Ironically DPRK would probably make the most money if they just ran honest banks and exchanges without the FATF and KYC nonsense, as a sort of refuge from regulation that island nations used to provide. There is massive demand and few options.
Crypto is cut-off from the international financial system but can be bridged by P2P. DPRK could allow, for example, exchanges without KYC that accept US customers. There is "sky high" demand for such a product (as in trillions). Russia used to have eBTC and it was one of the highest volumed exchanges.
My guess is that despite the DPRK appearing to be independent (nuclear et al), it really is not. NK envisaged starting not just an exchange but a whole "deregulated/free" city but China prevented them from doing that.
A random US Citizen cannot wire USD to NK. Their bank is not going to allow it. Their credit card company is not going to allow it. If you try to mail physical USD the USPS is going to confiscate it [1].
So, this leaves a US Citizen buying crypto on a KYC exchange and then transferring it to the NK exchange. Why? Just keep the crypto on the KYC exchange at this point.
I vouched your comment, it appears yours are dead by default. Being cut off from the financial system I'm interested in hearing your opinion on what that is like.
Unfortunately I'm afraid to venture too far into how/why I think it would work and being Virgil Griffith'd, and intentionally leaving it as a pure speculation on a hypothetical.
> This can come in the form of a technical interview, where the target is instructed to clone a git repository [containing malware] and to install the dependencies and/or run the project
Ironically DPRK would probably make the most money if they just ran honest banks and exchanges without the FATF and KYC nonsense, as a sort of refuge from regulation that island nations used to provide. There is massive demand and few options.
I don't understand how banks in a country that is completely cut off from the international financial system would be profitable.
Crypto is cut-off from the international financial system but can be bridged by P2P. DPRK could allow, for example, exchanges without KYC that accept US customers. There is "sky high" demand for such a product (as in trillions). Russia used to have eBTC and it was one of the highest volumed exchanges.
My guess is that despite the DPRK appearing to be independent (nuclear et al), it really is not. NK envisaged starting not just an exchange but a whole "deregulated/free" city but China prevented them from doing that.
They do have other free enterprises, for example see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rason_Special_Economic_Zone
How is this working?
A random US Citizen cannot wire USD to NK. Their bank is not going to allow it. Their credit card company is not going to allow it. If you try to mail physical USD the USPS is going to confiscate it [1].
So, this leaves a US Citizen buying crypto on a KYC exchange and then transferring it to the NK exchange. Why? Just keep the crypto on the KYC exchange at this point.
[1]: https://pe.usps.com/text/imm/il_015.htm#ep1639364
I vouched your comment, it appears yours are dead by default. Being cut off from the financial system I'm interested in hearing your opinion on what that is like.
Unfortunately I'm afraid to venture too far into how/why I think it would work and being Virgil Griffith'd, and intentionally leaving it as a pure speculation on a hypothetical.
> Use an isolated device (such as a Chromebook) for signing transactions
Can a Chromebook function as an isolated device for long?
Not in the UK that's for sure.
Nor anywhere else, being an American company bound by the CLOUD Act. [1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act
Related ongoing thread:
Bybit loses $1.5B in hack but can cover loss, CEO confirms - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43130143
> This can come in the form of a technical interview, where the target is instructed to clone a git repository [containing malware] and to install the dependencies and/or run the project
Jesus