IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/accper/v19y2020i4p363-387.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Digital Assets and Blockchain: Hackable, Fraudulent, or Just Misunderstood?†

Author

Listed:
  • John “Jack” Castonguay
  • Sean Stein Smith

Abstract

Unhackable. Immutable. Fraud‐proof. These terms are frequently used to describe cryptocurrencies and the blockchain technology that underpins them. Together, they imply that a high degree of safety accompanies cryptocurrencies and blockchain ledgers. But is this understanding supported by the facts, or is it more based on the promise and theoretical construction of blockchain and cryptocurrencies? To better answer this question, we have compiled and analyzed existing research on initial coin offerings, security offerings, blockchain hacks and thefts, and data breaches of blockchain‐based platforms and digital wallets. In contrast to the popular press, we find that in practice, blockchain and cryptocurrencies are more prone to malfeasance, fraud, and manipulation than is commonly understood. The security and trust provided by blockchain as a technology tool are only as secure as the underlying code that establishes the blockchain, and the value derived from cryptocurrencies is only as trustworthy as the entity developing the cryptocurrency. Neither are without their vulnerabilities. Skepticism and proper due diligence should be maintained for any entity looking to utilize blockchain technology or invest in cryptocurrencies. ACTIFS NUMÉRIQUES ET CHAÎNE DE BLOCS: PIRATABLES, FRAUDULEUX OU SIMPLEMENT MAL COMPRIS? Impossibles à pirater. Inaltérables. À l'épreuve des fraudes. Ces qualificatifs sont souvent utilisés pour décrire les cryptomonnaies et la technologie de la chaîne de blocs qui les sous‐tend. Collectivement, ces expressions donnent à penser qu'un niveau élevé de sécurité est associé aux cryptomonnaies et aux registres de la chaîne de blocs. Toutefois, cette perception est‐elle appuyée par les faits, ou se fonde‐t‐elle sur les promesses et la construction théorique de la chaîne de blocs et des cryptomonnaies? Pour répondre efficacement à cette question, nous avons compilé et analysé des études sur les premières émissions de cryptomonnaie, les émissions de titres, les piratages et vols associés à la chaîne de blocs et les atteintes à la sécurité des données dans les plateformes fondées sur la chaîne de blocs et les portefeuilles virtuels. Contrairement à ce qui est véhiculé dans la presse populaire, nous montrons que dans la réalité, la chaîne de blocs et les cryptomonnaies sont plus vulnérables aux malversations, à la fraude et à la manipulation qu'on ne le croit. Le degré de sécurité et de confiance que procure la chaîne de blocs en tant qu'outil technologique est tributaire du niveau de sécurité du code sous‐jacent, et la fiabilité de valeur conférée à une cryptomonnaie est tributaire de l'entité qui la crée. Chacun de ces éléments a ses propres faiblesses. Toute entité qui cherche à utiliser la technologie de la chaîne de blocs ou à investir dans les cryptomonnaies devrait faire preuve de scepticisme et d'une diligence raisonnable.

Suggested Citation

  • John “Jack” Castonguay & Sean Stein Smith, 2020. "Digital Assets and Blockchain: Hackable, Fraudulent, or Just Misunderstood?†," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 363-387, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:accper:v:19:y:2020:i:4:p:363-387
    DOI: 10.1111/1911-3838.12242
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3838.12242
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1911-3838.12242?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baber, William R. & Gore, Angela K. & Rich, Kevin T. & Zhang, Jean X., 2013. "Accounting restatements, governance and municipal debt financing," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 212-227.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Naheeda Ali, 2022. "Crimes Related to Cryptocurrency and Regulations to Combat Crypto Crimes," Journal of Policy Research (JPR), Research Foundation for Humanity (RFH), vol. 8(3), pages 289-302, September.
    2. Hsieh, Sheng-Feng & Brennan, Gerard, 2022. "Issues, risks, and challenges for auditing crypto asset transactions," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Junghack Kim & Bruce D McDonald & Jongmin Shon, 2022. "Does the charter form lead to lower borrowing costs? Examining the case of California local governments," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 93(1), pages 85-102, March.
    2. Ivan T. & Tom Zimmermann, 2021. "The "Privatization" of Municipal Debt," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 062, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    3. Kabir, Humayun & Rahman, Asheq, 2016. "The role of corporate governance in accounting discretion under IFRS: Goodwill impairment in Australia," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 290-308.
    4. Stephanie F. Cheng & Christine Cuny & Hao Xue, 2023. "Disclosure and Competition for Capital," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(7), pages 4312-4330, July.
    5. Anh Viet Pham & Mia Hang Pham & Cameron Truong, 2022. "CEO cultural heritage and the pricing of audit services," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1-2), pages 181-214, January.
    6. Nakhmurina, Anya, 2018. "Does Fiscal Monitoring Make Better Governments? Evidence from US Municipalities," Working Papers 284, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    7. Cuny, Christine, 2016. "Voluntary disclosure incentives: Evidence from the municipal bond market," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 87-102.
    8. Chen, Yangyang & Murgulov, Zoltan & Rhee, S. Ghon & Veeraraghavan, Madhu, 2016. "Religious beliefs and local government financing, investment, and cash holding decisions," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 38(PA), pages 258-271.
    9. Stephanie F. Cheng, 2021. "The Information Externality of Public Firms’ Financial Information in the State‐Bond Secondary Market," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 529-574, May.
    10. CAO, Ning & McGUINNESS, Paul B. & XI, Chao, 2021. "Does securities enforcement improve disclosure quality? An examination of Chinese listed companies' restatement activities," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    11. Steven DeSimone, 2018. "Internal Audit and Financial Reporting Quality in the Public Sector," Working Papers 1802, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
    12. Lin, Xiaowei & Chen, Sicen & Cheng, Xin & Wang, Jinmei, 2022. "Local government audit and municipal debt risk: Evidence from audit reform in China," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    13. Pei Li & Leo Tang & Bikki Jaggi, 2018. "Social Capital and the Municipal Bond Market," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 153(2), pages 479-501, December.
    14. Ying L. Compton & Angela K. Gore & Susan L. Kulp, 2017. "Compensation design and political risk: the case of city managers," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 109-140, March.
    15. Kabir, Humayun & Su, Li & Rahman, Asheq, 2020. "Firm life cycle and the disclosure of estimates and judgments in goodwill impairment tests: Evidence from Australia," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:accper:v:19:y:2020:i:4:p:363-387. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3838 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.