[FREE RAFFLE] - Custom eXch Cryptosteel Capsule (#18)!
Quote
Good luck!
Topic: eXch - instant exchange BTC / LN / XMR / LTC / ETH / ERC20 - page 11. (Read 27652 times)
Everyone is welcome to join the 18th Free Raffle to try to win a nice Custom eXch Cryptosteel Capsule!
[FREE RAFFLE] - Custom eXch Cryptosteel Capsule (#18)!
Good luck!
[FREE RAFFLE] - Custom eXch Cryptosteel Capsule (#18)!
Good luck!
Hi, ETH and ERC20 tokens were temporarily removed due to maintenance of our Ethereum node. Everything is back to normal already.
Given these intermittent issues with the ETH network, maybe it's really time to consider adding another option at least only for USDT. It doesn't have to be Trx if you already have your reasons why you are against this network. But there are other possibilitiesIs the exchange running a single ETH node?
I guess there should be some redundancy system here in order to account for different mishaps that could happen.
I ma not sure about the cost of running an eth node, but i guess it is far below of the cost of having to suspend your service for a few hours.
Hi, ETH and ERC20 tokens were temporarily removed due to maintenance of our Ethereum node. Everything is back to normal already.
Given these intermittent issues with the ETH network, maybe it's really time to consider adding another option at least only for USDT. It doesn't have to be Trx if you already have your reasons why you are against this network. But there are other possibilities It seems there are some ETH issues again. At least I don't see neither ETH nor ERC20 tokens in the dropdown menu on exch.cx (clearnet). System status is green though, so it may be a minor issue.
Hi, ETH and ERC20 tokens were temporarily removed due to maintenance of our Ethereum node. Everything is back to normal already.
It seems there are some ETH issues again. At least I don't see neither ETH nor ERC20 tokens in the dropdown menu on exch.cx (clearnet). System status is green though, so it may be a minor issue.
PS: Working again as of September 19.
PS: Working again as of September 19.
Actually 4 slots got filled and only one has remained available for now. The moment of choosing a winner is getting close.
Anyone still didn't join the raffle? Last chance for raffle #17!
(Do I have to also write about how great the prize is? I hope the name of it already tells a lot!)
Anyone still didn't join the raffle? Last chance for raffle #17!
(Do I have to also write about how great the prize is? I hope the name of it already tells a lot!)
Absolutely, as soon as this last slot will be filled, we will start the draw and get our 17th winner!
Let me share the information here, eXch and OrangeFren.com just launched a very cool initiative to develop a light client for Bisq 1
OrangeFren and eXch are happy to announce the public project aiming to initiate development of Bisq 1 light client in order to make it lightweight and usable for everyone.
We still have 5 slots available!
Quote from: paid2
Everyone is welcome to join the 17th Free Raffle to try to win a nice Custom eXch Cryptosteel Capsule! 
[FREE RAFFLE] - Custom eXch Cryptosteel Capsule (#17)!
[FREE RAFFLE] - Custom eXch Cryptosteel Capsule (#17)!
Actually 4 slots got filled and only one has remained available for now. The moment of choosing a winner is getting close.
Anyone still didn't join the raffle? Last chance for raffle #17!
(Do I have to also write about how great the prize is? I hope the name of it already tells a lot!)
We still have 5 slots available!
Quote from: paid2
Everyone is welcome to join the 17th Free Raffle to try to win a nice Custom eXch Cryptosteel Capsule!
[FREE RAFFLE] - Custom eXch Cryptosteel Capsule (#17)!
[FREE RAFFLE] - Custom eXch Cryptosteel Capsule (#17)!
So what happens now is that any coins sent from eXch to centralized platforms platforms are more at risk of triggering AML procedures?
Maybe that was the point of whole operation with Genesis Trading, but it all depends what tools are used to check risk for transactions and I don't trust any of this tools.I am not sure we should blindly trust anything we see on twitter, especially when this news is not reported anywhere else to my knowledge.
It seems to be already solved:
Probably just some issue with the ETH node?
Yap, it's back to normal for me too. I guess it's a temporary problem. Probably just some issue with the ETH node?
What is happening here, there is a warning that 'Issues present'.
I did not manage to find any dysfunctionality in the work of exch.
In the system status, the last thing we have is a notification about a Heavy DDoS attack from August 9.
I did not manage to find any dysfunctionality in the work of exch.
In the system status, the last thing we have is a notification about a Heavy DDoS attack from August 9.
Quote
09-08-2024 Heavy DDoS attack
There is an ongoing DDoS attack targeting our clearnet servers and Tor backend performed by the "Infinity Exchanger" operators. Expect some access issues till the threat actor stops.
There is an ongoing DDoS attack targeting our clearnet servers and Tor backend performed by the "Infinity Exchanger" operators. Expect some access issues till the threat actor stops.
It seems to be already solved:
Probably just some issue with the ETH node?
What is happening here, there is a warning that 'Issues present'.
I did not manage to find any dysfunctionality in the work of exch.
In the system status, the last thing we have is a notification about a Heavy DDoS attack from August 9.
I did not manage to find any dysfunctionality in the work of exch.
In the system status, the last thing we have is a notification about a Heavy DDoS attack from August 9.
Quote
09-08-2024 Heavy DDoS attack
There is an ongoing DDoS attack targeting our clearnet servers and Tor backend performed by the "Infinity Exchanger" operators. Expect some access issues till the threat actor stops.
There is an ongoing DDoS attack targeting our clearnet servers and Tor backend performed by the "Infinity Exchanger" operators. Expect some access issues till the threat actor stops.
Of course it's possible (at least partially) to trace banknotes. They have serial numbers that are registered at several occasions.
Sure, you can do that. Banks and financial institutions do it. If a big bank robbery happens, chances are that the banks and its government know what bills to be on the lookout for based on their serial numbers. But regular people don't do that. Me and you don't take note of our bill's serial numbers. With bitcoin, you have a public ledger and anyone can follow the trail to the point that it goes to a mixer/tumbler/coinjoin service. The difference isn't in the fact that Bitcoin can be traced easier, the difference is in the legal interpretation. I believe that's because governments have an interest in keeping confidence in their own fiat money, which at the same time gives them an interest in doing the opposite to Bitcoin.
You have got a point there. But I think that it's not just that they don't want confidence in bitcoin being high. It's also their incapability to advance with the times and understand new technologies. World governments are only (relatively) quick in collecting taxes, everything else is a slow and tedious process. 
That's not the case with cash.
Of course it's possible (at least partially) to trace banknotes. They have serial numbers that are registered at several occasions. But it was ruled out by court centuries ago:First of all I was going to explain what we mean by fungibility before bitcoin and ecash. It's an old legal concept in fact, about paper currency. It's the idea that a one ten dollar note is the same as any other ten dollar note. If you receive a note that was involved in a theft, 10 transactions ago, and the police investigate the theft, they have no right to remove the ten dollar note from your pocket. It's not your fault that it was involved in a previous crime. And so bank notes actually have serial numbers, so it would be possible for a stolen note to be traced back to you.
This first arose, there was a 17th century court case where a wealthy merchant sent a couple of high-value bank notes to a colleague in the post and they never arrived. Before he sent them, he was quite paranoid that they would get stolen. He wrote down the serial numbers and made a mark on them. Sure enough they didn't arrive, so he put in a complaint with the bank, and evenutally the notes turned up at the bank. He tried to get the bank to return the notes to his ownership. The courts sided with the bank. Their reason was that if notes could be returned to their original owner after a theft, it would damage confidence in currency and it would be bad for business, the currency would become unusable because every time you received the paper note you would have to look in the newspaper whether it was reported stolen, or you would have the risk of it being taken, or you would have to rush to the bank to deposit it so that it was the bank's problem.
That became a legal concept and it applies to most countries now.
The difference isn't in the fact that Bitcoin can be traced easier, the difference is in the legal interpretation. I believe that's because governments have an interest in keeping confidence in their own fiat money, which at the same time gives them an interest in doing the opposite to Bitcoin. This first arose, there was a 17th century court case where a wealthy merchant sent a couple of high-value bank notes to a colleague in the post and they never arrived. Before he sent them, he was quite paranoid that they would get stolen. He wrote down the serial numbers and made a mark on them. Sure enough they didn't arrive, so he put in a complaint with the bank, and evenutally the notes turned up at the bank. He tried to get the bank to return the notes to his ownership. The courts sided with the bank. Their reason was that if notes could be returned to their original owner after a theft, it would damage confidence in currency and it would be bad for business, the currency would become unusable because every time you received the paper note you would have to look in the newspaper whether it was reported stolen, or you would have the risk of it being taken, or you would have to rush to the bank to deposit it so that it was the bank's problem.
That became a legal concept and it applies to most countries now.
Too many people take them seriously. Some of the euro bills in my wallet may have been stolen at some point in the past, but none of that is my concern because I didn't steal them.
And many probably have powder residues on them as well. The danger of digital money, and also bitcoin for that matter, is that there is a track of where the money came from. That's not the case with cash. That's why we have such services as blockchain analysis companies, which have declared themselves to be the judges of what goes and what doesn't. Sadly, innocent people get caught in the middle just like you explained. You could get your bitcoin confiscated tomorrow by custodial services, and your only mistake would be being in possession of coins that at one point in time were used or are believed to have been used for something bad. Since no one in power cares to come up with a better system, we should all stay away from CEXs and custodial services who view the findings of blockchain analysis as the truth and comply with all their recommendations.
The thing is, that money could in fact be stolen, but with an unprofessional and shitty attitude as displayed by that blockchain analysis company and supposed trading/exchange service, who can take them seriously?
Too many people take them seriously. Some of the euro bills in my wallet may have been stolen at some point in the past, but none of that is my concern because I didn't steal them. That's what fungibility is all about. Nobody would trust banknotes if they could be marked "tained" later on, and nobody will trust Bitcoin if that can happen either. 
So what happens now is that any coins sent from eXch to centralized platforms platforms are more at risk of triggering AML procedures?
Look up "strong-arm".
Blockchain analysis companies have a real power towards the Cex’s, as they can potentially flag some fraudulent behaviour of cryptocurrency users.
If a cex decides not to abide by those warnings, it can find itself in a weak situation in an eventual subsequent trial.
That sounds like extortion (I can't think of a better word in English).If a cex decides not to abide by those warnings, it can find itself in a weak situation in an eventual subsequent trial.
Look up "strong-arm".
The whole chain analysis business works based on a "trust me bro" scheme. It's stolen bro, trust me. We have investigated it and wrote a report. What more do you want? Oh, you want evidence and an explanation? What a fascist! Don't you worry about that. It's stolen because we told you it's stolen. You don't need to worry about the details.
The thing is, that money could in fact be stolen, but with an unprofessional and shitty attitude as displayed by that blockchain analysis company and supposed trading/exchange service, who can take them seriously?
The thing is, that money could in fact be stolen, but with an unprofessional and shitty attitude as displayed by that blockchain analysis company and supposed trading/exchange service, who can take them seriously?
Blockchain analysis companies have a real power towards the Cex’s, as they can potentially flag some fraudulent behaviour of cryptocurrency users.
If a cex decides not to abide by those warnings, it can find itself in a weak situation in an eventual subsequent trial.
That sounds like extortion (I can't think of a better word in English). So exchanges buy "services" from companies that "advice" them, and if they don't, they risk problems later on? While this "advice" is based on arbitrary non-published criteria? If a cex decides not to abide by those warnings, it can find itself in a weak situation in an eventual subsequent trial.
Since that communication was apparently targeting centralized exchanges, we (eXch) have sent an inquiry to that company (Elliptic) in order to get clarifications on that situation. The answer we received from Elliptic consisted in them not being able to provide any details on that matter nor proofs of the eventual hack which for us was a solid sign that they have none.
Did you ever get some better response from so-called blockchain intelligence/investigation companies in other more sound cases?It's quite lame from Elliptic to issue such risk flags without providing actual evidence and solid proofs. Is this "normal" behavior of blockchain intelligence companies?
This is a very good question, and the evidence provided here is quite significant.
Blockchain analysis companies have a real power towards the Cex’s, as they can potentially flag some fraudulent behaviour of cryptocurrency users.
If a cex decides not to abide by those warnings, it can find itself in a weak situation in an eventual subsequent trial.
Given this very high power, I would have expected such firms to be way more responsible in communicating their stance on their own warnings.
Well done Exch for not surrendering to passive execution.
Jump to: