The Bitcoin Hackers Asked for a Bounty. Blockstream Said No. The Liquid exploit has developed into a surprisingly interesting argument about what actually counts as ethical hacking. Blockstream says it won't pay the people responsible for the exploit to return the remaining 598.5 $BTC. The company had attempted to negotiate the return of the funds but ultimately rejected the requested terms, arguing that taking assets without permission and then withholding them isn't responsible disclosure. I think the distinction matters. White-hat hackers sometimes move funds during an exploit because leaving them in place could allow an actual attacker to steal them. Afterwards, protocols frequently pay substantial bug bounties as a reward. But that model becomes awkward when the person holding the assets effectively says: pay me, or you don't get them back. At that point, where exactly does a bug bounty end and a ransom begin? The blockchain doesn't record intention. It only records that hundreds of $BTC moved without the owner's permission. Security researchers, protocols and courts may have very different answers about what happened next. #BTC Price Analysis# #Bitcoin Price Prediction: What is Bitcoins next move?#