After 12 Russian Officers Indictment, Diverse Claims on Digital Currency
There are at least two opinions or claims on cryptocurrencies after a team of Robert Mueller has indicted 12 Russian intelligence officers for their alleged involvement in the American elections campaign. The primary reason behind hackers using the digital coin was the anonymity. However, the event has created two opposite reactions. One of the views is the need for additional regulation in the crypto sector. The other alternative is to make the public ledger more traceable, which would curb its usage for criminal activities.
Representative, Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO), has reacted to the increased regulation move. He said that in the absence of the digital coin sector refusing or not competent enough to protect against Russian attacks, then the Congress has no option but to take its own course of action. In any case, he has called for steps to curb cryptocurrency use since it is threatening the security of the United States, ethnews.com reported. The 12 Russian agents were accused of hacking the campaign of Democratic National Committee and Hilary Clinton in 2016.
The comments from Cleaver have attracted criticisms on the predicted lines. Some of the supporters of the digital coins believe that if Mueller’s team was able to find that Russia was behind the hack, then it was due to the public ledger of bitcoin. This meant that the cryptocurrency is more traceable compared to fiat currency. There were also more opinions that are similar to that of Cleaver. For instance, Forbes article indicated that the indictment had absolved bitcoin from the charge of being not traceable.
The article said “A highly traceable transaction registry, much more so than the U.S. dollar for example, which only triggers red flags at large transaction thresholds … The bitcoin blockchain, by contrast, is a public ledger and the movements of capital and their destinations, albeit in hashed digital addresses or wallets, are highly traceable, widely known and at a much lower transaction value.”
However, this point of contention is disputed by others since the indictment has never pointed out that bitcoin ledger has driven Mueller’s team to close-in on the suspects. On the other hand, an email suggesting a bitcoin payment has driven the team to focus on the ledger. Therefore, the ledger has only confirmed the suspicion that the transaction happened with bitcoin.
Another point was that the indictment hinted that the investigating team found it tough because of the usage of digital coins. Its contention is that the usage enabled conspirators to circumvent any direct relationships with conventional financial service providers. This allowed them to buck not only the greater inquiry of their source of funds but also their identities.
Though the digital currencies provide some amount of traceability, the advantage that it could be easily sent across the borders cannot be undermined. Investigators are yet to provide clear-cut evidence of how cryptocurrency is used to manage criminal activity compared to other means. In any case, some of the experts think that the virtual asset emergence has not created any fresh challenges to either national security or the law enforcement authorities. That is because those challenges were there even before its emergence too.