“Cyber extortion is unfortunately a rapidly growing threat and highlights the ever-growing need for corporations to remain vigilant in cybersecurity efforts,” said Sean Burke, Acting Special Agent in Charge of FBI Atlanta. “This sentencing is just one example of the FBI working together to hold criminals that hide behind their computers accountable, regardless of their location.”

According to information presented in court, in June 2017, Purbeck purchased access to the computer server of a Griffin medical clinic on a darknet marketplace. He then used the stolen credentials to illegally access the computers of the medical clinic and removed records that contained the sensitive personal information of more than 43,000 individuals, including names, addresses, birth dates, and social security numbers.

In February 2018, Purbeck purchased access to a City of Newnan Police Department server on a darknet marketplace. Purbeck used the stolen credentials to hack into the City of Newnan’s computer systems and stole police reports and other documents, including personal information of more than 14,000 individuals.

Purbeck also attempted to extort a Florida orthodontist in July 2018, demanding a ransom payment in Bitcoin in return for his stolen patient files, threatening to sell the patient and personal information unless the orthodontist paid the ransom. Additionally, Purbeck threatened to sell the personal information of the orthodontist’s minor child. Purbeck harassed the orthodontist and his patients for 10 days with numerous threatening emails and text messages.

Song Wu, Chinese national, was indicted in September 2024, on charges for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft arising from his efforts to fraudulently obtain computer software and source code created by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (“NASA”), research universities, and private companies.

“Efforts to obtain our nation’s valuable research software pose a grave threat to our national security,” said U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Buchanan. “However, this indictment demonstrates that borders are not barriers to prosecuting bad actors who threaten our national security.” According to information presented in court, Song allegedly engaged in a multi-year “spear phishing” email campaign in which he created email accounts to impersonate U.S.-based researchers and engineers and then used those imposter accounts to obtain specialized restricted or proprietary software used for aerospace engineering and computational fluid dynamics. This specialized software could be used for industrial and military applications, such as development of advanced tactical missiles and aerodynamic design and assessment of weapons. In executing the scheme, Song allegedly sent spear phishing emails to individuals employed in positions with the United States government, including NASA, the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Army, and the Federal Aviation Administration.  Song also sent spear phishing emails to individuals employed in positions with major research universities in Georgia, Michigan, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Ohio, and with private sector companies that work in the aerospace field. Song’s spear phishing emails appeared to the targeted victims as having been sent by a colleague, associate, friend, or other person in the research or engineering community. His emails requested that the targeted victim send or make available source code or software to which Song believed the targeted victim had access. According to the indictment, while conducting this spear phishing campaign, Song was employed as an engineer at Aviation Industry Corporation of China (“AVIC”), a Chinese state-owned aerospace and defense conglomerate headquartered in Beijing, China.  AVIC manufactures civilian and military aircrafts and is one of the largest defense contractors in the world.

Ilya Lichtenstein, 35, of New York City, was sentenced recently to 60 months in federal prison for his involvement in a money laundering conspiracy arising from the hack and theft of approximately 120,000 bitcoin from Bitfinex, a global cryptocurrency exchange. According to information presented in court, Lichtenstein hacked into Bitfinex’s network in 2016, using advanced hacking tools and techniques. Once inside the network, Lichtenstein fraudulently authorized more than 2,000 transactions transferring 119,754 bitcoin from Bitfinex to a cryptocurrency wallet in Lichtenstein’s control. Lichtenstein then took steps to cover his tracks by deleting from Bitfinex’s network access credentials and other log files that could have revealed his conduct to law enforcement. Following the hack, Lichtenstein enlisted the help of his wife, Heather Morgan, in laundering the stolen funds. Lichtenstein, at times with Morgan’s assistance, employed numerous sophisticated laundering techniques, including using fictitious identities to set up online accounts; utilizing computer programs to automate transactions; depositing the stolen funds into accounts at a variety of darknet markets and cryptocurrency exchanges and then withdrawing the funds; converting bitcoin to other forms of cryptocurrency in a practice known as “chain hopping;” depositing a portion of the criminal proceeds into cryptocurrency mixing services; using U.S.-based business accounts to legitimize Lichtenstein’s and Morgan’s banking activity; and exchanging a portion of the stolen funds into gold coins. Additional information on this case is available on the United States Department of Justice’s website for large cases here.  

Money Laundering refers to the illegal process of concealing the origins of money obtained through criminal activities, making it appear as if it comes from a legitimate source. This is criminalized under 18 U.S.C. § 1956. Money laundering using NFTs involves the illicit use of these digital assets to disguise the origins of illegally obtained funds. In this context, individuals create a fake record of sales on the blockchain by selling NFTs to themselves using different accounts. Once finished, they sell the NFT to an unsuspecting buyer and repeat the process.

Fraud has grown increasingly common in the crypto landscape due to its anonymous and decentralized nature. Fraud involving NFTs can manifest in various ways due to the unique characteristics of these digital assets. This is mostly being prosecuted as wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Some common forms of fraud associated with NFTs include:

1. Fake or Stolen NFTs: Fraudsters might create counterfeit NFTs by copying digital content and attempting to sell them as original or rare pieces. Additionally, they might steal someone else’s artwork or content and mint NFTs to sell without the creator’s consent.
2. False Representation: Individuals might misrepresent the ownership or authenticity of an NFT by falsely claiming it is associated with a particular creator or source, leading buyers to believe they are purchasing something of higher value or legitimacy than it actually holds.
3. Pump-and-Dump Schemes: Similar to traditional financial markets, some individuals may engage in pump-and-dump schemes within the NFT market. This involves artificially inflating the value of certain NFTs through false hype or manipulation, only to sell them off at a high price, leaving unsuspecting buyers with devalued assets.
4. Phishing and Scams: Scammers may use phishing techniques to trick NFT owners into providing their private keys or access to their digital wallets, allowing the fraudster to steal the NFTs. Additionally, fraudulent schemes and fake NFT marketplaces can deceive buyers and sellers into making transactions for non-existent or misrepresented NFTs.
5. Rug-Pull Scheme: As the term suggests, a “rug pull” refers to a scenario where the creator of an NFT and/or gaming project solicits investments and then abruptly abandons a project and fraudulently retains the project investors’ funds.

Law enforcement is continuing to prosecute these types of NFT schemes across the nation, in cases that allege millions of dollars being defrauded. Two defendants were charged for executing a $1 million NFT money laundering and fraud scheme in January 2022. In another NFT rug-pull, Aurelien Michel was charged for diverting $2.9 million dollars in an international fraud scheme.

Bitcoin is definitely attractive to money launderers because it is a decentralized currency that is not subject to government regulation. This makes it difficult, but not impossible, to track and trace Bitcoin transactions. Additionally, Bitcoin is often used in online transactions, which makes it easy to conceal the identity of the sender and receiver.

There are a number of ways to launder money using Bitcoin. One common method is to use a mixer, which is a service that mixes Bitcoin from multiple sources together. This makes it difficult to trace the original source of the Bitcoin. Another method is to use a tumbler, which is a service that breaks up Bitcoin transactions into smaller pieces and then reassembles them. This makes it difficult to track the individual transactions.

Bitcoin can also be used to purchase goods or services that are difficult to trace, such as drugs or weapons. This can make it difficult to identify the source of the funds used to purchase the goods or services.

Money laundering is a serious crime that can have a significant impact on the economy. It can also be used to finance terrorism and other criminal activities. Conaway & Strickler can help if the government is questioning you about or charging you with money laundering /wire fraud /bank fraud charges.

A lot of the times a money mule is utilized in money laundering schemes. A money mule is a person who transfers money on behalf of someone else, often without knowing that they are involved in a criminal activity. Money mules are typically recruited through online job scams, romance scams, or other fraudulent schemes. They are then asked to receive money from criminals, often through wire transfers or cryptocurrency transactions. The money is then transferred to other accounts, or used to purchase goods or services.

Money mules are often unaware that they are involved in a criminal activity. They may be promised a share of the money, or they may be led to believe that they are helping someone in need. However, money mules are always at risk of being caught and prosecuted. They may also face financial losses, as they may be held responsible for any money that is stolen from the criminals. The government often goes after these low end cases and prosecutes them federally.

Again, contact us immediately if you are being questioned by a federal agent about any of these issues.