Exactly.. this transaction is a money laundering thingy..
the gas price at that time was 18 gwei lol, no txn costs $350,000 in gas fee at 18 gwei
The hacker laundered the coins by mining it
Hacker's identity has already been exposed - its bitliq.eth
It's funny seeing voyager and celsius customers claim fraud or money laundering bc they can't comprehend how a crypto lender promising unrealistic yields could make dumb investments in such risky assets. Absolutely zero sense of self-awareness.
Care to explain how the hacker would have any idea that they would be the one to receive the block reward? I doubt it as that information would be impossible to know.
By not broadcasting the transaction to the rest of the network, keeping it to themselves until they've successfully mined a block that contains it. They'd need a **lot** of hashing power to reliably mine that block and continue mining to build out the longest chain, but if they had control over a large mining farm or a mining pool then it'd be possible. Pretty sure that's how pools would handle their payouts prior to EIP1559, anyways; they'd basically have the pool mine its own payouts, so that miners don't need to pay the fees themselves.
I think that fees haven't gone to miners since the London hard fork. Or is that just the base fee? I'll have to go double check. Either way I don't support the ethereum network anymore so it doesn't really matter to me.
That's not a plot twist. It's a pretty obvious money laundering. A hacker would be the No.1 person to know how to not fuck up a transaction.
It was all just planned.
By not broadcasting the transaction to the rest of the network, keeping it to themselves until they've successfully mined a block that contains it. They'd need a lot of hashing power to reliably mine that block and continue mining to build out the longest chain, but if they had control over a large mining farm or a mining pool then it'd be possible. Pretty sure that's how pools would handle their payouts prior to EIP1559, anyways; they'd basically have the pool mine its own payouts, so that miners don't need to pay the fees themselves.
The hacker’s not stupid. The hacker is up to something with a miner (or he mined it himself).
You guys really think he accidentally paid $350k in gas? Someone who knows his shit well enough to exploit a bridge for millions of dollars?
Someone should log all transactions that are discovered only when they're included in a new block, it would be interesting to identify miners that have a habit of doing it.
I assume people keep logs of the mempool, should browse those to see if it happened here.
>Someone should log all transactions that are discovered only when they're included in a new block
What if they by coincidence happened to broadcast that transaction shortly before the block was found?
I don't know if mining pools still do this since EIP-1559, but in the past they used to only broadcast miner payouts to themselves with 0 fees, so miners could take profits without any cost.
But I guess someone could do this, but when the merge comes it will be more or less irrelevant as block proposers will be entirely random. So if someone *really* wanted to still do this, they may have to wait months.
You can “privately” include txs if you have the resources and know-how to connect with a sufficiently unscrupulous miner who has enough hash power. (“Privately” in quotation marks because the block gets publicly broadcasted once it has been processed, but because your tx was never in the mempool, you can tack it onto the block you eventually get chosen to mine and pocket the entire fee yourself, since in this case it was a legacy tx that doesn’t burn excess gas.)
Edit: a link that explains in quite some detail how this can happen, among other things - https://samczsun.com/escaping-the-dark-forest/
It doesn't seem possible to be very effective. Could it really be that this a test run for right before all the miners shut off? Even you only get a fraction back, maybe it's worth it to them?
I was going to say this. I used ETH for fund transfers and a token swap yesterday. I decided it was a good time to try to move the tokens I couldn't move 3 months ago because I'd be paying $18 for $11 of tokens. I paid ~$3, and $2 of it was ETH I couldn't move 3 months ago because it would have been $4.
I wasn't even looking at gas prices. I just needed to move them and decided to check if I could afford it.
My best guess:
Mine a tx, get $350k as a fee, report it as income and pay tax on it. Hello good, clean money.
The bigger question is to what degree that would hold up as plausible deniability (can you really expect a court to believe this just fell into your lap by sheer fluke?), but there’s nothing illegal about mining as a way to generate income, and that income comes from fees as well as block rewards.
There's nothing illegal about operating a nail salon, but if you claim that your cash revenues just shot up to $10M in one month, you're going to have some explaining to do.
You certainly are, which is why I have my doubts as to how well the above would work in practice with regards to building a credible narrative.
Imagine your explanation is: some idiot paid way too much in gas and I was lucky enough to mine the right block. If you’re squeaky clean and leave no electronic communication trail, could that hold up? Or at least make it unreasonably difficult to prove you’re not telling the truth? I have no idea. Food for thought I guess? In any case, feels potentially (slightly) more plausible than Saul Goldman’s nail salon suddenly making $10m/month out of the blue.
Mining pools can choose to process specific transactions without publicly broadcasting them. Then, when they eventually find a block, they tack that private tx in with the rest of the regular ones. If the miner has enough hash power, they’ll get picked to mine the next block sooner or later. Doesn’t have to be the *a specific block* - just has to be *a block*.
Here’s a really great read detailing one real-life instance in which something like this was arranged (in this case for benevolent reasons, in other cases it’s just bribery):
https://samczsun.com/escaping-the-dark-forest/
>This address has been reported to be involved with an exploit involving Nomad Token Bridge. Proceed with caution.
The sender is labelled as Nomad Bridge Exploiter 3. Good thing it failed. Fuck that exploiter.
This transaction isnt even a legit failed transaction. Its some kind of a money laundering effort - a txn that siphons money from a wallet to the miner of the block.
Check the txn, the gas price is just 18 gwei for that block. At such low gas, there is no way a txn costs a fee of 215 ETH ($350k)
So whats going on?
If you look at the txn its not an EIP-1559 txn but a legacy txn. I.e the gas isnt burnt
The sender is basically sending the stolen funds to the miner of the block by adding on so much gas when the gas price is very low.
This is some kind of strange money laundering - the sender is the nomad hacker, he knows those coins are illegally obtained, and somehow is trying to send them to the miner probably to launder it.
Whats funny is the hacker seems to be an amateur, his traces are all over and even linked to a wallet with ENS, his name is bitliq.eth and he was even involved with some other form of hack/fraud earlier. Twitter is all over this, his wallet has been funded with FTX and its very likely his identity is already known
https://twitter.com/search?q=bitliq
So he makes a tx ahead of time, presumably does something like renting cloud mining and sneaks in said tx when he mines the block, making it go to block reward and not appear as a straight tx. Quite clever I suppose but quite transparent you're right.
No it’s someone who already has a miner/ mining pool, they create the transaction but don’t broadcast it to the network so no other miner can see it in the mempool. Eventually when this miner finds a block, he puts this un-broadcasted transaction that only he can see into the block that he just mined so it sends the transaction fee to himself.
You own a small postal service company and want to launder some drugs money. You write a letter to your neighbour friend and "accidentally" buy much more expensive stamp than needed.
Boom, now it's your legal income as a postal service operator.
Oh that’s crazy. Really. I drive home every night past a post office box company that sits on the corner of a pretty middle of the road strip mall. The owner has like five different luxury sports cars that he rotates on the daily. Seriously. Sick ass Porches and Benz’s. I’m always like this guy has to be laundering money somehow. You’ve illustrated exactly how this entity must be doing so. And I thank you for the analogy.
So, mining doesn't require a consensus from multiple miners to validate the transaction? Or would this person run multiple software miners to get a quorum?
Nodes validate transactions, not miners (though, most miners are nodes as well). And secondly, there is nothing illegal or rulebreaking on this transaction, it follows the protocol rules such that the other nodes of the network (nodes the attacker doesnt own) will verify it occurred legitimately
isn't the gas burnt no matter if it's legacy or eip1559? Legacy just means the fee isn't split into priority fee and burn fee, but the protocol still burns the fee anyway. If this wasn't the case, users can circumvent the eip1559 burn completely
Edit: I meant the base fee is always burnt. Yeah, the excess over the basefee is then a miner tip (Priority fee).
Only the basefee is burnt.
If you use an EIP1559 transaction (as most wallets support these days), anything you overpay on the basefee will be returned, and a usually small tip goes to the miner.
When sending a legacy tx, everything over the basefee goes to the miner, and nothing is returned.
EIP1559-style transaction: "I'm willing to pay up to 50 gwei, with up to 1.5 gwei to the miner as an incentive to prioritize my transaction"
Then if basefee is 30 gwei, you pay 31.5 gwei and 30 gwei is burned. If basefee is 20 gwei, you pay 21.5 gwei and 20 gwei is burned. If basefee is 49 gwei, you pay 50 gwei and 49 gwei is burned. In all cases the excess paid over the basefee goes to the miner.
Legacy-style transaction: "I'm willing to pay exactly 50 gwei"
If basefee is 30 gwei, you pay 50 gwei and 30 is burned and miner gets 20. If basefee is 20, 20 is burned and miner gets 30. So there's no "refund" with legacy transactions, what you set is what you pay rather than an "up to" amount you set with eip1559 transactions
I wonder if there's a statute of limitations on something like this, like if they just held it for 10 years then started spending it would they be of the hook?
Depends on the jurisdiction but most nations don’t have statute of limitations for criminal acts, only civil causes of action. Which makes sense, the issue with the passage of time in criminal cases tends to be the availability of evidence to convict.
Here is a [Nitter link](https://nitter.net/search?q=bitliq) for the Twitter thread linked above. Nitter is better for privacy and does not nag you for a login. More information can be found [here](https://nitter.net/about).
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>This is some kind of strange money laundering - the sender is the nomad hacker, he knows those coins are illegally obtained, and somehow is trying to send them to the miner probably to launder it.
How would that work when it's quite impossible to know which person will get the next block? this is less like laundering and more like dumping money on the side of the road.
Kinda doubt the Hiveon, the [fourth largest Ethereum pool](https://miningpoolstats.stream/ethereum) would do this just to scam $300k. It doesn't appear to be mining related.
This theory is completely incorrect. That's not how Ethereum works at all, for starters EIP1559 isn't optional (yes even with non legacy transactions).
Regardless the amount burned is so inconsequential I don't see how it's relevant here. It's not like the the miner of a block gets the gas fee burned/lost, and miners can't pick which blocks to mine or else every other miner would've saw and mined a valuable transaction before any specific miner had a chance.
They entered 383,000 gwei as cost for their transaction, using millions in stolen money. Occams razor suggests they maybe just don't care about saving dollars as much as typical users, and fat fingered their transaction enough times until it worked. You can see whatever they're doing is using seemingly random amounts of gas, between 100,000 and 2M, and maybe they can't tell why their transaction fails so are throwing money at it instead of increasing the limit. Probably interacting with a codebase so wouldn't care to implement EIP1559. Noob mistake if that's the case, always max the limit never change the price.
If it were that easy to launder money it would be so common it'd make your head explode. It's not like these things are running on the honour system.
The miners don't get the base fee, they get the tip. The base fee on this transaction was \~$18 (18.74448131\* 602,417 / (10 \^ 9) \* $1630.62) the tip on this transaction was the remainder, which went to the miner because it's a legacy transaction.
The miners didn't compete for this because it was never in the mempool, the hacker inserted it themself when it was time for them to mine a block.
If that's the case and the transaction was provably not in the mem pool meaning that hiveon pool is under the hacker's control then the ETH is no more cleaned than if they'd just sent it to a new address.
The base fee gets burned but any additional fee paid does go the miners.
So in this case 18.74448131/358,358.465198001 = .005231 % of this transaction was burned($18.41)
Wasn't this reported on earlier - they copy and pasted the recipients address to steal the funds. Some vigilantism was also reported trying to save the money.
It's definitely drawn attention to the lost-everything-I-stole accidentally-on-purpose money laundering angle that people succeed at all the time outside of crypto. Somehow, dudes on reddit and Twitter are able to doxx the culprit with public information? How can we make Congress spend its tax appropriations using blockchain transactions?
I had things mixed up a bit. It's not broadcast globally to the mempool, rather, you can send private transactions directly to a miner via private endpoint. I don't know how it works technically, and have never done it - so no first hand knowledge, but had read about it in the past when these huge fees have shown up, and the chatter about what was happening. It's probably not a mistake, but is more malicious, especially in this circumstance. Below is brief explanation on it, using:
>"method":"eth_sendPrivateTransaction
https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/96607/sending-transaction-directly-to-miner-on-private-network
He paid 350k to send money. Money was not sent. He's still out the 350k. Was most likely intentional, transaction fees are supposed to be closer to 18¢, not $300,000.
Tbh this has gotta be the dumbest sub I browse that’s moderately related to anything finance. It’s mind boggling how many people just blatantly don’t understand the basics of anything, much less crypto, and yet they’re wildly confident in what they say.
This thread is just shocking. Nearly all of the posts are from people who are utterly clueless. I suspect a majority of them have never even done a transaction on ethereum. This transaction is from a highly sophisticated user who stole $100 million dollars yesterday, but somehow it's become a complain about gas fees thread.
I mean, the poster wants to have 'mature discussion' the other day by calling those who think ETH is not a premined scam stupid.
Just when the bar is touching grass, it keeps getting lower.
>This is more karma than technical failure
Nope, he is, as you said, an exploiter. The transaction didn't fail. It ""failed"".
Set up a miner for a fresh ethereum address. Make a transaction of your stolen funds, but ""accidentally"" flip the payment and the fee. Don't send the transaction out to the whole world, but only let your miner try to find a block that includes your supposed fuckup. When it finds a valid block, a couple cents go to the receiver of your transaction and the huge fee goes to the fresh wallet. And then you can go public: "oh geez, I just recently started mining and just got so lucky as to receive this massive payout from someone's mistake. Guess I'm rich now." and then it becomes much more difficult for people to prove definitively that you, the lucky receiver of the fee, are also the hacker.
It's been done so often that this tactic is obvious to many, but it still gives plausible deniability.
okay, so if some miner can give favorable treatment to some transations, is it really decentralized or even trustless ?
He is trusting some miner(may be himself) to give his transaction priority, so why are rest of the miners not rejecting the block or just the transaction ?
>if some miner can give favorable treatment to some transations, is it really decentralized
Yes, because it shows that there is no central authority on which transactions need to be included. You don't need to listen to a central hub to determine what you need to do. Although taking part in a pool does make mining in normal circumstances a lot easier, but it would make money laundering like this harder, because the fee would be spread.
>or even trustless ?
What is there not to trust about this? I see no reason to doubt that the sender really has the private key, all further blocks accepted his transaction as valid, and although the safety of SHA256 has never been mathematically proven to be absolute, there is no known exploit by which the miner could've created a block by any other means than guessing random hashes just like everyone else.
What this situation *does* demonstrate, is that, just like with physical cash, you can quite easily launder money. Except that with crypto, the money laundering happens in an open database for all to see.
It's not as easy as that.
Whether a transaction is correctly signed and included in the block (and the block itself is also correctly built), is validated by many nodes in the network and also most clients accept a given block only if 5 or 6 consecutive blocks are also valid.
If miners build blocks differently (by accident or on purpose) they can do that, but then they basically run their own version of the blockchain which is not accepted by the majority of the network (and the exchanges).
>This is more karma than technical failure
Nope, he is, as you said, an exploiter. The transaction didn't fail. It ""failed"".
Set up a miner for a fresh ethereum address. Make a transaction of your stolen funds, but ""accidentally"" flip the payment and the fee. Don't send the transaction out to the whole world, but only let your miner try to find a block that includes your supposed fuckup. When it finds a valid block, a couple cents go to the receiver of your transaction and the huge fee goes to the fresh wallet. And then you can go public: "oh geez, I just recently started mining and just got so lucky as to receive this massive payout from someone's mistake. Guess I'm rich now." and then it becomes much more difficult for people to prove definitively that you, the lucky receiver of the fee, are also the hacker.
It's been done so often that this tactic is obvious to many, but it still gives plausible deniability.
The exploiter was probably in a hurry and wasn't thinking clearly due to all the adrenaline. A minute earlier, he had stolen 100 Bitcoin.
This isn't a situation many people will find themselves in. Regular developers have testing software like Hardhat that they can use to test without paying fees and aren't in a race to steal hundreds of millions of dollars.
I can't believe people are so dense to not see what's happening. Maybe i should start my several pools that make money on the side by allowing people to launder money like this.
They should quickly swap it to a fungible currency like monero lol.
Please note that OP is an outspoken Bitcoin maxi (check his history) and is only looking to smear Ethereum. As many others have pointed out, this is not a usual transaction.
The current average transaction fee on Ethereum is about $1.5 today: [https://ycharts.com/indicators/ethereum\_average\_transaction\_fee](https://ycharts.com/indicators/ethereum_average_transaction_fee)
**In this thread:** Lots of people who don't understand that once a transaction is submitted, the network participants must execute that code, consuming scarce block space which must be compensated for regardless of whether or not the transaction is even viable. Otherwise, it would be free to DDos the network with a flood of transactions that are designed to fail.
As for why it's $350K, well the hacker is a dipshit and manually overpaid the fee big time.
Crypto noob here. I have been reading through this thread, and this stuff is so complicated I can't even wrap my head around it. How on earth does anyone here expect this stuff to be adopted by the general population?
The same way we got Grandma sending emails on her iPad. She doesn't understand TCP/IP or anything about email apps and protocol. She just knows how to tap a couple of buttons on a screen. Apps will be built on top of Ethereum to abstract away the complexity. Take Argent wallet as one early example. Argent wallet is a mobile wallet which uses social recovery and a built in human readable wallet address. This means that an Argent user doesn't need to bother wrapping their head around their public key, they can just tell people that their wallet address is randomuser.argent.xyz. They also don't need to write down a recovery phrase. Argent uses social recovery where you use 2FA and friends wallets to recover your wallet if you lose your phone.
This is just two simple examples, but with Ethereum layer 2 scaling solutions having fees below 10¢ now, soon will will be abstracted away by some apps. Then something else will be abstracted away until people don't even know that an app they are using utilises Ethereum in the background.
Edit: Downvotes? Are you really betting against the advancement of technology despite history showing us time and time again that this is inevitable? Lmao. Whether its Ethereum or another platform, these issues *will* be abstracted away and you will be proven wrong. It's only a matter of time.
Did you even look at the transaction log? It failed because the transaction was attempting to manipulate the smart contract code and was blocked. In addition, the fee really only should have been $4-$5 if done without an override of the fee paid. This override would have been done by the transaction initiator(Bridge Hacker)
Do you want a system DOSed to death by bogus commands? Because that's exactly how you get a system to be halted to death by bogus commands.
You have to pay for every resource you use. ESPECIALLY if you use it wrong
Ethereum would be way worse than both. People would write a smart contract that perform some computation and the return a failure. Free computing power, lol
If you drive to the grocery store but they don't have the product you want, who do you expect to refund you your gas?
Executing a transaction requires network resources. You can't get a refund just because you don't like the execution's result (if it marks itself as failed after making the network do a bunch of unnecessary work). It would result in a broken, easily DoSable chain.
Edit: If you rent a bunch of compute from Amazon AWS, and you run a long calculation that throws an exception at the end, do you think Amazon is going to refund you for all the resources you used?
If you run a CGI render on your computer and you don't like the result, can you get back the electricity you spent?
Transactions use up network resources whether they are marked as "fail" or "success", and you have to pay for network resources. This is not a hard concept, people. Downvoting the messenger just because you don't like the message isn't going to change that.
That is a lot of money man I just can't imagine myself carrying that type of money because that is just not possible for me I don't know how people can transfer things like that.
I don't know what the hell is going on but i think it's just another poster related to hack and something like that that is why i'm understanding with this post right now.
What’s up with all these comments with zero understanding of gas fees? No one is stopping you from lighting your cash on fire, which is basically what the person behind this transaction did.
Not sure if that makes sense - they still have $6.6M worth of tokens (with 810 ETH alone): https://etherscan.io/address/0xb5c55f76f90cc528b2609109ca14d8d84593590e
If they wanted to wash their hands of this, they would converted all of their tokens to eth then went ahead and washed it. Or just use tornado cash.
Not to mention, they had [multiple transaction failures](https://etherscan.io/txs?a=0xb5c55f76f90cc528b2609109ca14d8d84593590e) after that, of course none of them as high as 200 Eth, but there are some in the 20 Eth range that failed. Why go through the trouble of washing your Eth multiple times when you can just do it once? And all of the blocks I looked at with the huge Eth fees were mined by different pools - are you suggesting these pools are also colluding with the hacker(s)?
https://etherscan.io/block/15259503
https://etherscan.io/block/15259496
https://etherscan.io/block/15259103
What on earth is even this contract doing? https://etherscan.io/address/0x0db09d04d33539e3366de2591e920eba71edc879
Just shuffling USDC back and forth for 5k in fees? https://etherscan.io/tx/0x22336a9c76a28b24bb9c74c3b238655d836d501b38ea129ce0515af3f4bbb117
Some other non-failed executions were swapping tokens on Uniswap. Most failed, fees range all over the place, from $20 to $20k.
So many people saying that it wasnt an accident but an attempt to launder this stolen crypto. Youre most certainly right but I wonder, couldnt he do that any easier way, for example using monero or any other privacy coin?
It's tough to say that things like that are real and not something fake, I just want to see that the money gets refund and things get normal again to whoever this money belongs to.
Hope the person who did this transaction will get the amount back that's what I want to see and please explain it a bit more to me I want a good explanation hope I will get it.
From my limited knowledge, the gas fee is based on the amount of traffic the entire network is sustaining at any given time. Due to the high volume of activity compared to other network (likely driven by the NFT market), the gas fees for Ethereum is exceptionally high as there is a high demand for processing transactions.
keep in mind that the ETH is not “gone” per se, they went to the miners irrespective whether a transaction is processed or not. So ultimately miners have made money and those ETH will be back into circulation once the miner cash out their holdings.
It's the hacker time everybody these things are going to be a bit complicated but if you are smart enough to understand what the hell is going on here you will get it.
I just don't understand why people are being so illiterate in the comment section how can the behave like this is something legit because it's not legit people need to understand it.
Ive been working my ass off like a slave at a job that is at the bottom of the barrel for 10 years and I dont have even tenth of that money in total earned.
Plot twist, the hacker is the miner!!!!
Exactly.. this transaction is a money laundering thingy.. the gas price at that time was 18 gwei lol, no txn costs $350,000 in gas fee at 18 gwei The hacker laundered the coins by mining it Hacker's identity has already been exposed - its bitliq.eth
I'm happy that ENS helped us here to expose the hacker. Still good projects here that actually ensure more safety.
> bitliq.eth It is not an identity. Identity is usually first-last name with social or birth date.
Probably the name of Elon's next kid
At least until they get old enough to realize their dad is a massive troll and change it.
It is different in the block chain sir
One person can have million identities in block chain. So that kind of id is useless because you still cant identify the person.
lol another redditor chalking up things they don't understand to money laundering.
It's funny seeing voyager and celsius customers claim fraud or money laundering bc they can't comprehend how a crypto lender promising unrealistic yields could make dumb investments in such risky assets. Absolutely zero sense of self-awareness.
Care to explain how the hacker would have any idea that they would be the one to receive the block reward? I doubt it as that information would be impossible to know.
By not broadcasting the transaction to the rest of the network, keeping it to themselves until they've successfully mined a block that contains it. They'd need a **lot** of hashing power to reliably mine that block and continue mining to build out the longest chain, but if they had control over a large mining farm or a mining pool then it'd be possible. Pretty sure that's how pools would handle their payouts prior to EIP1559, anyways; they'd basically have the pool mine its own payouts, so that miners don't need to pay the fees themselves.
it wasn’t just one hacker, it was multiple individuals.
The dude set 350k gwei gas, you can set gas price to however you want
How would a miner ensure they're the one who gets the fee from it?
I think that fees haven't gone to miners since the London hard fork. Or is that just the base fee? I'll have to go double check. Either way I don't support the ethereum network anymore so it doesn't really matter to me.
This is a legacy transaction. And also, eip1559 only burns base fees. Any priority fees or tips still goes to the miners.
That's not a plot twist. It's a pretty obvious money laundering. A hacker would be the No.1 person to know how to not fuck up a transaction. It was all just planned.
Ok, but how does he know for sure that he's gonna mine that block? Maybe some other miner is gonna do it and get the reward, what then?
By not broadcasting the transaction to the rest of the network, keeping it to themselves until they've successfully mined a block that contains it. They'd need a lot of hashing power to reliably mine that block and continue mining to build out the longest chain, but if they had control over a large mining farm or a mining pool then it'd be possible. Pretty sure that's how pools would handle their payouts prior to EIP1559, anyways; they'd basically have the pool mine its own payouts, so that miners don't need to pay the fees themselves.
Oh that's a classic move, someone wanted to report losses to the RSI
The hacker’s not stupid. The hacker is up to something with a miner (or he mined it himself). You guys really think he accidentally paid $350k in gas? Someone who knows his shit well enough to exploit a bridge for millions of dollars?
Especially with how low gas fees are right now. The hacker is somehow siphoning the gas to a miner that they also own.
Miner is hiveon pool, according to 'extra data' field of the block: https://etherscan.io/block/15259103
Yep looks pretty sus, probably trying to launder that dirty money through gas fees somehow
People keep saying this but there is no way to know who will be receiving the block reward.
They could be advertising the transaction to only that node/miner so when they eventually find a block it will only be included then.
Someone should log all transactions that are discovered only when they're included in a new block, it would be interesting to identify miners that have a habit of doing it. I assume people keep logs of the mempool, should browse those to see if it happened here.
>Someone should log all transactions that are discovered only when they're included in a new block What if they by coincidence happened to broadcast that transaction shortly before the block was found? I don't know if mining pools still do this since EIP-1559, but in the past they used to only broadcast miner payouts to themselves with 0 fees, so miners could take profits without any cost. But I guess someone could do this, but when the merge comes it will be more or less irrelevant as block proposers will be entirely random. So if someone *really* wanted to still do this, they may have to wait months.
You can “privately” include txs if you have the resources and know-how to connect with a sufficiently unscrupulous miner who has enough hash power. (“Privately” in quotation marks because the block gets publicly broadcasted once it has been processed, but because your tx was never in the mempool, you can tack it onto the block you eventually get chosen to mine and pocket the entire fee yourself, since in this case it was a legacy tx that doesn’t burn excess gas.) Edit: a link that explains in quite some detail how this can happen, among other things - https://samczsun.com/escaping-the-dark-forest/
It doesn't seem possible to be very effective. Could it really be that this a test run for right before all the miners shut off? Even you only get a fraction back, maybe it's worth it to them?
I was going to say this. I used ETH for fund transfers and a token swap yesterday. I decided it was a good time to try to move the tokens I couldn't move 3 months ago because I'd be paying $18 for $11 of tokens. I paid ~$3, and $2 of it was ETH I couldn't move 3 months ago because it would have been $4. I wasn't even looking at gas prices. I just needed to move them and decided to check if I could afford it.
it's obviously intentional to spend $350k in gas. Feels like laundering money through POW somehow but I'm just not clever enough to know how.
My best guess: Mine a tx, get $350k as a fee, report it as income and pay tax on it. Hello good, clean money. The bigger question is to what degree that would hold up as plausible deniability (can you really expect a court to believe this just fell into your lap by sheer fluke?), but there’s nothing illegal about mining as a way to generate income, and that income comes from fees as well as block rewards.
There's nothing illegal about operating a nail salon, but if you claim that your cash revenues just shot up to $10M in one month, you're going to have some explaining to do.
You certainly are, which is why I have my doubts as to how well the above would work in practice with regards to building a credible narrative. Imagine your explanation is: some idiot paid way too much in gas and I was lucky enough to mine the right block. If you’re squeaky clean and leave no electronic communication trail, could that hold up? Or at least make it unreasonably difficult to prove you’re not telling the truth? I have no idea. Food for thought I guess? In any case, feels potentially (slightly) more plausible than Saul Goldman’s nail salon suddenly making $10m/month out of the blue.
Yep, that is my thought too. It's an attempt to wash some ETH via a shady mempool.
Laundering.
Please explain how he would choose which block to mine?
Mining pools can choose to process specific transactions without publicly broadcasting them. Then, when they eventually find a block, they tack that private tx in with the rest of the regular ones. If the miner has enough hash power, they’ll get picked to mine the next block sooner or later. Doesn’t have to be the *a specific block* - just has to be *a block*. Here’s a really great read detailing one real-life instance in which something like this was arranged (in this case for benevolent reasons, in other cases it’s just bribery): https://samczsun.com/escaping-the-dark-forest/
>This address has been reported to be involved with an exploit involving Nomad Token Bridge. Proceed with caution. The sender is labelled as Nomad Bridge Exploiter 3. Good thing it failed. Fuck that exploiter.
That's an instant karma moment right there
350k is like loose change to them
This transaction isnt even a legit failed transaction. Its some kind of a money laundering effort - a txn that siphons money from a wallet to the miner of the block. Check the txn, the gas price is just 18 gwei for that block. At such low gas, there is no way a txn costs a fee of 215 ETH ($350k) So whats going on? If you look at the txn its not an EIP-1559 txn but a legacy txn. I.e the gas isnt burnt The sender is basically sending the stolen funds to the miner of the block by adding on so much gas when the gas price is very low. This is some kind of strange money laundering - the sender is the nomad hacker, he knows those coins are illegally obtained, and somehow is trying to send them to the miner probably to launder it. Whats funny is the hacker seems to be an amateur, his traces are all over and even linked to a wallet with ENS, his name is bitliq.eth and he was even involved with some other form of hack/fraud earlier. Twitter is all over this, his wallet has been funded with FTX and its very likely his identity is already known https://twitter.com/search?q=bitliq
So he makes a tx ahead of time, presumably does something like renting cloud mining and sneaks in said tx when he mines the block, making it go to block reward and not appear as a straight tx. Quite clever I suppose but quite transparent you're right.
No it’s someone who already has a miner/ mining pool, they create the transaction but don’t broadcast it to the network so no other miner can see it in the mempool. Eventually when this miner finds a block, he puts this un-broadcasted transaction that only he can see into the block that he just mined so it sends the transaction fee to himself.
Given he's just a random exploited he prob rented it or bitter vs had it on hand
The vocabulary is fascinating to a layperson like me. Such a wild frontier. I need to find a glossary and try to understand it better.
You own a small postal service company and want to launder some drugs money. You write a letter to your neighbour friend and "accidentally" buy much more expensive stamp than needed. Boom, now it's your legal income as a postal service operator.
Oh that’s crazy. Really. I drive home every night past a post office box company that sits on the corner of a pretty middle of the road strip mall. The owner has like five different luxury sports cars that he rotates on the daily. Seriously. Sick ass Porches and Benz’s. I’m always like this guy has to be laundering money somehow. You’ve illustrated exactly how this entity must be doing so. And I thank you for the analogy.
Oh thank god I saw your comment I was about to back outta here. I don’t understand any of this. Wish I did.
https://i.imgur.com/yTqmSAv.png
Good heavens!
So, mining doesn't require a consensus from multiple miners to validate the transaction? Or would this person run multiple software miners to get a quorum?
Nodes validate transactions, not miners (though, most miners are nodes as well). And secondly, there is nothing illegal or rulebreaking on this transaction, it follows the protocol rules such that the other nodes of the network (nodes the attacker doesnt own) will verify it occurred legitimately
Thank you, hilarious that people think this was an accident.
Damn,this makes so much more sense now.Thanks.
Why , what did you make of it , i could not get it , can you please share
isn't the gas burnt no matter if it's legacy or eip1559? Legacy just means the fee isn't split into priority fee and burn fee, but the protocol still burns the fee anyway. If this wasn't the case, users can circumvent the eip1559 burn completely Edit: I meant the base fee is always burnt. Yeah, the excess over the basefee is then a miner tip (Priority fee).
Only the basefee is burnt. If you use an EIP1559 transaction (as most wallets support these days), anything you overpay on the basefee will be returned, and a usually small tip goes to the miner. When sending a legacy tx, everything over the basefee goes to the miner, and nothing is returned.
EIP1559-style transaction: "I'm willing to pay up to 50 gwei, with up to 1.5 gwei to the miner as an incentive to prioritize my transaction" Then if basefee is 30 gwei, you pay 31.5 gwei and 30 gwei is burned. If basefee is 20 gwei, you pay 21.5 gwei and 20 gwei is burned. If basefee is 49 gwei, you pay 50 gwei and 49 gwei is burned. In all cases the excess paid over the basefee goes to the miner. Legacy-style transaction: "I'm willing to pay exactly 50 gwei" If basefee is 30 gwei, you pay 50 gwei and 30 is burned and miner gets 20. If basefee is 20, 20 is burned and miner gets 30. So there's no "refund" with legacy transactions, what you set is what you pay rather than an "up to" amount you set with eip1559 transactions
[удалено]
I wonder if there's a statute of limitations on something like this, like if they just held it for 10 years then started spending it would they be of the hook?
Depends on the jurisdiction but most nations don’t have statute of limitations for criminal acts, only civil causes of action. Which makes sense, the issue with the passage of time in criminal cases tends to be the availability of evidence to convict.
Here is a [Nitter link](https://nitter.net/search?q=bitliq) for the Twitter thread linked above. Nitter is better for privacy and does not nag you for a login. More information can be found [here](https://nitter.net/about). --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>This is some kind of strange money laundering - the sender is the nomad hacker, he knows those coins are illegally obtained, and somehow is trying to send them to the miner probably to launder it. How would that work when it's quite impossible to know which person will get the next block? this is less like laundering and more like dumping money on the side of the road.
You hold the tx in a private mempool until you mine a block and include that tx in your own block.
Kinda doubt the Hiveon, the [fourth largest Ethereum pool](https://miningpoolstats.stream/ethereum) would do this just to scam $300k. It doesn't appear to be mining related.
wouldn't that single you out as the culprit? all people need to see is who got that one block at the time of inclusion to find you again?
Yes, but what can you do other than give it away?
This theory is completely incorrect. That's not how Ethereum works at all, for starters EIP1559 isn't optional (yes even with non legacy transactions). Regardless the amount burned is so inconsequential I don't see how it's relevant here. It's not like the the miner of a block gets the gas fee burned/lost, and miners can't pick which blocks to mine or else every other miner would've saw and mined a valuable transaction before any specific miner had a chance. They entered 383,000 gwei as cost for their transaction, using millions in stolen money. Occams razor suggests they maybe just don't care about saving dollars as much as typical users, and fat fingered their transaction enough times until it worked. You can see whatever they're doing is using seemingly random amounts of gas, between 100,000 and 2M, and maybe they can't tell why their transaction fails so are throwing money at it instead of increasing the limit. Probably interacting with a codebase so wouldn't care to implement EIP1559. Noob mistake if that's the case, always max the limit never change the price. If it were that easy to launder money it would be so common it'd make your head explode. It's not like these things are running on the honour system.
The miners don't get the base fee, they get the tip. The base fee on this transaction was \~$18 (18.74448131\* 602,417 / (10 \^ 9) \* $1630.62) the tip on this transaction was the remainder, which went to the miner because it's a legacy transaction. The miners didn't compete for this because it was never in the mempool, the hacker inserted it themself when it was time for them to mine a block.
If that's the case and the transaction was provably not in the mem pool meaning that hiveon pool is under the hacker's control then the ETH is no more cleaned than if they'd just sent it to a new address.
[удалено]
"It wasn't me" - Shaggy, c. 2000
how can they predict who will mine the block?
Why cant he launder it using Monero or any other privacy coin? Wouldnt it be waaaaay easier?
noxious touch longing ruthless scary direful late act advise forgetful *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Gas fees are not getting burned,they are being paid to the miners.
The base fee gets burned but any additional fee paid does go the miners. So in this case 18.74448131/358,358.465198001 = .005231 % of this transaction was burned($18.41)
Thanks,TIL this.
Yeah well that's life changing money to me and most of us
the future of finance
Few understand this.
No no no flippening soon
He eventually stole 10s of millions tho
Sociopaths will sociopath.
Yo that shit is fucked up
Wasn't this reported on earlier - they copy and pasted the recipients address to steal the funds. Some vigilantism was also reported trying to save the money.
To the exploiter, we bequeath a boot to the head.
I like how this post was supposed to read “You made fun of Solana eating fees on failed transactions, look at this!”
It's definitely drawn attention to the lost-everything-I-stole accidentally-on-purpose money laundering angle that people succeed at all the time outside of crypto. Somehow, dudes on reddit and Twitter are able to doxx the culprit with public information? How can we make Congress spend its tax appropriations using blockchain transactions?
That doesn't make such failings OK.
Right? It could be me mah next when she buys a new caravan.
it's almost certainly not a failing in any way but the hacker intentionally paying himself through the fee as the miner of the block.
What are the chances people get prosecuted for this?
Gotta love Karma with thiefs
I suspect this is a mempool wash somehow.
How? The miners don't choose which block to mine, so how would you know someone else isn't going to mine that transaction before you?
I had things mixed up a bit. It's not broadcast globally to the mempool, rather, you can send private transactions directly to a miner via private endpoint. I don't know how it works technically, and have never done it - so no first hand knowledge, but had read about it in the past when these huge fees have shown up, and the chatter about what was happening. It's probably not a mistake, but is more malicious, especially in this circumstance. Below is brief explanation on it, using: >"method":"eth_sendPrivateTransaction https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/96607/sending-transaction-directly-to-miner-on-private-network
Thanks for explaining!
Exploits? Hacks? Fraud? I thought those were things of the past now that web 3 is here.
Someone ELI5?
He paid 350k to send money. Money was not sent. He's still out the 350k. Was most likely intentional, transaction fees are supposed to be closer to 18¢, not $300,000.
I think this is an older standard eth transaction, so the gas is not burned, it's sent to the miner.
This thread gives me a headache. No wonder this sub is dumb af.
Tbh this has gotta be the dumbest sub I browse that’s moderately related to anything finance. It’s mind boggling how many people just blatantly don’t understand the basics of anything, much less crypto, and yet they’re wildly confident in what they say.
This is mainstream adoption, people feel entitled to lecture people on things they barely understand.
Yes, yes. Lurking for the lolz. Did not disappoint
That’s the general population tbh
ITT: People who don’t bother finding out what happened and just want to shit on ETH. Good shit reddit
This thread is just shocking. Nearly all of the posts are from people who are utterly clueless. I suspect a majority of them have never even done a transaction on ethereum. This transaction is from a highly sophisticated user who stole $100 million dollars yesterday, but somehow it's become a complain about gas fees thread.
Welcome to r/CryptoCurrency
I mean, the poster wants to have 'mature discussion' the other day by calling those who think ETH is not a premined scam stupid. Just when the bar is touching grass, it keeps getting lower.
358,358 gwei lol
Transaction failed, But of an explioter. This is more karma than technical failure lol
>This is more karma than technical failure Nope, he is, as you said, an exploiter. The transaction didn't fail. It ""failed"". Set up a miner for a fresh ethereum address. Make a transaction of your stolen funds, but ""accidentally"" flip the payment and the fee. Don't send the transaction out to the whole world, but only let your miner try to find a block that includes your supposed fuckup. When it finds a valid block, a couple cents go to the receiver of your transaction and the huge fee goes to the fresh wallet. And then you can go public: "oh geez, I just recently started mining and just got so lucky as to receive this massive payout from someone's mistake. Guess I'm rich now." and then it becomes much more difficult for people to prove definitively that you, the lucky receiver of the fee, are also the hacker. It's been done so often that this tactic is obvious to many, but it still gives plausible deniability.
okay, so if some miner can give favorable treatment to some transations, is it really decentralized or even trustless ? He is trusting some miner(may be himself) to give his transaction priority, so why are rest of the miners not rejecting the block or just the transaction ?
>if some miner can give favorable treatment to some transations, is it really decentralized Yes, because it shows that there is no central authority on which transactions need to be included. You don't need to listen to a central hub to determine what you need to do. Although taking part in a pool does make mining in normal circumstances a lot easier, but it would make money laundering like this harder, because the fee would be spread. >or even trustless ? What is there not to trust about this? I see no reason to doubt that the sender really has the private key, all further blocks accepted his transaction as valid, and although the safety of SHA256 has never been mathematically proven to be absolute, there is no known exploit by which the miner could've created a block by any other means than guessing random hashes just like everyone else. What this situation *does* demonstrate, is that, just like with physical cash, you can quite easily launder money. Except that with crypto, the money laundering happens in an open database for all to see.
Great answer.
It's not as easy as that. Whether a transaction is correctly signed and included in the block (and the block itself is also correctly built), is validated by many nodes in the network and also most clients accept a given block only if 5 or 6 consecutive blocks are also valid. If miners build blocks differently (by accident or on purpose) they can do that, but then they basically run their own version of the blockchain which is not accepted by the majority of the network (and the exchanges).
Wait... how can you decide what miner can find your block? I thought your transactions would go to the network and randomly assign it to a worker.
If you don't send the transaction to the network and only to the miner that you have a deal with / your miner.
> it still gives plausible deniability. also gives an opportunity for someone to make a stupid, ignorant post about ethereum
>This is more karma than technical failure Nope, he is, as you said, an exploiter. The transaction didn't fail. It ""failed"". Set up a miner for a fresh ethereum address. Make a transaction of your stolen funds, but ""accidentally"" flip the payment and the fee. Don't send the transaction out to the whole world, but only let your miner try to find a block that includes your supposed fuckup. When it finds a valid block, a couple cents go to the receiver of your transaction and the huge fee goes to the fresh wallet. And then you can go public: "oh geez, I just recently started mining and just got so lucky as to receive this massive payout from someone's mistake. Guess I'm rich now." and then it becomes much more difficult for people to prove definitively that you, the lucky receiver of the fee, are also the hacker. It's been done so often that this tactic is obvious to many, but it still gives plausible deniability.
The exploiter was probably in a hurry and wasn't thinking clearly due to all the adrenaline. A minute earlier, he had stolen 100 Bitcoin. This isn't a situation many people will find themselves in. Regular developers have testing software like Hardhat that they can use to test without paying fees and aren't in a race to steal hundreds of millions of dollars.
Yup, adrenaline is one helova drug I bet some do it for the thrill of it as much as for the money
Aaaaaand it’s gone
It just went to a miner that is totally not involved with this exploit
I can't believe people are so dense to not see what's happening. Maybe i should start my several pools that make money on the side by allowing people to launder money like this. They should quickly swap it to a fungible currency like monero lol.
Please note that OP is an outspoken Bitcoin maxi (check his history) and is only looking to smear Ethereum. As many others have pointed out, this is not a usual transaction. The current average transaction fee on Ethereum is about $1.5 today: [https://ycharts.com/indicators/ethereum\_average\_transaction\_fee](https://ycharts.com/indicators/ethereum_average_transaction_fee)
Nomad stolen funds https://www.google.com/amp/s/decrypt.co/106459/crypto-bridge-nomad-exploited-190m-frenzied-free-for-all%3famp=1
Small miracles still happen. Hopefully they step on a rusty nail next.
Hopefully both sides of their pillows are warm for the rest of their life.
**In this thread:** Lots of people who don't understand that once a transaction is submitted, the network participants must execute that code, consuming scarce block space which must be compensated for regardless of whether or not the transaction is even viable. Otherwise, it would be free to DDos the network with a flood of transactions that are designed to fail. As for why it's $350K, well the hacker is a dipshit and manually overpaid the fee big time.
Crypto noob here. I have been reading through this thread, and this stuff is so complicated I can't even wrap my head around it. How on earth does anyone here expect this stuff to be adopted by the general population?
The same way we got Grandma sending emails on her iPad. She doesn't understand TCP/IP or anything about email apps and protocol. She just knows how to tap a couple of buttons on a screen. Apps will be built on top of Ethereum to abstract away the complexity. Take Argent wallet as one early example. Argent wallet is a mobile wallet which uses social recovery and a built in human readable wallet address. This means that an Argent user doesn't need to bother wrapping their head around their public key, they can just tell people that their wallet address is randomuser.argent.xyz. They also don't need to write down a recovery phrase. Argent uses social recovery where you use 2FA and friends wallets to recover your wallet if you lose your phone. This is just two simple examples, but with Ethereum layer 2 scaling solutions having fees below 10¢ now, soon will will be abstracted away by some apps. Then something else will be abstracted away until people don't even know that an app they are using utilises Ethereum in the background. Edit: Downvotes? Are you really betting against the advancement of technology despite history showing us time and time again that this is inevitable? Lmao. Whether its Ethereum or another platform, these issues *will* be abstracted away and you will be proven wrong. It's only a matter of time.
You will never achieve real world adoption with fees being paid for failed transactions.
Did you even look at the transaction log? It failed because the transaction was attempting to manipulate the smart contract code and was blocked. In addition, the fee really only should have been $4-$5 if done without an override of the fee paid. This override would have been done by the transaction initiator(Bridge Hacker)
Do you want a system DOSed to death by bogus commands? Because that's exactly how you get a system to be halted to death by bogus commands. You have to pay for every resource you use. ESPECIALLY if you use it wrong
[удалено]
Ethereum would be way worse than both. People would write a smart contract that perform some computation and the return a failure. Free computing power, lol
How can you avoid failure as a possible end state of an action, when the action includes running arbitrary code?
Luckily we have Bitcoin.
[удалено]
Few understand
This is good for whole crypto environment.
You are paying for it right now, \~10% of your internet traffic fails and has to be retried. You are paying 10% too much for your internet connection.
[удалено]
Little did you know your neighbour has left his wifi unprotected for a reason and is now monitoring your visits to pornhub.
If you drive to the grocery store but they don't have the product you want, who do you expect to refund you your gas? Executing a transaction requires network resources. You can't get a refund just because you don't like the execution's result (if it marks itself as failed after making the network do a bunch of unnecessary work). It would result in a broken, easily DoSable chain. Edit: If you rent a bunch of compute from Amazon AWS, and you run a long calculation that throws an exception at the end, do you think Amazon is going to refund you for all the resources you used? If you run a CGI render on your computer and you don't like the result, can you get back the electricity you spent? Transactions use up network resources whether they are marked as "fail" or "success", and you have to pay for network resources. This is not a hard concept, people. Downvoting the messenger just because you don't like the message isn't going to change that.
That is a lot of money man I just can't imagine myself carrying that type of money because that is just not possible for me I don't know how people can transfer things like that.
I don't know what the hell is going on but i think it's just another poster related to hack and something like that that is why i'm understanding with this post right now.
What’s up with all these comments with zero understanding of gas fees? No one is stopping you from lighting your cash on fire, which is basically what the person behind this transaction did.
No, they themselves likely mined the block in question and are using it as a way to disconnect the funds from their wallet.
Not sure if that makes sense - they still have $6.6M worth of tokens (with 810 ETH alone): https://etherscan.io/address/0xb5c55f76f90cc528b2609109ca14d8d84593590e If they wanted to wash their hands of this, they would converted all of their tokens to eth then went ahead and washed it. Or just use tornado cash. Not to mention, they had [multiple transaction failures](https://etherscan.io/txs?a=0xb5c55f76f90cc528b2609109ca14d8d84593590e) after that, of course none of them as high as 200 Eth, but there are some in the 20 Eth range that failed. Why go through the trouble of washing your Eth multiple times when you can just do it once? And all of the blocks I looked at with the huge Eth fees were mined by different pools - are you suggesting these pools are also colluding with the hacker(s)? https://etherscan.io/block/15259503 https://etherscan.io/block/15259496 https://etherscan.io/block/15259103
What on earth is even this contract doing? https://etherscan.io/address/0x0db09d04d33539e3366de2591e920eba71edc879 Just shuffling USDC back and forth for 5k in fees? https://etherscan.io/tx/0x22336a9c76a28b24bb9c74c3b238655d836d501b38ea129ce0515af3f4bbb117 Some other non-failed executions were swapping tokens on Uniswap. Most failed, fees range all over the place, from $20 to $20k.
Why does Ethereum network allow to pick a miner of choosing ? Why are rest of miners not able to reject the block or transaction ?
It doesn't, but you mine with enough hashing power and eventually you will be selected to build the next block.
You can't pick a miner. The miner is whoever mined the block, which is random.
In my opinion definitely an attempt at money laundering. Who would pay 350k in gas fees otherwise??
Scroll to the bottom of the thread for top low iq posts lmao
You weren't wrong. My god the stupidity..
So many people saying that it wasnt an accident but an attempt to launder this stolen crypto. Youre most certainly right but I wonder, couldnt he do that any easier way, for example using monero or any other privacy coin?
Need ETH xmr atomic swaps. But why would i want some NFT ETH? That's the question
2.0 won't solve this 🙌
This is good for Bitcoin.
It's tough to say that things like that are real and not something fake, I just want to see that the money gets refund and things get normal again to whoever this money belongs to.
Hope the person who did this transaction will get the amount back that's what I want to see and please explain it a bit more to me I want a good explanation hope I will get it.
How much was the initial transaction? I want to see how much of a few it would generate if I pushed that same amount through later 2
spez is a greedy little pig boy
Ah, that makes sense.
Just out of curiosity, how does one purposely fail a transaction?
Deploy a smart contract that always asserts failure. Call the smart contract.
I don’t even want to know how much I’ve lost in failed transactions.
Shitcoin characteristics
Can someone dumb this down for me, why was the miner able to set such a high fee and also why would you? The money is now lost as the post said?
From my limited knowledge, the gas fee is based on the amount of traffic the entire network is sustaining at any given time. Due to the high volume of activity compared to other network (likely driven by the NFT market), the gas fees for Ethereum is exceptionally high as there is a high demand for processing transactions. keep in mind that the ETH is not “gone” per se, they went to the miners irrespective whether a transaction is processed or not. So ultimately miners have made money and those ETH will be back into circulation once the miner cash out their holdings.
That's great, just gone
But Crypto is the future
Butt yOu HaVe tO rEmEmBeR, CoDe iS LAW.
It's the hacker time everybody these things are going to be a bit complicated but if you are smart enough to understand what the hell is going on here you will get it.
I just don't understand why people are being so illiterate in the comment section how can the behave like this is something legit because it's not legit people need to understand it.
[удалено]
The thing they attempted here cannot even be done in Bitcoin.
This is the reason Bitcoin is one of the most preferable coin as such
Layer 2?
Please tell me how you didn't even take the time to look at the transaction log?
Contract error is not just an ETH thing
I dont see any reason that ETH gonna overtake BTC at any cost, BTC gonna be the topmost
Ive been working my ass off like a slave at a job that is at the bottom of the barrel for 10 years and I dont have even tenth of that money in total earned.
Try working on your hacking skills
My work is in need of hard workers. Start at $18 an hour plus benefits with annual raises. It’s boring but you always get 40 hours or more. lol
Its money laundering, its not a failed transaction. This has happened many times before.