With the Ethereum community and DAO Hub investors, all shook up things are starting to look worse for them in regards to retrieving the loss back. It seems the “attacker” has written an open letter to both camps concerning his/her rightful ownership of the 3,641,694 Ether he has taken calling it a “reward.”
In an email which is PGP signed and titled “An Open Letter To the DAO and the Ethereum community” the claimed attacker believes he examined the code and believes the Ether drained is now legitimately in his/her possession. The attacker writes that people characterizing the event as “theft” are completely unjustified and it the smart contract itself has allowed this to happen. The attacker writes:
“I have made use of this feature and have rightfully claimed 3,641,694 ether, and would like to thank the DAO for this reward. It is my understanding that the DAO code contains this feature to promote decentralization and encourage the creation of “child DAOs”. I am disappointed by those who are characterizing the use of this intentional feature as “theft”. I am making use of this explicitly coded feature as per the smart contract terms and my law firm has advised me that my action is fully compliant with United States criminal and tort law.”
It is interesting that the person referenced the United States within the letter and could mean he/she is from the U.S. The so-called “attacker” also cites the written words of the binding smart contract which says, “The terms of The DAO Creation are set forth in the smart contract code existing on the Ethereum blockchain. Nothing in this explanation of terms or in any other document or communication may modify or add any additional obligations or guarantees beyond those set forth in The DAO’s code.”
The author claims that a soft or hard fork would be considered “theft” in legitimate tort law, and he/she believes the 3 million Ether was declared legally through the terms of the smart contract. The attacker also says that changing the code in a fork-type manner will destroy the Ethereum community and confidence in the very foundations of smart contracts. Throughout most forums the concept of smart contracts already are getting trampled by the cry of “dumb contracts.” The language the contracts are written in Solidity is also being called faulty and too complicated for these types of self-executed negotiations. The author explains the effect that will take place if developers decide to continue with the fork solutions saying:
“A soft or hard fork would amount to seizure of my legitimate and rightful ether, claimed legally through the terms of a smart contract. Such fork would permanently and irrevocably ruin all confidence in not only Ethereum but also the in the field of smart contracts and blockchain technology. Many large Ethereum holders will dump their ether, and developers, researchers, and companies will leave Ethereum. Make no mistake: any fork, soft or hard, will further damage Ethereum and destroy its reputation and appeal.”
The unconfirmed “attacker” concludes his/her message by saying legal action has been taken, and he/she is working with a law firm at the moment in regards to this case. Accomplices (developers) taking part in a freeze, hard fork, soft fork, or roll back will “be receiving Cease and Desist notices in the mail shortly.” The author comes off as trying to be “nice” about the situation and hopes the community learns a lesson from this particular experience.
“I hope this event becomes a valuable learning experience for the Ethereum community and wish you all the best of luck. Yours truly, ‘The Attacker’”
Live Bitcoin News will keep our readers informed of any more breaking updates concerning this case. Disclaimer: It is not officially confirmed if the “attacker’s” letter is legitimate. However, the point of the letter provides a message smart contract proponents should consider, there are always loopholes.
Images courtesy of Pixabay and the DAO Hub