I have the feeling the old falling out (old SWC to new one) also had an impact on security protocols. To me, the security of knowing I can withdraw will always be a top priority. Always. No point in playing somewhere if you never even know if you can get your money out, so I'd rather SWC do whatever is needed to ensure that's never an issue.
Old Seals had a security model that was good. SwC has a security model that is great. Old Seals was built with no concept of security model from the beginning. While all the Old Seals code was very well implemented, there were lots of things that required very active management, particularly public facing web architecture making live queries to critical databases.
When we started over at SwC we began enforcing a more rigid security model from the beginning. Web infrastructure has no ability or access to game infrastructure-- everything is kept strictly in its own silo. Every single process with potential attack surface is meticulously audited for all forms of memory corruption and parse tree differential attacks. They are also only run inside carefully crafted environments deploying the state of the art in protections against the malloc funny business- SEHOP, ASLR, DEP, PaX, etc. We use bcrypt for hashing. We use disk encryption across the board.
One thing that we are doing way, way better at SwC than Old Seals is assuredly security. We have vastly improved on this compared to the old site.