Facebook creates new policy on advertising ICO’s and cryptocurrency

ICO Scams Fraud

Facebook has another crime prevention strategy relating to digital money, parallel choices and introductory coin offerings. The strategy is going to prevent ICO’s and other Cryptocurrencies from advertising or promoting on Facebook “that are as often as possible related with deceiving or misleading practices,” Facebook Product Management Director Rob Leathern wrote in a blog entry today.

Cryptographic forms of money like Bitcoin, Litecoin and Ethereum, and initial coin offerings have all hit the standard, which has expeditiously brought about various scams. While Facebook says it needs individuals “to proceed to find and learn” about those items and administrations, “there are numerous organizations who are promoting paired choices, ICOs and digital forms of money that are not right now working in accordance with integrity,” Leathern composed.

Leathern perceives that the strategy is very expansive, yet he says that is deliberate. The arrangement is to keep attempting to better distinguish beguiling and misdirecting advertisements that relate to digital forms of money, ICOs and double choices.

After some time, Facebook says it will return to the strategy and its implementation components as its signs progress. Meanwhile, Facebook is urging individuals to report content that disregards this arrangement.

“This approach is a piece of a progressing push to enhance the uprightness and security of our advertisements, and to make it harder for con artists to benefit from a nearness on Facebook,” Leathern composed.

I suspect Facebook will be shutting off the account of Blocksims soon. Blocksims CEO, Shehar Yar is under investigation for theft and operating a scam IPO.

Shehar Yar ICO Blocksims

Shehar Yar of Blocksims under investigation for fraud and intellectual property theft

shehar yar blocksims

Shehar YarThis is Shehar Yar. Shehar Yar was hired by an ICO, Mobilink-Coin to develop a website, database and back office for their company. Earlier this month Shehar was fired after the client realized the website the client had paid for was actually a clone from another website UTrust. The developer did not in fact create a custom website per the original scope of work and contract. And in fact, Shehar left much of the identifying code from the original website within the cloned website. Many screenshots and files were provided to me as proof. Here is just one from the root directory

Shehar Yar

Not that that was enough of an offense, on January 22nd a website was registered called blocksims.io representing an ICO called Blocksims. Problem is, Blocksims resembles the exact online presence Shehar Yar was developing for his prior client, Mobilink-coin. Based upon the timelines I have and the subsequent launch of a like product last week, by all appearances this team has indeed started a fraudulent business process to present their client’s business as their own.

I am Ted, the original Ted, and I have been asked as a writer and former investigator to look into the alleged fraud, intellectual property theft, hacking and trade secret theft by Mr Yar and his associates, Gopinath Krishnamoorthy, Kugan Ausuvalingam, Tarmaraja Padrasono and Muhammad Younas dba an ICO and telcom product called Blocksims.

This case was brought to my attention after several investors started reaching out because they were receiving e mails from buzz@blocksims.io

blocksims

This contractor that was fired, establishes a website on the 22nd of Jaunuary, 3 days after being fired officially by the client.  Mr Yar’s website essentially representing the clients entire marketing model and 7 days later, the members of the clients ICO are receiving e mails from the very same company. Can any reasonable individual think this is a coincidence? It is clear this contractor, Shehar Yar downloaded the clients database or hacked into it. I have a forensic technology team looking into it now.

I am currently reviewing hundreds of Skype messages between Shehar Yar and the original client starting in October of last year.

On 10/17 there is communication between Yar and the CEO of the client negotiating the hiring of Yar as a developer for the team.

On 10/26 mobilink.io is established.

On 11/20 it looks like they are moving forward with the business relationship when Yar is asked about other projects he has worked on:

[11/20/2017 10:55:55 PM] Client: I would like to see the websites
[11/20/2017 10:56:00 PM] Shehar Yar: atbcoin.com
[11/20/2017 10:56:09 PM] Shehar Yar: https://mainsale.powerledger.io
[11/20/2017 10:56:36 PM] Shehar Yar: This is our latest project .
https://www.brickblock.io/
[11/20/2017 10:56:55 PM] Shehar Yar: Working on raising funds digital marketing
[11/20/2017 10:59:59 PM] Shehar Yar: Here is our media platform we’ve also been listing ICO’s etc.
https://www.cryptocurrencyreporters.com/

The next day we can clearly see Yar taking the lead on the design process:

[11/21/2017 10:37:13 AM] Rod Ceo: yes today will take care of that
[11/21/2017 10:38:02 AM | Edited 10:38:05 AM] Shehar Yar: Great we’ll send you something soon I’ll be working on the main Domain
[11/21/2017 10:38:21 AM] Shehar Yar: Like the landing page will be added to Mobilink.io
[11/21/2017 10:38:36 AM] Rod Ceo: ok, great
[11/21/2017 10:38:37 AM] Shehar Yar: They can continue working on Staging
[11/21/2017 10:39:17 AM] Shehar Yar: Please make sure to make me admin on Facebook ads account and and Google adwords
[11/21/2017 10:39:23 AM] Shehar Yar: Highly needed
[11/21/2017 10:39:31 AM] Shehar Yar: Samitpro2@gmail.com
[11/21/2017 10:40:21 AM] Shehar Yar: We need a to write a couple blog for our blog section will discuss that over a call as well

Per the client, Yar was to have had a completed project in December. It was incomplete and filled with errors. The client was not happy. Excuses were made by Yar and at one point he wanted more money. In January after finding out that the large sum of money he was paid, purchased an incomplete website that was a copy of another clients website.

In January, Shehar Yar was fired which led to him starting an ICO which is almost an exact duplicate of the product the client was offering.

So who is Shehar Yar? I googled his name, his “name” with “ICO” added and a number of his e mail addresses. It looks like he has been involved in the development of many ICO’s that never launched. I find it funny to compare his stated persona as the CEO of Blocksims…

Shehar Yar

…yet he is listed as a $20 per hour hack at UpWork

Shehar Yar

Last night there was a social media buzz about Blocksims and Shehar Yar allegedly ripping off Mobilink.io. They responded with a post on Twitter accusing the client of stealing THEIR idea. I am glad I got a screenshot last night as they deleted their original post:

Blocksims.io

Before I make my closing remarks, and if you conduct a Google search for Shehar Yar ICO, you will see the subject of this investigation was clearly one of many team members of the client, mobilink.io

Shehar Yar Mobilink

Shehar Yar Blocksims

Shehar Yar ico

You can see clearly that the clients company existed before Yar was hired as a contractor and the statement that the client ripped off HE and Blocksims is completely false.

The Timeline

On October 20, 2017 negotiations started to hire Shehar Yar as a developer contractor.

The client registered their website, mobilink.io on October 26th.

In November the work started by Yar and Yar was added as a developer to the clients team list on multiple ICO directories.

In December the product was supposed to be delivered and was incomplete and filled with errors.

In January 2018, Yar was fired for not completing the scope of work in a timely manner, insisting on charging more money to complete the project and being discovered that he cloned an existing website and just swapped out the content.

On January 22nd, 2018 Blocksims.io was registered and the site went live recently essentially duplicating the clients online presence.

On January 29th, e mails started being received from Blocksims.io inviting them to see THEIR opportunity.

On January 30th, Blocksims claims they were ripped off in response to a social media buzz.

My personal opinion based upon the allegations and my observations to date.

Mr Yar, having sour grapes because he was fired, has chosen to cause financial harm to his prior client buy presenting the clients business as his own under a different name. Mr Yar breached the database of the client illegally and has been reaching out to the clients member database. Mr Yar who has been involved in a number of ICO’s, none successful, does not have the finances nor the experience to be the CEO of an ICO.

Consider this blog post Part 1 of a series as I investigate his associates, Gopinath Krishnamoorthy, Kugan Ausuvalingam, Tarmaraja Padrasono and Muhammad Younas and others associated with his prior ICO endeavors.

TED

 

How will the SEC’s new Cyber Unit effect ICO offerings in the USA?

SEC ICO

I am Ted. The original Ted. And this is the Official Ted Blog.

If you have seen some of the posts I make online about due diligence and my interest into crypto, you can be sure as I move deeper into the cryptocurrency world, that I am going in with my eyes wide open.

In the second from last quarter of 2017 alone, ICOs raised more than $1.3 billion for crypto  — around five times more than subsidizing brought through investment up in the blockchain space.

There were 200 ICO’s in 2017 and at least 1,100 ICO’s in play worldwide now. The majority will fail because most of these ICO’s are fraudulent ponzi schemes. Games are played. The insiders are trading back and forth. It looks just like a penny stock pump and dump operation.

One company that made the news lately is Bitconnect. So many people got in. Mostly greedy Americans that were looking for easy money. It seemed too good to be true from its inception in January of 2017, and it was.

There were so many red flags. Promises of returns were made. It was run anonymously and as I look at it today, it looks more like an investment instrument, and that brings up the SEC.

The SEC’s new Cyber Unit is focused on misconduct involving distributed ledger technology and initial coin offerings, the spread of false information through electronic and social media, brokerage account takeovers, hacking to obtain nonpublic information, and threats to trading platforms. The SEC also has a Distributed Ledger Technology Working Group that focuses on various emerging applications of distributed ledger technology in the financial industry.

This tells me that ICO’s based in the USA are going to be scrutinized and quite possibly, the SEC might see all ICO’s as an investment opportunity that falls within their domain of oversight. That would create new regulations and qualifications wherein the ICO would have to register. This would scare the scammers but the legit ICO’s would then become regulated and the whole point of having a worldwide cryptocurrency outside the international banking swamp would be moot.

And I see the SEC and the IRS sitting back in the weeds, letting the coin build value and at the point they go after any ICO, seizing its assets and leaving the coinholder with nothing.

Overseas ICOs rely on Americans being one of the most active investment groups even to the point of creating MLM network marketing groups to push or mine coins. An MLM should never be the reason to support a specific coin.

I am looking at a number of factors in choosing the ICO with the best chance of success, backed buy a REAL product, with team members I can vet and maybe even restricting sales of the coin in the USA. I am getting very close and will discuss in my next post.

Commercial Loan Due Diligence

Due Diligence

I am Ted. The original Ted. And this is the Official Ted Blog.

There was a time when I was part of a team that was retained by a major California bank to go after post judgement money overseas. Their client, who they commercially funded(in the millions), defaulted on the loan. Judgement was issued by the court however the bank could find very few assets in the USA. They needed to take the hunt for the cash up a few notches as many of these clients were still living the high life. We were hired because of our relationships with international law enforcement and expats retired from the US Government living abroad. We had our methods which were successful in finding the money which would pave a path for our client to collect on the debt.

Throughout this investigative process we noticed a trend. While we investigated the case, we would find pre-existing detrimental data, that had the bank known, they would not have ever funded the loan.

I took our new data to this financial institution and asked them to implement a much deeper due diligence program. I found the loan officers and supervisors were over zealous in funding the loans. They just did not look that deep. If the surface of the package made sense, they pushed it through there funding meetings. Accountants crunch the numbers. Lawyers go over the paperwork. But who was looking deep into the past and civil and criminal issues? Who was looking the integrity of the company and its principals? They adopted our program. However there was this one case…where the LO tried slip one past us.

The VP of commercial funding had seen we had not signed off on the package which made sense considering we were never sent the package for review.

Their client was an aviation equipment company(that is still in business so I will leave their name out of this post). They wanted $2 Million dollars to retrofit a couple of 737 aircraft as island hoppers in Hawaii. The package looked great. And in fact they provided aviation equipment to the US Government and the Department of Defense. They made a forward statement in which they expected to have a continuing income from DoD contracts. Their financials looked great and they did have money in the bank.

Only one problem. A few years before, the company and its CEO were convicted in federal criminal court for defrauding the government. It seems they wanted to win a specific parts contract and they paid off the other bidders to bid really high so that this company could come in at low bid. Part of the conviction included an 8 year stay on this company being able to do business with the government in any way. So how does the forward statement above hold any water?

This is an integrity issue. Did our findings always stop the bank from funding the loans if they make sense in other ways? No and that was not our responsibility. But at least the financial institutions had additional data within their decision making process.

Integrity is everything and as a former investigator when I work with start up companies, IPO’s and ICO’s, I dig deep.