Slashdot Mirror


FBI Says Islamic State Used eBay, PayPal To Channel Money To the US (theverge.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: Islamic State allegedly used PayPal and fake eBay transactions to channel money to an operative in the U.S., The Wall Street Journal reports. The man who allegedly received the money was American citizen Mohamed Elshinawy, who was arrested last year in Maryland. The FBI claims that Elshinawy, in his early 30s, sold computer printers on eBay as a front in order to receive the payments through PayPal. The details have come to light because of a recently unsealed FBI affidavit, which alleges Elshinawy was part of a worldwide network that used such channels to fund ISIS. Elshinawy received $8,700 from ISIS, including five PayPal payments from senior ISIS official Siful Sujan through his technology company. Those funds were used to buy a laptop, a cellphone, and a VPN to communicate with IS, according to the affidavit. Sujan was killed in a drone strike in 2015. eBay told The Wall Street Journal it "has zero tolerance for criminal activities taking place on our marketplace." Meanwhile, a spokeswoman for PayPal said it "invests significant time and resources in working to prevent terrorist activity on our platform. We proactively report suspicious activities and respond quickly to lawful requests to support law enforcement agencies in their investigations."

57 comments

  1. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    PayPal gives you enough of a hard time getting your money when your legit.... They freeze funds at will and seemingly at random based on smallest complaint or suspicion... But activity like this gets by???

    1. Re:Wow by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But activity like this gets by???

      Uhh, it was $8700 over several months. The guy could have made more money if he just got a job at McDonalds. Maybe ISIS's "vast worldwide network" isn't such a big threat after all.

    2. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The guy could have made more money if he just got a job at McDonalds.

      Someone with a real job doesn't have time to be up to no good.

      That is why the so called "cybercommandos" are so efficient at spreading propaganda.
      Regular people with a 8-5 job spends less than an hour every day on a few forum and write one or two posts.
      A professional shitposter can spend 10 minutes writing a text, post it to a hundred forums and then move on to write the next post.
      It is very cheap to create the impression of a majority or drown out unwanted opinions that way.

      $8700 isn't much, but it might be sufficient for someone to work part-time as an ISIS-recruiter, or full-time if the rest of the salary comes from recruits that donates their assets before going to Syria.

    3. Re:Wow by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      I guess now we know where your money goes when your account gets mysteriously frozen.

    4. Re:Wow by v1 · · Score: 1

      Several times I've ran into VERY small items and seen them listed for absolutely absurd amounts. I'm talking $0.25 electronic components listed for $285. With several completed sales. That's some pretty obvious money laundering or covert payment going on there. I'd always assumed they were payments for drug sales, but I suppose this is another possibility.

      But whatever the case, the problem isn't eBay. Trying to take them on over this is like trying to shutter the cell phone towers because the terrorists are using them to coordinate. People will always find another way to do things. It's like laws - the only good law is one that has a dramatic effect on the intended target, while having VERY little to no effect on the innocent. If you can't apply it in that sort of way, you need to find some other much more effective angle to deal with the problem.

      Part of the issue here as I see it is when they're faced with a difficult problem, one that's proven to be resistant to previous attempts at control. They start "lowering the bar" of quality on the solutions they try to implement. Settling for methods that are both less effective on the problem AND causing more collateral damage to the innocent public in the process. And if the problem drags on or gets worse in the meanwhile, people start demanding more effective actions be taken. So the bar continues to get lower and lower, until it starts becoming apparent that the cure is getting as bad as the disease.

      If your hammer isn't getting the job done, getting out a bigger hammer isn't always the best response. Maybe you need to re-examine the problem and start considering more effective, less destructive tools. (like a screwdriver)

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    5. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you retard? this is textbook fascism

    6. Re:Wow by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      > Maybe ISIS's "vast worldwide network" isn't such a big threat after all.

      Yes, but "anti-ISIS" bullshit government project is big. Too big to fail. Too bureaucratic to cancel.

      I keep repeating this, but who listens? The number one reason why there is law enforcement effort against Islam is Kafkaesque, not Orwellian. Bureaucratic, not partocratic.

      - Event
      - Use event to create bureaucracy
      - Use bureaucracy for self-serving purposes by creating cases out of thing air
      - And, as you have guess exactly, profit.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    7. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The government needs to be seen taking action against terrorists because if they don't they get hammered with the blame when the next attack happens. The US government ignores the demands of their citizens with all their pointless and inane arguments in Washington. The only time the government listens to the public is when the public is pissed off about some country or terrorist group committing acts of violence against the US. When someone commits a really egregious act against the US they risk getting the US public all pointing in the same direction and more than willing to support anything the government does in retaliation. Pearl Harbor and 9/11 are just to examples of what happens that really irritates the US public. And NK should probably stop baiting the US for a fight because they are one decision away from total destruction. SK would get some damage but that's to be expected when countries think diplomacy ever works in these type of situations. The real world has always been defined by the application of force. Every border be tween countries have been drawn and redrawn in blood not fancy words and foolish agreements that always look better on paper than they do in the real world.

  2. The evidence? by nanoflower · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hope the FBI has more evidence than the summary or the article has. All that they state is that he sold a cellphone, laptop and a VPN service to a company. That company happened to be owned by a guy associate with ISIS.

    Then they make the leap that the money paid was going to be used to plan an attack in the US. All of which may be true but unless they have the guy on record as planning an attack or captured his plans it's going to be hard to prove that case. So either the FBI has a weak case or this is a really weak article.

    1. Re:The evidence? by jon3k · · Score: 1

      How much does Putin pay you for these posts, Boris?

    2. Re:The evidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Democrat, right? How much does the DNC pay you for yours?

    3. Re:The evidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Omg it's teh Russianz!

      Fuck off, ShariaBlue.

  3. And in other news by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

    And in other news, it turns out Islamic State has used US currency to purchase goods and services. This clearly means we need to get rid of cash and move to a cashless society, where the government can track every single transaction you make, right down to the cherry 7-up you buy at 7-11. All due to Islamic terrorism. Frankly, I'm more afraid of the FBI than any Muslim.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:And in other news by BlueStrat · · Score: 2

      Frankly, I'm more afraid of the FBI than any Muslim.

      Being afraid of one's government having too much power is both logical and wise.

      More people have been killed by their own nation's government than have died in all the wars in recorded history, by orders of magnitude.

      Those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    2. Re:And in other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More people have been killed by their own nation's government than have died in all the wars in recorded history, by orders of magnitude.

      I'm sure you've got plenty of cites from non-RWNJ sources to back this up. So let's see them.

    3. Re:And in other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More people have been killed by their own nation's government than have died in all the wars in recorded history, by orders of magnitude.

      I'm sure you've got plenty of cites from non-RWNJ sources to back this up. So let's see them.

      It is probably an incorrect statement, but it isn't really controversial.
      Hitler, Stalin and Mao managed to kill off a lot of their own population.

      Neither Stalin not Hitler killed off more than what was killed on each side in the war and for Mao to count you have to include people that died of side-effects rather than direct killings. (Famine caused by government policy.)
      If you do that then you can also include people that died because the government failed to provide modern healthcare or because they didn't invest enough in research that could have saved lives, but it is all just a big stretch.

    4. Re:And in other news by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Neither Stalin not Hitler killed off more than what was killed on each side in the war

      It really does depend how you count, but I think we can agree that if the State kills the most productive farmers, then the State is responsible for the famine that follows. Just these deaths alone, "The Holodomar", is understood to be be somewhere between 7 million and 10 million.

      Some experts disagree as to if these deaths can be correctly classified as "murder" rather than "execution."

      The thing with Mao is that while he was responsible for doing some "purging", he lost control of the situation entirely. so again people argue how many of the tens millions or so "purge" deaths could be blamed on him. What is a fact is the Mao himself said that as many as 50 million people needed to be "purged." After the "purges" came "the great leap forward" which like with Stalin cased a major famine, with an estimated 48 million people killed.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    5. Re:And in other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mysteriously, in both cases, there was more than enough food. Production was not the issue, nor killing the farmers. You have it backwards. In fact, exports of grain increased in both instances.

      Unlike say the Irish Famine, or the ENSO related famines of the 1800s, which could have killed as many as sixty-million, and were related to actual reduced capacity to produce food, though in both cases, other policies may have had as much of an impact as disease or weather.

      Still, what we aren't doing, is examining the question properly, what counts as being killed in war, and what counts as being killed by their own nation's government? This can be especially troubling with civil wars and revolutions.

      Not that it matters, there's plenty of deaths we can examine. Even now, of course, we could also consider how many tobacco-related deaths there are, estimated to be 7 million a year, and the worldwide effects of pollution have caused quite a number, and even now, there are foreign interventions in various countries that are causing lots of deaths.

    6. Re:And in other news by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      This clearly means we need to get rid of cash and move to a cashless society

      I thought you had one since like 2008...? ;)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    7. Re: And in other news by denis.goddard · · Score: 1

      Strat, your logic is ironclad. So... when are you coming home to New Hampshire? ;)

    8. Re:And in other news by HiThere · · Score: 1

      It's probably a more extreme statement than is accurate. The Mongols killed huge numbers of people *not* under their rule before being conquered. But I believe both China and Egypt developed a policy of when there was a crop failure stealing all the food from the "less loyal" provinces and distributing it to the loyal provinces. In both cases this resulted in massive deaths, but how much was just redistribution of deaths that would have happened anyway is uncertain.

      You could also reasonably count all soldiers killed in war as people being killed by their own government. Especially those of draftees. But in cases where the action was defensive it's not clear that this isn't just redistributing deaths that would have happened anyway. You can even sometimes make that argument in wars of aggression.

      All that said, population numbers have been increasing so rapidly, that you can basically ignore all deaths before about 1800 if you're just counting numbers. You could even declare that "anybody born over 100 years ago would be dead by now anyway". But governments are both one of the largest threats AND one of the largest defenders of human life at any one time. And your own government usually sits on both sides of that balance. Exceptions exist, like Pot Pol, but they are rare. And there are also exceptions in the other direction, also rare, and not very visible. Sweden probably counts as one in the decade of the 1990s. (You've got to index that by time, and you need to look at historic data to be sure that you aren't being mislead by biased news coverage. Also, consider Iceland. The government can't take credit for the defense given by isolation. Otherwise it would probably replace Sweden as my beneficial example.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    9. Re:And in other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More people have been killed by their own nation's government than have died in all the wars in recorded history, by orders of magnitude.

      I'm sure you've got plenty of cites from non-RWNJ sources to back this up. So let's see them.

      It is probably an incorrect statement, but it isn't really controversial.

      Indeed, for it to be controversy, it'd have to be anything other than BlueStrat's biases showing again.

      It might be something if it was an official presidential tweet, but his usual hysteria and hyperbole?

      Nope. Just more noise, as useful as that fired CNN's commentators rants.

      If you do that then you can also include people that died because the government failed to provide modern healthcare or because they didn't invest enough in research that could have saved lives, but it is all just a big stretch.

      Every person that dies because the government lets us drive cars! Every person that dies since the government actually fosters births! That means every time a girl gets pregnant, the government is putting somebody in the grave! MURDERERS!

    10. Re: And in other news by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Strat, your logic is ironclad. So... when are you coming home to New Hampshire? ;)

      Hah! Thanks! :)

      Been keeping an eye on the Free State Project, and yes, thinking about possibly relocating either there or Texas at some point.

      Be safe out there! ;)

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  4. Less than $1000 at a time by chromaexcursion · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've bought things internationally. Less than $1000 it's not a big deal. Probably an easy way to spoof the payment system. But it takes a lot of payments. Just sell as many Xbox3's as you need. If they're over priced, no one else will buy them. And, hey, no complaints.

    on a different note
    I needed to make a cash payment over $1000, for travel arrangements (in Italy). It took 3 trips to the bank, I had to be in person to sign, and multiple forms filled out. As an individual, international transactions are fantastically difficult. They're solving the wrong problem.

    1. Re:Less than $1000 at a time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Thank the war on drugs for that.... we're all guilty until proven innocent.

  5. Zero Tolerance by 31415926535897 · · Score: 1

    I agree with eBay here: we can have no tolerance for terrorist activity. The only safe answer is to completely shut down eBay and PayPal. Please, won't you think of the children!

  6. His crime was selling stuff? by jandrese · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So they funded him by buying goods and services with money? Motherfucker, that's a JOB!

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
    1. Re:His crime was selling stuff? by denzacar · · Score: 2

      Many times I've stumbled on ridiculously overpriced items on ebay.
      Like clearly overpriced... well... plastic junk.

      I remember finding a silicone cover for my sister's phone - priced at over a 1000 dollars. The phone was about 170$ at the time.
      And that's not taking in account auctioned items where both sides can jack up the price for easy transfer of money.

      Hell... if you want to maintain appearance of legality, buy a year-old mobile phone, disassemble it and put each part up for auction.
      Ebay is full of overpriced parts for obsolete but arguably useful hardware.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    2. Re:His crime was selling stuff? by richy+freeway · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Many times I've stumbled on ridiculously overpriced items on ebay.
      Like clearly overpriced... well... plastic junk.

      I remember finding a silicone cover for my sister's phone - priced at over a 1000 dollars. The phone was about 170$ at the time

      I believe they jack the price when they run out of stock so they can keep the same listing active and not pay extra fees.

    3. Re:His crime was selling stuff? by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Interesting idea.

      I just figured things like this (I have witnessed it on NewEgg) were there to try to con sloppy/stupid business folks. Your explanation seems a bit more likely since these sites would eventually shut down such obvious cons.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    4. Re:His crime was selling stuff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, they funded him by "buying" fake goods that didn't not exist, to escape suspicions on largish international transfer of money.

  7. People are missing out on what this really means. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can no longer trust independent merchants. The government will slowly tighten its grip since we're all 'thinking of stopping the terrorists' but it is all really a pro-corporate power grab using fearmongering to give up the last vestiges of the 'American Dream' and return the populace to the peasant class without an easy way to pull themselves out.

    Mark my words, this is going to end badly, but not for the terrorists :(

  8. It's all good, man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The US used Libya and Saudi Arabia and Turkey to channel weapons to ISIS (and Al Qaeda.. double your profits). Did eBay or PayPal provide free shipping for such a big order? Or was it "structured" to avoid detection? Really, what's the big deal?

    capcha: plunders

  9. International payments involving UD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    International payments involving US ( don't know about U.K. , others ) adopting stricter controls . I.D. Required and must be beneficiary, that is can not do on someone else's behalf. A Japanese co-worker asked me to help pay his final US credit card bill since I had a international bank account and he was super busy ( Exec) secretary takes care of this stuff usually. Bank rejected said I can not pay someone else's bill over seas. Easy to fix, go to post office and get a money order but similar requirements beneficiary had to do it. Not a big deal but they want clear transparency on who is paying who and purpose. This threads case unclear if any goods even shipped to trigger payments, further there was a front Co involved overseas sending $- this is where overseas bank needs to validate legitimacy of sender. Think PayPal may have more work to do to enable international payments.

  10. TO the US? by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

    If Islamic State wants to give foreign aid donations to the USA despite the lack of diplomatic relations, that's nice. It's not as if the major challenge would-be terrorists in America face is lack of money. For those in need of money, does their sense of honor prevent them from robbing people or are they afraid of being shot before they can blow themselves up?

    --
    This space intentionally left blank
  11. maybe spend less time harrasing conservatives... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if they put as much effort into fighting terrorism as they do to banning trump voters maybe they could put a tiny dent in isis fundraising.

  12. Ok but... by XSportSeeker · · Score: 1

    How exactly things happened?
    Elshinawy sold printers and someone from ISIS bought it, and that was it?
    Nothing eBay can possibly do in a case that is a legal transaction really... well, of course, hand out information, let police monitor accounts when it's known to be tied to terrorist operations and whatnot. But it's not like they are dealing in terrordollars or something.

    1. Re:Ok but... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The US is tracking structuring https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Any strange pattern of any amount can start an investigation.
      Banks do more with currency transaction reporting, suspicious activity reporting, monetary instrument logs. Lots changed with the Bank Secrecy Act.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Lots of small amounts doing things are now just as interesting as the $10000 plus movement of funds was in the past.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  13. My company sells all of our old crap on eBay... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and they basically now just require PayPal, but I think we only collect on about 20% of what we sell. Plus with the fact that eBay plus PayPal fees account for >15% in fees for the times we actually do get paid. I refuse to believe that any criminal would ever subject themselves to such inefficiencies. Wachovia made the decision to launder about $350 billion(yes, with a B) for Mexicans as was exposed by an investigation started in 2005 and were caught, but even they didn't charge nearly as much as eBay/PayPal. No way anyone now would pay that much to launder money. Wachovia (now Wells Fargo) was willing to take a much smaller percentage of the money than eBay/PayPal does now even for legitimate sellers.

    1. Re:My company sells all of our old crap on eBay... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      eBay's fees plus the PayPal fees are just ridiculous. I can't imagine anyone using them instead of a bank like Wells Fargo that is cheaper and more reliable at money laundering.

  14. FBI doesn't know jack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That IBM Proprinter was in mint condition! Totally worth the $800.

  15. Unsurprising by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 1

    While the government would have us believe that if they can read everyones emails and facebook accounts at will we are all safer, the truth is that with all the backdoors in the world they cannot stop terrorism. If it wasn't ebay or paypal it would be another service or method. Sophisticated terror orgs have a multitude of creative ways to do what they do. Education and freely available resources will do more to curb terrorism than a ban on encryption or a money transfer service... Then again if there is no big bad wolf how will politicians scare us to convince us they are needed while they serve the interests of elites to stuff their pockets with wealth and gain more power?

    --
    A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
  16. More fearmongering from the FBI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear FBI, DHS and TSA,

    There are not monsters seeking to harm us at every corner. Please disband.

    Signed We the People

  17. Re:Moto Racer Game Free Download by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't click--link in parent is a goatse mirror.

  18. Close these terrorist allies ! by stooo · · Score: 1

    We have to close ebay and paypal. They are a bunch of terrorist allies it seems.

    --
    aaaaaaa
  19. Yes, those terrorists are downright evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But what does ISIS have to with it?

  20. Which is why using fourth parties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To buy stuff on the internet is unwise in fact retarded.

  21. So now ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... the FBI will need blanket authority to examine any transaction, no matter how small.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  22. Re:Well then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This troll is both tiring and idiotic.

    At least the apps apping apps guy was on topic and relevant. Hell, even the "Frist psot!" guy shows more imagination than you.

    I long for the flair and panache of trolls gone by. Where is the wit and originality of the bug splat guy from eons ago. I'd give a beowulf cluster for even 1 more post from TehGrammarPatroll, who was perhaps the best that slashdot ever had to offer in terms of trolls.

    I wish we could make slashdot trolls great again. Sad.

  23. Re: Well then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Note to AC: This +5 insightful/informative post is to inform you that you sir, are a goddamn idiot.

  24. The 80s called by grumpy_old_grandpa · · Score: 1

    The 80s called - they want their "wire transfer" back.

    In the various countries and banks I've been with over the last 17 years, international transfer have been as easy as domestic payment. The main difference is the length of the account number vs. SWIFT / IBAN, and the slickness of the web form to fill out. Typing in the address of the receiving bank is a bit daft, if you ask me.

    If you have to show up with papers to make a small transfer (and below $10.000 is small in today's money), then somebody's doing it wrong. Might not be your fault, maybe it's the other side who is stuck in the past. But international transfer has been a solved problem since the turn of the century.

  25. US Dollar also used! Ban US Dollar! by Katatsumuri · · Score: 1

    It is also reported that the terrorists used US Dollars to fund their activities! Ban US Dollar!!!1