News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Republishing a fork of the sanctioned Tornado Cash repositories. Parent comment

Re:Republishing a fork of the sanctioned Tornado Cash reposi... by thesausageking on Monday August 22, 2022 @09:43PM (#32559584)
> In the same way that The Pirate Bay was just code, its is how complicit they were in the offence that will get them.

Can you explain what you mean by this? To me, publishing code that can be used to do something is very different from running it and allowing people to use it.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Republishing a fork of the sanctioned Tornado Cash reposi... by paddlepop on Monday August 22, 2022 @10:03PM (#32559721)
That's exactly what I mean, its the service that is getting sanctioned. The people that "knew and didn't do enough to stop it" will be arrested.

My meaning of "code is just code" as a bad take, was just that the code part in isolation wasn't sanctioned.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Republishing a fork of the sanctioned Tornado Cash reposi... by t_mann on Tuesday August 23, 2022 @04:23AM (#32561976)
> publishing code that can be used to do something is very different from running it and allowing people to use it

that difference is non-existent when code is published as a smart contract

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Republishing a fork of the sanctioned Tornado Cash reposi... by woojoo666 on Tuesday August 23, 2022 @06:51AM (#32562927)
A smart contract doesn't run on it's own, you still need computers to run it. Not to mention for Tornado cash, you also need people interacting with the contract and sending money to it, since it doesn't do anything on its own
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Republishing a fork of the sanctioned Tornado Cash reposi... by t_mann on Tuesday August 23, 2022 @07:45AM (#32563388)
It's run by the miners and users and disconnected from the people who published the code (who may also be miners and users, but needn't be)
[ Parent | on HN ]