:5, Funny)
pip install figureManipulator fraudHider
Python makes everything easy.
Re: (Score:2)
Cue the Scooby Doo reveal: "I would've gotten away with it, too, if it hadn't been for your lousy Python code!"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because Python has no code of conduct (Score:5, Insightful)
AI which is clearly threatens jobs and our morality is mostly written in Python so double dangerous. Ban it, I tell you.
Re: (Score:2)
I knew it, Python is a language used by criminals. This is why I stick to Perl.
Re: (Score:2)
Still use perl? oh no, you need a hug my friend :p. (and I am not saying python is perfect either )
Hang in there, at least it's not cobol
Re: (Score:2)
They just disintegrate.
Perl (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Definitely. Everyone knows it's a write-only language.
Re: (Score:2)
Would using perl be considered obfuscation? ;)
Yes.
Only Perl-meisters understand and read Perl code but they are sworn to perpetual silence when they become Perl-meisters.
Re: (Score:2)
Not if you already speak fluent klingon ... in that case, speaking the perl code out loud sounds like poetry :p
Python must be banned (Score:2)
This is clear evidence that python is a tool for fraud and must be banned. If you're not a criminal, you have no reason to use python, anyway.
The government demands backdoor access to all operating systems to find anyone using python in order to impose the proper penalties.
Re: (Score:2)
Believe it or not, but a lot of pentesters aren't really good programmers. But if they know one language, it's python.
You may be onto something...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Python is interpreted you insensitive clod!
Would it have been better in C++? (Score:2)
Ponzi scheme (Score:2)
The more I read about FTX/Alameda, the more they sound like Ponzi schemes.
Re: (Score:2)
That's pretty much Crypto in general though.
At least with stocks, you may actually get a dividend someday, or the company will liquidate and return your share of the assets to you. There's actually a presence with value, assuming massive fraud hasn't taken place, like with Theranos.
With Crypto, you're stuck hoping that there's a "greater fool" who is willing to pay you more money(or assets) than you paid, later on. There will never be a dividend, liquidation of assets, etc...
I'll note that I don't favor h
Re:Ponzi scheme (Score:4, Informative)
More like a control fraud scheme on top of a Ponzi scheme. Two (or more) frauds in one. That's how SBF went from zero to $36 billion in two years.
Crypto issuing exchanges have been dubbed a "flywheel Ponzi". You aren't paying off early investors with later investors money as in a classic Ponzi. Instead you create a big batch of tokens ("coins") and sell some of them (possibly to a shill buyer) and then claim that value for all the tokens and show that as your balance sheet, then use that to either entice investors or take out loans, and then use that cash to pump the token price further - continuing the flywheel.
But on top of the SBF was running an Enronesque scheme where two companies supposedly operating independently (though both owned by SBF) practiced self-dealing - almost all of the assets claimed by his trading firm Alameda were actually just tokens minted by FTX, not real or tradeable assets at all (this revelation by CoinDesk is what brought about the FTX collapse). Oh and then there were the hidden negative balances, the fake insurance fund noted in TFS, the "compnay purchases" for private use, lots of scams being run at once.
Re: (Score:2)
The analogy is apt: spin a flywheel
Madoff used an AS/400 to create fake returns (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So what? (Score:2)
The fact that they wrote code in Python to perpetrate a fraud is as much as an indictment of Python as the fact that they wrote their prospectus in English is an indictment of English.
Scammers do scammy things (Score:2)
Scammers do scammy things, news at 11.
I'm sure the whole cryptocurrency "industry" is rife with crap like this.
'crypto' currencies enabled massive fraud (Score:2)
Maybe bitcoin started out innocently enough, or maybe it was some massive operation by the NSA or some other organization. But, the whole environment was ripe for fraud and fraud did come to it, to basically become the norm. I know a bunch of people who were pulled into it, some of whom had decent 'net savvy but not knowledge of how the real financial market operates. Some people, such as the guy who installed this insulation in my house, didn't have any practical knowledge and probably lost everything. I a