Need Bitcoin Knowledge - Mueller Report Bitcoin Doesn't Make Sense

CNN

I have many questions:

Russian operatives used cryptocurrency at almost every stage in their online efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, according to Special Counsel Robert Mueller's final report on his investigation.

Systems used in the hacking of the Democratic Party were paid for using Bitcoin, as were online hosting services that supported websites which published hacked materials and were used in the targeting of disinformation at American voters. The hacking and disinformation campaigns accounted for the vast majority of Russia's online efforts to influence the 2016 election.

All Bitcoin transactions are posted to an immutable public ledger, known as a blockchain. While the blockchain doesn't contain obvious identifying information about the person behind a transaction, once someone figures out a user is responsible for one transaction it can be possible to track their entire Bitcoin history.

... trading Bitcoins on exchanges usually requires users to set up Bitcoin wallets that are tied to an email address. Federal investigators were able to access at least some of the email accounts used in the operation, which, Cotten says, would have made tracing Bitcoin transactions a lot easier.
Investigators' access to the "the other side of the blockchain equation," as he described it, was important because, "Rather than having to search the blockchain for clues, they already had all of the receipts demonstrating which accounts were under the GRU's control."

The Russians used stolen and false identities in setting up some of these accounts, according to Mueller's team, but had used some of the same accounts to purchase servers and website domains involved in the hacking of the Democratic Party and the publishing of the hacked materials, Mueller's indictment outlines. That, Cotten said, would have made it easier for investigators to tie the case together.

A virtual private network, a way to obscure the location from which a user is accessing the internet, was also purchased using Bitcoin, Mueller found; that network was used to login at @Guccifer_2, the infamous Twitter account that communicated with Wikileaks and others, Mueller's investigation found.

So...
1. The only website known is DCLeaks which was paid for through Bitcoin using a "stolen or false identity"
2. used "some" of the same stolen or false identities to purchase the hardware used
3. this alludes to more than one domain but only one domain is stated in Mueller report, DCLeaks
4. the only two known places to have published the leaks are WikiLeaks and DCLeaks, so does this mean one or both used bitcoin to pay for their hosting?
5. What is this about once you determine a user is responsible for one transaction, you can track their bitcoin history about?
6. How would federal investigators accessing "stolen or false" identities used in setting up email addresses be able to tie these to actual GRU officers names and "made tracing Bitcoin transactions a lot easier? I got really lost here.
7. They make this elusive reference to "the other side of the blockchain equation" as if it's the Holy Grail. It gave them "all the receipts demonstrating which accounts were under the GRU's control." Come again?

Here's what Mueller's report states:

... a bitcoin mining operation to secure bitcoins used to purchase computer infrastructure used in hacking operations.

Unit 26165 officers appear to have stolen thousands of emails and attachments, which were later released by WikiLeaks in July 2016.

What does all of this word salad garbage mean?
It still remains very unclear to me how 'untraceable' Bitcoin was traced back to GRU officers used false or stolen identities to purchase hardware and domain(s)? all because of some federal investigators unlocking email accounts that were still false and having some "other side of the blockchain equation" that gave them GRU accounts. Confusing stuff.

Written by angry Mueller Team Members 😎

The "20 Mule Team Borax" ...........(pre-Bleachbit technology)

a reply to: xuenchen

12 Angry Mules.

Or 20?

a reply to: ucanthandlethetruth

Im sorry, I don't fully understand it either and I probably never will until I actually participate in some crypto transactions/trades and I'm too afraid I will get scammed to try it because I don't know anyone I trust to teach me.

Its a vicious cycle I tells ye.

But I would not mind seeing some activity in this thread. Maybe someone who I trust a little bit will have some worthwhile info.


I was under the assumption that you could only track where a bitcoin (or fraction of a bitcoin as the case may be) has been spent. I didnt know that about tracking every bitcoin transaction a Person has made. I thought anonymity was part of the allure?

I haven't read the report, but white hat tracking and cyber intelligence has come a long way since the days of "hack the Gibson".

They may have operated a large number of nodes on the Bitcoin network, and traced traffic involving the known public addresses involved.

The complicated tracking method here, for a large number of nodes, is a similar idea to cell tower triangulation. They can trace network packet propogation, and determine a general region from where the transaction originated geographically. If they have any cross reference information, it gets much easier from that point. They can subpoena ISP's involved, and if the individual had any cookies shared publicly or with any involved web traffic, it only takes 2 subpoenas from there to fully nail down an identity and confirm. (Sure smart people use VPN, proxy, or Tor services, but one single mistake is all it takes to find you.) Tor isn't foolproof 100%. We found out within the past few years, government agencies operate a large number of Tor nodes, so that they can track Tor traffic by network propogation speed as well. If they have a list of potential suspects, squeezing down to a geographical area the size of just one county, is very manageable by an investigative team. If the crime is a big enough deal, subpoenas get filed, and the likes of cell carriers, ISP's, social media, or cloud services, (Facebook/Google) will absolutely turn over your information.

If they match any of the traffic up, it becomes compelling evidence in court, it opens the floodgates for warrants to allow forensic searching, and at that point if you DO have anything incriminating, it will be found.

a reply to: 3n19m470

I'd write more but I have to leave, so I'll say what I can in like 1 minute.
Every bitcoin transaction is traceable, but a person can hide their identity, and/or obscure the source of the bitcoin transaction. The source can be obscured by "mixing" the bitcoin, for example if 100 users send bitcoin to a mixing service, and then the mixing service randomly sends bitcoin to the intended destination... You would only be able to see that user A sent bitcoin to a mixing service, and the mixing service sent bitcoin to 100 different locations.
Now, if a mysterious user A were to send bitcoin to location 3, 5 and 8, and someone were to discover that person A is John and that John sent the bitcoin to location 3, they would also be able to tell that John sent the bitcoin to location 5 and 8 as well. Does this help?
The key here is keeping your real identity separate from the source of the bitcoin you are sending.

a reply to: ucanthandlethetruth

Bitcoin is supposed to be fairly anonymous and untraceable but the implication in this is that it is not actually true and that one can identify transactions as having a particular 'owner', despite the other details of the owner being obfuscated.

What does all of this word salad garbage mean?

Absolutely nothing.

The GRU would know this.

You can't believe nothing those snip hats say.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: ucanthandlethetruth

Bitcoin is supposed to be fairly anonymous and untraceable but the implication in this is that it is not actually true and that one can identify transactions as having a particular 'owner', despite the other details of the owner being obfuscated.

This is what I thought and it has some uh publicity? implications for Bitcoin. Confidentiality was supposed to be most of the appeal.

I know this is an aside, but I wish they would quit implying that the stuff "stolen the Ruskies" or whomever is somehow less than factual. They were actual emails detailing DNC shadiness of epic proportions.

Intent aside, it was legit info, not 'disinformation'.

And how did that info "help" trump?

How did it Convince Hilary not to visit Michigan at all during the 2016 campaign?

How did it convince her to call off the rescue team at BenGhazi?

Did these bitcoin accounts buy a secret server, break into her home, and leave the server in the broom closet?

Did they wipe her server??

You mean like with a cloth????

Is that what collusion looks like???

originally posted by: Graysen
And how did that info "help" trump?

How did it Convince Hilary not to visit Michigan at all during the 2016 campaign?

How did it convince her to call off the rescue team at BenGhazi?

Did these bitcoin accounts buy a secret server, break into her home, and leave the server in the broom closet?

Did they wipe her server??

You mean like with a cloth????

Is that what collusion looks like???

Lol, magic!
Apparently they are supernatural yet idiotic.

This is what we’re supposed to blindly believe?

originally posted by: Graysen
And how did that info "help" trump?

How did it Convince Hilary not to visit Michigan at all during the 2016 campaign?

How did it convince her to call off the rescue team at BenGhazi?

Did these bitcoin accounts buy a secret server, break into her home, and leave the server in the broom closet?

The server wasn't particularly secret.

Owning a business server is not illegal. I have a stack of them in my home office.

Did they wipe her server??

Her office surrendered the fully operational server and admin password to FBI & DHS investigators very early on in the investigation.

The attempt to wipe old mail exports (.PST files) from the server were inept as the mail database (.EDB file/s) was intact and still had all messages on it dating back to the initial installation of the server. Remember that the issue was that the IT support didn't properly wipe the messages and that these were then compromised by hackers.

That was how the FBI could identify that there were thousands of e-mails that potentially posed a security risk and that should not have been sent via a less secure server.

You mean like with a cloth????

Clearly a sarcastic remark. implying that Hillary realized the stupidity of the allegation.

Is that what collusion looks like???

Clearly having emails on an insecure server, that is illegally hacked by a group sponsored by the government of an opposing state, isn't collusion by any definition.

Can you explain to me exactly what you think collusion looks like - in legal terms?

Or is it that you are just using random words that others are all talking about?