> A May 27 transfer of nearly 64 bitcoins landed at a virtual address to which the FBI gained access, providing an opportunity to get a warrant and pounce.
Yeah this was confusing to me as well. I assumed that it was related to the devices that were seized[0] from the darkside group. Maybe this means the keys/wallet was is what the FBI gained access to.
[0] From the article:
> On May 13, DarkSide told affiliates that its servers and other infrastructure had been seized, but didn’t specify where or how.
4 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 15.9 ms ] threadWhat does that mean?
[0] From the article: > On May 13, DarkSide told affiliates that its servers and other infrastructure had been seized, but didn’t specify where or how.
How they got it I've yet to see an article on.
[1]: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1402056/downl...
Edit: My assumption is that the blacked out portion names an informant who made the transfer.
One thing i don’t see discussed in that conversation is that the payment itself becomes a liability to the criminals.
That said, there’s no guarantee that the ransomware is no longer in a position to retaliate.