When courts control DeFi

From: POLITICO's Digital Future Daily - Monday Feb 27,2023 09:02 pm
Presented by TikTok: How the next wave of technology is upending the global economy and its power structures
Feb 27, 2023 View in browser
 
POLITICO's Digital Future Daily newsletter logo

By Ben Schreckinger

Presented by TikTok

With help from Derek Robertson

Union Jack flag and Big Ben

Britain’s flag waves in front of the bell known as Big Ben in London. | Matt Dunham/AP Photo

Score one for state oversight of decentralized finance.

Last week, a London court ordered a DeFi developer to enable the transfer of $140 million worth of hacked crypto from one of its user’s wallets to a court-designated recipient, a lawyer for the company tells DFD.

This, of course, runs counter to one of the foundational tenets of decentralized finance: that third parties like courts and service providers are not supposed to be able to control users’ funds.

In practice, though, DeFi can’t always deliver on that promise.

On Thursday, we looked at a couple of recent trends that showed the challenges regulators face in exerting control over decentralized finance networks. But DeFi firms and users face their own challenges in making the networks as decentralized and immutable as intended.

Even when the core blockchains at the heart of DeFi function as advertised, DeFi activity often relies on centralized service providers to make it more efficient and accessible. Those service providers are more susceptible to government-mandated interventions than the blockchains they connect to. In some cases, the service providers have back doors that let them override users who falsely believed their transactions were irreversible.

And that, in turn, gives governments an opening to exert control over DeFi.

In this case, the long arm of the state was able to reach onto a blockchain and yank a bunch of digital loot away from someone that was not supposed to have it, with the help of some eagle-eyed hackers.

This particular saga began last year when a hacker took advantage of a bug in the Wormhole Bridge — software that provides inter-connection between several different DeFi blockchains — to make off with 120,000 Ether (These software “bridges” between blockchains often contain weak links that allow hackers to steal funds). At the time, the haul was worth more than $300 million, making it one of the larger crypto heists of the year.

Eventually the hacker deposited the funds in a crypto wallet provided by Oasis, a developer of front-end software that makes it easier for users to engage in DeFi (Oasis was in no way implicated in the hack). The wallet was billed as non-custodial, meaning the user controls the funds with cryptographic keys.

But there were caveats. Like many DeFi developers, Oasis built a multi-signature override — basically a back door that requires multiple private keys to open — into its software.

This would let the company intervene in case the software got hacked and it needed to undo the damage, according to the lawyer for Oasis, Ann Sofie Cloots.

A group of white hat hackers discovered the back door, and that it could be used to take the hacker’s funds away, she said. The white hats alerted Oasis earlier this month, and the court ordered that the back door be exploited.

In a series of transactions that began on Tuesday, it was.

Crypto media company Blockworks took note of the unusual transactions and described their mechanics in a research note published on Friday. This was followed by a statement from Oasis revealing the court order.

The episode illustrates the gap between the vision of DeFi purists and the messy reality of DeFi activity today, which often relies on centralized service providers whose software contains both bugs and intentional back doors.

Even a hacker sophisticated enough to pull off one of the largest crypto heists on record was unable to steer clear of these traps.

And even when back doors are built on purpose to thwart crime, they are controversial — the subject of long-running fights about digital governance that extend beyond crypto.

For years, governments have sought to mandate back doors into encrypted digital communications tools — like WhatsApp — citing the need to gather intelligence and fight crime. Civil society groups like Human Rights Watch have pushed back, citing privacy concerns.

Meanwhile, federal law enforcement officials in the U.S. have successfully clawed back stolen crypto funds on several occasions, though their exact methods are often unknown.

In cases when a special back door is not available, participants in crypto networks can still band together to reverse illicit transactions. Most famously, a majority of the Ethereum network agreed to reverse a theft of stolen funds in 2016. But that decision prompted heated debate among its users and a schism in the network when a rump group of crypto purists refused to recognize the reversal.

So, while a company might normally celebrate its role in helping to restore hundreds of millions of dollars in funds to their rightful owners, Oasis is instead emphasizing that it had no other choice.

“There’s no way for a UK entity to just say we’re going to ignore a court order,” Cloots told DFD. “It wasn’t a pleasant situation for our team to be in.”

 

A message from TikTok:

We work hard to create a positive experience for teens. That's why accounts for anyone aged 13-15 are set to private by default without access to direct messaging. It’s also why we developed Family Pairing tools that let parents link their account to their teens’ and decide together what settings work best. Set screen time limits, decide who can comment on their content and more, so everyone can use TikTok safely and responsibly. Learn more.

 
citizens (virtually) united

Over the weekend the European Union kicked off its “citizens’ council” meant to solicit feedback on the metaverse, with its recommendations to be sent to the European Commission for consideration as it tackles regulation in the virtual world.

Patrick Grady, a policy analyst at the Center for Data Innovation, was there and recapped the experience in a blog published this morning, providing a few key takeaways from a weekend that featured a virtual Bruegel Room, some airing of digital grievances, and, for some reason, an improv comedy troupe.

Despite Grady’s praise that the session was “A leading experiment in democratic policymaking and invigorating to hear citizens input and experience on a pressing initiative,” the post features plenty of negative feedback for the Commission. Grady argues that the Commission “stack[ed] the deck” by loading the panels and programming with its own staffers, giving the EU citizens in attendance a relatively one-dimensional view of the nascent VR industry, among other things.

He added in an email to DFD that “The Commission should pay for and observe the process but remain impartial to it because it is for the citizens, not them, to decide what the topics and priorities should be,” and the next council “must not make the same mistakes.” — Derek Robertson

 

A message from TikTok:

Advertisement Image

 
don't panic

Some very smart people are kind of freaking out about AI.

And not about its capacity to disrupt the service industry, or “end homework” — rather, they’re worried about the possibility it could kill us all.

But not everyone is so chagrined. Rohit Krishnan, the VC and tech blogger I spoke to about the subject in DFD last month, has published a new essay that throws some additional cold water on the panic.

“If you are going to be the type of person so invested in empirical truth that you would like a meta-study of plenty of peer-reviewed studies to understand the efficacy of Ivermectin on Covid-19, then perhaps you should apply similar epistemic standards to predicting the future before jumping ahead to updating on our impending doomsday and prescribe courses of action,” Krishnan writes. (Ouch.)

Krishnan makes at length a case similar to the one he made when we spoke, saying that while the AI apocalypse some envision isn’t impossible, it’s improbable on the order of various other sci-fi catastrophes, and humanity would do much better for itself to think harder about how we develop and govern it in the here-and-now. — Derek Robertson

 

JOIN POLITICO ON 3/1 TO DISCUSS AMERICAN PRIVACY LAWS: Americans have fewer privacy rights than Europeans, and companies continue to face a minefield of competing state and foreign legislation. There is strong bipartisan support for a federal privacy bill, but it has yet to materialize. Join POLITICO on 3/1 to discuss what it will take to get a federal privacy law on the books, potential designs for how this type of legislation could protect consumers and innovators, and more. REGISTER HERE.

 
 
tweet of the day

It’ll only be 2025 when the first AI chatbot stands trial for convincing someone to commit murder, issuing in a tech civil war that turns octogenarian 1980s sci fi authors into four-star generals and strategists

the future in 5 links

Stay in touch with the whole team: Ben Schreckinger (bschreckinger@politico.com); Derek Robertson (drobertson@politico.com); Mohar Chatterjee (mchatterjee@politico.com); Steve Heuser (sheuser@politico.com); and Benton Ives (bives@politico.com). Follow us @DigitalFuture on Twitter.

Ben Schreckinger covers tech, finance and politics for POLITICO; he is an investor in cryptocurrency.

If you’ve had this newsletter forwarded to you, you can sign up and read our mission statement at the links provided.

 

A message from TikTok:

TikTok offers an abundance of tools to help parents create a positive experience for their teens. For starters, it sets accounts for anyone aged 13 to 15 to private by default, and restricts access to direct messaging. TikTok also offers a Family Pairing tool that gives parents the ability to manage various account and privacy settings for even more peace of mind. They can link their own account to their teens’ and then decide together which settings work best for their unique needs. This encourages ongoing conversations around reasonable screen time limits and responsible messaging practices. TikTok has always been a place where people can express themselves openly and creatively. With these tools, and open dialogue, parents can help ensure it stays that way for their teens. Learn more at tiktok.com/safety.

 
 

DOWNLOAD THE POLITICO MOBILE APP: Stay up to speed with the newly updated POLITICO mobile app, featuring timely political news, insights and analysis from the best journalists in the business. The sleek and navigable design offers a convenient way to access POLITICO's scoops and groundbreaking reporting. Don’t miss out on the app you can rely on for the news you need, reimagined. DOWNLOAD FOR iOSDOWNLOAD FOR ANDROID.

 
 
 

Follow us on Twitter

Ben Schreckinger @SchreckReports

Derek Robertson @afternoondelete

Steve Heuser @sfheuser

Benton Ives @BentonIves

 

Follow us

Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Instagram Listen on Apple Podcast
 

To change your alert settings, please log in at https://www.politico.com/_login?base=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com/settings

This email was sent to by: POLITICO, LLC 1000 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, VA, 22209, USA

Please click here and follow the steps to .

More emails from POLITICO's Digital Future Daily

Feb 23,2023 09:19 pm - Thursday

DeFi vs. the regulators, by the numbers

Feb 22,2023 09:02 pm - Wednesday

Metaverse winter sets in

Feb 21,2023 09:02 pm - Tuesday

AI chatbots meet the press

Feb 15,2023 10:37 pm - Wednesday

AI's political bias problem