Yeah so see this is why i asked the question. You don't understand the series of events here. And that's okay bc the post is confusing. But probably dont try to drive phishing…
Original source excerpt
Yeah so see this is why i asked the question. You don't understand the series of events here. And that's okay bc the post is confusing. But probably dont try to drive phishing victims to suicide jus…
Yeah so see this is why i asked the question. You don't understand the series of events here. And that's okay bc the post is confusing. But probably dont try to drive phishing victims to suicide just the initial 5-day-old report isnt super clear on what happened lmao? Google shit is unrelated. That's skids. It's somehow tied in but that dev (A) didnt get phished by DPRK. Ever. Thus, there was not one dev that got phished and then had access to the systems. Period. Oops. It's super unclear what was happening all of Sept+Oct but DPRK wasn't sitting around doing nothing. There's also missing escalation that we see from the onchain at the beginning of October that doesnt map to anything here (yet.) I'm sure it will become clear over time. You also want someone to blame, which is natural, but misguided. The entity to blamed here is the one harmed. Binance. It's their fault, their loss, and they will have to work to recover. There's no need to go on a witch hunt for a dev who wanted a new job, got on a phone call with a real ass person, and seems to not even have had access to the critical systems.
AI context is not available for this statement. The original source can be read independently.