SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The coming US dollar crisis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Real Man who wrote (53892)11/16/2013 9:51:02 PM
From: ggersh  Respond to of 71475
 
We just get the R WS gets the VA..-g-



To: Real Man who wrote (53892)11/18/2013 9:43:44 AM
From: ggersh3 Recommendations

Recommended By
maceng2
Real Man
roguedolphin

  Respond to of 71475
 
Bring back the trading pits.....-g- Mind you this happened in July
and today is November 18th I believe.

bloomberg.com

CME Hack Draws FBI Probe While Renewing Market Structure Anxiety
By Matthew Leising - Nov 15, 2013 11:01 PM CT


The computer intrusion at CME Group Inc. (CME) has spurred a federal investigation and renewed concerns about the trustworthiness of electronic markets.

The Chicago Mercantile Exchange’s owner said yesterday that its systems were hacked in July and some customer information was compromised. CME Group said there’s no evidence that transactions on its electronic-trading system or its clearing services were affected.





Enlarge image
Flags fly on the front facade of CME Group Inc.'s Chicago Board of Trade in Chicago in Chicago. Photographer: Tim Boyle/Bloomberg




Although CME Group downplayed the significance of its incident, the danger to capital markets from hacking is underappreciated, said John Edge, a managing director at New York-based Nice Actimize who specializes in global trading and market structure issues. It’s likely there will one day be a large-scale attack that causes a major disruption, he said.

“From a statistical point of view, it’s completely improbable that it won’t happen,” he said. “The hacking community belongs to usually one of three groups: state-sponsored, organized financial crime or agenda-based activists. You’ve got some very well-funded, very talented, competent people whose job it is to breach security.”

Cybersecurity has been flagged as one of the biggest threats to markets and governments by industry groups and regulators. A study in July found that computers at about 53 percent of exchanges around the world were attacked during the previous year. Nasdaq OMX Group Inc. discovered suspicious files on its website in 2011, prompting a federal investigation.

Customer Credentials ClearPort, the system that CME Group said was targeted, provides clearing services for block trades that are negotiated privately in over-the-counter energy and metals markets. “To protect participants, CME Group forced a change to customer credentials impacted by the incident, and is corresponding directly with the impacted customers,” the company said in a statement yesterday.

“Assuming no customer assets were affected, this is useful as an eye-opener,” Pete Lindstrom, an analyst at Spire Security in Philadelphia, said of the CME Group incident. “We continue to see various types of folks who are hacked,” he said. “It starts to generate concern over our financial infrastructure.”

Michael Shore, a CME Group spokesman, declined to elaborate on the statement, which said the incident was the subject of a U.S. criminal investigation.

“We did receive the referral” from CME Group, said Joan Hyde, a spokeswoman for the Chicago office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. “We are looking into the matter.”

Hong Kong The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the main U.S. derivatives regulator, is helping with the investigation, according to a person familiar with the matter, who asked to not be named because the inquiry is private. The attack on CME Group came from a hub in Hong Kong, although the perpetrators could have been based elsewhere, the person said.

CME Group offers futures based on interest rates, equity indexes, currencies, metals, energy products and agricultural commodities. It also guarantees interest-rate swaps and credit-default swaps with its clearinghouse.

From January to August of this year, CME Group handled 2.17 billion futures contracts, according to an analysis by the Futures Industry Association, making it the world’s largest exchange by volume.

While computer attacks are global, American exchanges have reported the most instances of attempted sabotage via the Internet, according to a July study co-authored by the World Federation of Exchanges and the International Organization of Securities Commissions. About 67 percent of U.S.-based trading venues said they had to fight them off, the study showed. About 89 percent said it represents a systemic risk.

‘Big One’ That’s similar to the conclusion made by Depository Trust & Clearing Corp., which processes U.S. stock trades. It said in August that hacking is the gravest threat to financial markets.

“Cybersecurity is a large and growing problem for all financial service providers,”Howard Ward, the chief investment officer for growth equity at Rye, New York-based Gamco Investors Inc., which oversees about $40 billion, wrote in an e-mail. “We must accelerate our investments in protecting our financial system and power grid from intruders before they score a big one.”

On July 25, U.S. prosecutors said they indicted four Russians and a Ukrainian in what was called the largest hacking and data breach scheme in U.S. history. Nasdaq OMX was among their targets.

‘Suspicious’ Files Nasdaq OMX in 2011 disclosed an intrusion involving “suspicious” files on its Directors Desk system, which lets corporate board members communicate and share information. The National Security Agency, the top U.S. electronic intelligence service, joined a probe of the 2010 attack, people familiar with the investigation said in March 2011.

Although unrelated to hacking, U.S. stock and options exchanges have experienced a series of self-imposed technical errors this year, reinforcing concern that electronic markets are fundamentally flawed. The errors, including an Aug. 22 malfunction at Nasdaq OMX that prompted a three-hour trading suspension for thousands of stocks, prompted Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary Jo White to demand infrastructure and protocol improvements.



To: Real Man who wrote (53892)11/18/2013 4:23:11 PM
From: ggersh1 Recommendation

Recommended By
dvdw©

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 71475
 
Another dot connected????

truthingold.blogspot.com





The Golden Truth
I'm not worried about how high in price gold is going, I'm worried about what the world around us will look like when it gets there







Sunday, November 17, 2013 An Analysis Of The CME's Comex Gold/Silver Inventory Report Legal Disclaimer The information in this report is taken from sources believed to be reliable; however, the Commodity Exchange, Inc. disclaims all liability whatsoever with regard to its accuracy or completeness. This report is produced for information purposes only. - CME legal disclaimer placed on the Comex daily gold and silver warehouse stock reports I wanted to elaborate on Friday's post to make it crystal clear to everyone WHY the CME suddenly slapped that disclaimer on the Comex gold/silver warehouse inventory reports. It seemed to me that the CME might be liable for legal claims - when the Comex ultimately defaults - which seek damages based on the argument that the Plaintiff relied on the CME reports in making a decision to invest in a gold/silver futures contract prior to the date that the disclaimer first appeared.

What I'm really trying to ferret out here is exactly why the CME waited five years after acquiring the Comex before applying the disclaimer to the inventory report. My assessment is that, per my article Friday, given the extreme decline in gold inventory on the Comex the beginning of the year, the CME - by invoking the disclaimer - is worried about the reliability of the gold/silver inventory reports. Recall that the reports are generated based on paper reports submitted by banks who operate the Comex vaults. In other words, the CME is relying on the reliability of these reports without actually verifying that the content of the reports is based on a provable fact - i.e. that the inventory reported by the banks exists as reported without doing an independent physical audit to verify that the reports are legally valid.

As it turns out, based on Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), even though the CME waited 5 years before invoking and applying the disclaimer on the inventory reports, the CME has for all intents and purposes legally insulated itself for any legal claims that may arise from publishing the inventory when the Comex defaults and has shifted the burden to the individual vault operators who submit the data that the reports are based on. I called on a friend and colleague who is one of the sharpest attorneys I have ever met to give his assessment of the timing of the CME's application of the inventory report disclaimer:
The disclaimer language at issue appears to be tailored specifically not only to forestall ALL fraud cases based on that element, but to do so at the pleading stage of the case, i.e., BEFORE THERE IS ANY DISCOVERY OF THE DEFENDANT'S DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION, by way of a dismissal under [Federal Civil Rules of Procedure] 12(b)(6) or the State court equivalent.

One of the trickier elements in a civil fraud case (criminal is slightly different on this point) is proving that you reasonably relied on the misrepresentation at issue, meaning you did in fact rely on it, and that your reliance was reasonable (an objective standard to winnow out idiotic plaintiffs). The intent behind the disclaimer is to provide a legal override of such facts, like a trump card. Federal Civil Rules of Procedure 12(b)(6) allows a defendant to ask a judge to dismiss the lawsuit before any real litigation takes place based on a "failure to state a claim even accepting all facts stated in plaintiff's complaint as true." In order to compel a judge to deny the Defendant's motion to dismiss under this Rule, the Plaintiff must show that it's possible for him to prove a set of facts in court that shows he is legally entitled to the "relief " (damages from investing in this situation) requested in the legal claim because he bought Comex futures in reliance on the truthfulness of the CME Comex inventory reports at the time he made the investment. As my friend states: "the intent behind the disclaimer is to provide a legal override of such facts, like a trump card" - which leads to the Defendant's argument that the Plaintiff failed to state a claim. As applied to the CME situation, the Plaintiff will fail in its pursuit in damages against the CME.

Think about what FRCP 12(b)(6) requires if someone were to go after the CME because they bought a gold futures contract in May 2013 - before the disclaimer was slapped on the Comex gold inventory report - expecting to stand for delivery of the gold at contract expiry. The Comex defaults. The Plaintiff (person who bought the contract) files a claim against the CME for fraudulent misrepresentation because the Plaintiff relied on the Comex gold inventory report published by the CME in making his decision to get long the contract on the basis that the Comex had enough gold to make on the delivery of the gold.

You see the problem here in satisfying the requirement under FRCP (or State-equivalent) 12(b)(6)? The Plaintiff has to produce evidence showing several things, including some kind of proof that shows beyond reasonable doubt that his decision (the "claim") was made specifically with reliance on the CME/Comex report before the disclaimer was slapped on it. In order to satisfy that a bona fide claim has been stated under the Rules of Evidence requirement, it would minimally have to be something like a dated journal entry with a date-stamp on it and a witness affidavit that testifies that the witness watched the plaintiff make the journal entry on the date as shown. Even that would be questionable. The only thing I can think of that would satisfy this would be to write yourself a memo and mail it to yourself in order to get a postal stamp on the envelope and leave the envelope sealed. Anyone ever go to this length before executing a trade?

It is clear to me, and to my friend who is an attorney, that the CME's lawyers determined it was necessary at this point in time to invoke the disclaimer because the risk of fraud is clear and present with regard to the reports being submitted by JP Morgan, HSBC and Scotia in relation to the extreme and unprecedented rate of decline in the reported Comex gold and silver inventory. And this particular disclaimer gives the CME a shield of legal protection that extends all the way back to its date of acquisition.

The bottom line here is that it is highly probable that the real inventory that is sitting in the gold and silver vaults of JP Morgan, HSBC and Scotia is quite a bit less than the inventory being reported in the daily stock reports. This conclusion, of course, is consistent with the type of fraudulent behavior for which these banks have already been successfully prosecuted and/or forced to settle. What it implies is that the Comex may indeed be closer to default than any of us can possibly understand. In this context, and notwithstanding Ted Butler's dismissal of this matter, it is clear that CME is concerned enough about this possibility and was compelled to invoke a powerful legal shield from liability in order to evade the potential legal liability to which its member banks will be exposed. It is also clear that business entities that rely on the Comex as a source of safekeeping and of deliverable physical gold are taking an increasingly large amount risk in relying on the Comex for this purpose.