By a lucky occasion Cloudflare isn't blocking me from accessing Bitcointalk today and I can finally reply.
Do you intend to try to submit the app to Google Play as well?
No, nor planning to. Google Play is not a safe source of Android applications.
I was hoping that you would add another possibility, which I consider to be a possibility, especially for less experienced users, which relates to transactions that occur by mistake. This means, for example, that he uses the Ethereum deposit address and deposits a token on it. These incidents are often repeated, and platform systems exempt themselves from responsibility, and it is not possible to blame them for abandoning assistance to one of their customers, especially since this possibility of error is mentioned in the terms of use.
[...]
I expect that experienced members do not care about filling all the fields because it is always obvious that the refund address is the same address from which the deposit was made. But the matter becomes more dangerous with less experienced customers, since a large percentage of them make deposits directly from other platforms, that is, from one of the addresses of that platform and not from a personal address.
Regarding wrong token deposits:
The situation you described happens from time to time and our standard procedure to handle such cases is to cancel the order and disclose a private key of the deposit address to user. Our users never had problems restoring their tokens this way.
Regarding optional refund addresses:
It's not always obvious that the refund address is the sending address because many use third-party services/exchanges to send funds as deposits to us, therefore our system offers such a flexible refunding model aimed to cover both use cases - custodial and non-custodial. From what I can tell most users are happy with it so far and there were never complaints about it, otherwise we would consider changing it.
Nothing very useful but I laughed when I saw the following list:
Cannot believe changenow.io and eXch are on the same boat in his mind. "these will die off or remove priv coins" lol
Both ChangeNow and FixedFloat are puppets of chain analysis and intel platforms.
twitter/demchukvm/status/1755180697390571727 (tweet by Slava Demchuk, founder of AMLBot)
twitter/MistTrack_io/status/1699926525229863003
What kind of support are you using this days and is posted SimpleX chat connection link working or nor for direct communication (
https://exch.cx/support) ??
I am getting some network errors in eXch mobile app.
We use:
- our on-site support ticketing system
- email (both with and without PGP)
- SimpleX
For fast and secure assistance please use our ticketing system as it's monitored and attended by all of our team members. Your communications will be encrypted by our own TLS certificate on our HTTP server without any intermediary third-party servers (such as Cloudflare), since all the frontend servers belong fully to us and operate strictly on bare metal hardware that will be automatically considered compromised by a state-level attacker in case there is a single unexpected reboot to happen.
Email without PGP is also a fast option which is also attended by various people but less secure.
Email with PGP is a slower option, since the PGP key is only possessed by the core admin/founder.
SimpleX is only attended by the core admin who is not always online and doesn't have it installed on a mobile device (which might change later).
Rate increased from 0.5% to 5% ?!?!
I saw the increase to 5%/5.5% too. It seems to be however only for the Bitcoin -> Monero trading pair. XMR -> BTC and also other pairs like BTC -> LTC are not affected.
I noticed that XMR reserves are usually quite low as this seems to be the most attractive trading pair (for quite obvious reasons). This might be the reason for the fee increase, maybe to get funds to purchase new XMR reserves?
I confirm I get the same rates. It must be a shortage, or at least this is my only reasonable explanation. Don't forget that most CEXs don't trade XMR, so XMR flows in the market are limited in general.
Could this be because of the way the price is determined?
Current rate is a median value based on the latest trading data of the following markets: Binance, OKEX, Kraken
Coinmarketcap shows the 24h trading volume for Bitcoin/Monero on those echanges is about $4M. The eXch volume on this pair is almost half of that.
Normally, on an exchange, if demand for a coin goes up, the price shifts to match supply and demand. Since eXch doesn't influence the price pair, that doesn't happen.
Another theory is that a large holder switched to Monero, or simply makes usage of this internal function as a mixer. eXch is really attractive for an anonymous entity. No KYC and supports Tor. It reduces some risks of de-anonymization by just sending and receiving bitcoin via Tor Browser, than to use a less reviewed, more complicated software like Bisq. (And it might be cheaper as well)
The service fee increase is a loss prevention mechanism of our exchange and usually only affects highly volatile coins, which in that case was XMR. Don't forget that we don't resell Binance like other swappers, so charging 0.5% which often causes a loss of our own reserves is not always an option.
The first service fee spike for XMR pairs was caused by OKX delisting XMR.
The second service fee spike for XMR pairs was caused by Binance attacking XMR by delisting announcement and price manipulation involving various techniques not obvious to most people (except ones who have been here enough to know how all this speculative market works and has nothing in common with tech)
As a service that provides its own liquidity for trades, we have to protect our liquidity from extreme volatily in order to prevent losing our capital.
If we increase a price by 5% 10% or 22% it means we only do it to protect ourselves from some factors currently affecting the coin's price and not to make extra gains.
We are barely able to make any profits even with a current 5% service fee but it's at least a good (and only) mean of protection against high volatility.
However, we are considering to keep 5% on selling XMR in future because our service is now used by many other services with a purpose of mixing, therefore it's absolutely inconvenient for us to work hard acquiring XMR then give it away for nothing to some other service that makes considerable gains based off our hard work acquiring XMR. Same for users who only use eXch for mixing their BTC through XMR - we don't consider it honest when some of them complain about 5% for the level anonymity they will take from our service without recurring to chaining their funds flow through different services that might cost them far more than just 5% (and who are often eXch's resellers).
I wonder why recently some pairs BTC-XMR for example charge 5% fees on eXch when just few months ago it was 0.5% fee ?
OP does all the pairs will soon be at 5% fee? or it will stay only for ETH-XMR BTC-XMR ?
It's sad this eXch was the best in the industry until it became overpriced just recently..
I understand i just hope this 5% fee will not apply to all the pairs in the future, and it is indeed for re-balancing the liquidity.
A price increase of 5% on XMR won't make us worse for sure, because first of all it's justified and secondly we are the only service offering a set of unique privacy/anonymity options and features.
And no, we do not plan to impose a 5% service fee to other pairs unless it becomes necessary, like it was/is in case of XMR.
I'd like to make a small comment / correction; Bisq has been around
since December 2014, with over 200 contributors and also connects through Tor by default.
However, I confess that it feels a bit more complicated than an instant exchange running in the browser.
Bisq is one and the only truly decentralized exchange which we often recommend to our customers without any greed feelings, since our primary goal is not to make money but to defend some cypherpunk ideas instead.
However, Bisq comes with some privacy and useability issues not often convenient for some edge use cases.
- Java has a very risky environment and is very resource-consuming
- Bisq has no reproducible builds yet, so if you don't compile the project yourself, you have to trust its builders and pray they (or their hypothetical attackers) don't include malicious code into the builds you rely on. This is the reason many people isolate it using virtualized environments which also creates a big resource load overhead
- Privacy issues related to reusing same identity - after a certain amount of trades a user can be tracked and even traced. Gladly you can at least change your identity fast currently, but I've heard that Bisq 2 will be based on a reputation-only model which potentially might make things worse in terms of privacy and hope that they will at least continue providing the current collateral-based model as an option
BTW, @exch.cc, have you tried contacting theymos about the old domain (user)name? I'm pretty confident he'll allow changing it to "exch.cx".
Yeah, there were attempts to do so. Although theymos was not able to help at all, we were recently contacted by another admin who is offering some options related to username change which we are reviewing still.
I have been using L-BTC (liquid) and I would like to suggest you to add this 2nd layer solution to your services. I would certainly use it and I believe other members would use it as well.
https://liquid.net/Liquid network is a next project we will list and there is currently work ongoing.
Hello @eXch.cc
Not that it's a serious matter at the moment, but I am just curious and thinking. Your x.com profile is named after a one Sarah Nugent (
https://twitter.com/exchcx) with probably her profile photo or perhaps a fake one. I don't know. Why Sarah Nugent? Is she a representative? I hope it's a fake.
If indeed she's a real person out there, don't you think this might endanger her, given how hell-bent law enforcement is towards services that resist their directives?
Hello @eXch.cc
Not that it's a serious matter at the moment, but I am just curious and thinking. Your x.com profile is named after a one Sarah Nugent (
https://twitter.com/exchcx) with probably her profile photo or perhaps a fake one. I don't know. Why Sarah Nugent? Is she a representative? I hope it's a fake.
If indeed she's a real person out there, don't you think this might endanger her, given how hell-bent law enforcement is towards services that resist their directives?
The profile picture reminds me of something out of AI face generators particularly with the way it's awkwardly cropped 🤔
She was hired on Linkedin and informed about all the potential risks working with us, which she agreed to.
We checked her profile pic on
https://wasitai.com and it told us she is a human:
She also has Twitter's blue check mark which means she most probably passed KYC.
However, we will for sure review all this information and let you know in the near future if there is anything wrong with that person.
Also, just a tip: take everything that happens on Twitter with a grain of salt including this particular reply in regards to herI think exch.cx and similar are way cheaper than mixers. People might be using it for privacy too.
2 facts, by the way:
1. Some people indeed use eXch as a mixer
2. Some mixers now use eXch as their backend
Hello,
I've been using eXch since a few months and saw Blixt being recommended for LN usage. However I was never able to receive anything with Blixt from eXch because of expiration limit (and likely zero-amount invoice). For the record: A channel was already opened and transactions with other LN Wallets work in both directions.
Is it possible to use Blixt on eXch to receive LN BTC? If so it would be nice if someone explains how, but I understand that this is maybe too much to ask. If not, are there any good alternatives that can be used with eXch?
Thanks in advance!
We've been recommending Blixt for some time already (
https://exch.cx/faq#wallet_security_recommendations) mainly because they make a full LN node from a mobile device, however we will probably stop doing so temporarily because they fail to include their wallet to the main F-Droid repo nor seem to care about doing so, which is a huge security issue according to our assessment.
For now the only solid options we can recommend are Electrum or self-hosting a node.
However, for users who don't mind trusting .apk's built directly by devs there are for sure many good options available, but we don't want to take a responsibility of recommending them because of their security model not matching our high standards (Tl;DR: F-Droid or avoid). And of course, any suggestions are always welcome.
Is there scope or plans for adding any other stable coins options to eXch in the future? DAI and USDT are available on the Ethereum blockchain but are there any plans to spread out further say to TRC-20?
What
d5000 answered above is still relevant and can be taken as a full answer. We are still hesitant on adding Tron or Avalanche. We don't trust both project founders and specially the latter.
. Lol I never thought I would be able to do such a mistake, but that's not the point. I opened a case with the support, and the problem was quickly resolved. The agent sent me the private key to the address where I'd sent the tokens by mistake, and I was able to recover everything of course.