Buy Crypto
Pay with
USD
USD
Buy & Sell
Hot
Supports Visa, Mastercard, SEPA & more
P2P
0 Fees
Flexible trading, zero fees
Gate Card
Use your crypto for payments worldwide
Markets
Trade
Basic
Advanced
Futures
Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
CFD
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Earn
Launch
CandyDrop
tag
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
Investment
Square
Square
Post, share, and explore crypto trends
Live
moments live
Live crypto market analysis
Chat
Chat with crypto traders
News
What is happening in crypto
flower_head
More
Promotions
AI
Others
TradFi
Gate Card
Rewards
Square
Latest
Hot
News
Profile

ZachXBT states that the issue of stablecoin issuers freezing funds in real-time should not be confused with DeFi security.

MeNews
ME News Report, April 18 (UTC+8), in response to Neeraj K. Agrawal's statement that "asking Circle to act as the police of the crypto world does not enhance DeFi security," on-chain investigator ZachXBT responded that it is inaccurate to conflate "whether stablecoin issuers should freeze assets in real-time" with "DeFi security," because publicly traded companies and centralized stablecoin issuers are not part of DeFi. ZachXBT stated that in a "clear and definite" case, approximately $230 million in illegal funds were laundered within six hours; if the relevant infrastructure and customer compliance are inadequate, this is a very poor example. He also criticized the inefficiency of using legal procedures to pressure victims instead of establishing real-time response mechanisms, and said that Circle should not selectively switch between "centralized" and "decentralized" based on its own interests. (Source: MLion)
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 8
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
Add a comment
Add a comment
Half-SectionedSucculent
· 4h ago
The term "selective switching" is used brilliantly; the essence of a business company is ultimately profit-seeking.
View OriginalReply0
DoNotTouchTheLiquidationLine.
· 4h ago
DeFi security indeed should not be equated with the ability to freeze stablecoins; they are two different things.
View OriginalReply0
OneMoreReorg
· 4h ago
The inefficiency of legal procedures is a fact, but bypassing them for real-time handling also involves questions of authority boundaries.
View OriginalReply0
DustyAirdropper
· 4h ago
ZachXBT's point is valid; Circle itself is a centralized organization, so discussing DeFi security is indeed misplaced.
View OriginalReply0
NightTideShell
· 4h ago
Switching to a decentralized narrative based on self-interest—that's the most ironic thing.
View OriginalReply0
OvernightPositionPhobia
· 4h ago
Circle this wave is caught between being squeezed from both sides, exposing the predicament of centralized stablecoins.
View OriginalReply0
SandwichAlertAgent
· 4h ago
Real-time freezing sounds great, but what if it freezes by mistake? Who will be held responsible?
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-3f3455c7
· 4h ago
ZachXBT is becoming more and more like the disciplinary committee of the crypto world.
View OriginalReply0

  • Pinned

Sitemap