On March 7, 2018 (January 20, 2018 in the lunar calendar), the beginning and end of the incident when Binan was hacked and stolen coins. March 7, 2018 is destined to be remembered by the currency circle. In the early morning, Binance was reported to have a malfunction. Hackers stole Binan accounts and stole at least 700 million yuan. Immediately afterwards, on the morning of the 7th Beijing time, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued an announcement reminding investors of illegal platforms for digital asset trading and stated that regulatory actions on such trading platforms have become stricter. "These trading platforms provide mechanisms for trading assets that must meet the definition of 'securities' under federal securities laws," the SEC said. If the platform provides securities digital asset trading services and operates in accordance with an 'exchange' under the provisions of the Federal Securities Act." Then, the Financial Services Agency of Japan issued eight "cleanup orders" in succession and issued seven fines. Two exchanges were directly shut down and five were required to rectify. Within one day, a series of accidental incidents involved all people in the currency circle, causing panic. On March 9, Xu Mingxing, founder of OKcoin, one of the world's largest virtual currency exchanges, said in the employee group that "we are ready to donate it to the country at any time in the future." The entire Binance incident occurred late at night. At 1:40 a.m. Beijing time on March 7, the digital currency exchange Binance was exploded and failed. Several users posted on the forum saying that Binan was suspected of being hacked and suddenly sold the cryptocurrency in their accounts. They found that various tokens and digital currencies in their Binan account were instantly traded into BTC. According to media reports and analysis, this was an organized and premeditated hacking operation. The failure originated from the fact that some API robots were hacked. Hackers used the stolen account to buy VIA (viloin) at a high price, causing VIA to explode, with a 110-fold increase. Binance immediately announced that it would suspend withdrawals of all currencies. However, the hackers did not choose to withdraw cash. Instead, they increased the value of VIA on the currency, triggering a chain reaction of currency prices on other exchanges, and the hackers then profit from short orders placed on other exchanges. However, Binance official responded: "There was no theft. API withdrawals need to be confirmed by email, but they were only sold. Now the situation has been stopped. The currency cannot be withdrawn. We are confirming why these users have problems." The stolen person wanted to roll back the transaction, but Binance stated that because the counterparty was not a hacker account, it could not roll back the transaction, and the losses would be borne by the user. Binance is currently the second-largest virtual currency exchange by transaction volume, behind OKEx. This security failure not only caused the credibility of Binance to plummet, but also caused major exchanges to be questioned. "Playing with centralized blockchain virtual currency on a centralized trading platform is itself ironic." Some netizens said. According to statistics from CoinMarketCap.com, affected by this incident, the top ten digital currencies fell across the board, and digital currencies fell into a sustained general decline. At 9 a.m. on March 8, Binance issued an announcement on its official website saying that it had resumed withdrawing cash, and said that this was a large-scale incident of obtaining user accounts through phishing and "attempting" to steal coins. The lesson of "Mentougou" Binan is the second large-scale coin theft incident in the world. The "Mentougou" incident four years ago directly led to the collapse of the world's largest trading platform at that time. Mentougou, the Chinese translation of Mt. Gox, was once the largest Bitcoin trading website. It is headquartered in Tokyo, Japan and was founded in 2010. At that time, Bitcoin was in the ascendant. Due to early participation and little competition, Mt. Got once accounted for 80% of the global Bitcoin trading volume market. On February 7, 2014, Mt. Got issued an announcement stating that it found a large number of invalid withdrawal requests and needed to analyze the reasons, and immediately suspended all withdrawal operations. This instant brought panic to the Bitcoin world. Several well-known Bitcoin trading websites have announced a suspension of withdrawals, and the price of Bitcoin has been halved. Three days later, Mt. Gox issued an announcement stating that the cause had been identified and that the withdrawal transaction was subject to a "forged transaction ID attack" and the culprit was a "transaction extension vulnerability." Simply put, the hacker applies to withdraw currency and modifies the transaction ID after receiving the bitcoin paid by the exchange, making the exchange mistake that the transaction failed and resend the bitcoin. In this way, the hacker will receive double the amount of Bitcoin. According to a document called Mt. Gox Crisis Management Draft, Mt. Gox lost a total of approximately 750,000 bitcoins from investors at the time, with a current price of approximately US$365 million. In the end, due to insolvency, Mt. Gox had to file for bankruptcy. There are different opinions about the reasons for the theft. Some people say that Mt. Gox was indeed hacked, while others say that the exchange stole from itself, taking investors 'bitcoins for its own and selling them to other platforms. Either way, the victims are Bitcoin investors. Exchanges can charge trading fees, stop losses by opening positions, or run away like Mt. Got. Investors, on the other hand, have to pay for the mistakes of the exchange. In fact, exchanges have always been a rich mine for hackers. Recently, news of exchanges being stolen has been frequently reported around the world. On January 26 this year, Japanese crypto exchange Coincheck was hacked and 58 billion yen of new coins were stolen; on February 11, Italian crypto exchange BitGrail worth US$170 million was stolen. In the eyes of currency speculators, apart from the threat of a sharp drop in the currency price, the most feared thing is probably the intrusion of hackers. Regardless of natural and man-made disasters, investors can only look at the ocean and sigh. What hackers are sure is that many countries will not file cases for the theft of virtual currencies. In a legal vacuum, they attack and plunder recklessly. Regulatory authorities in the United States, Japan and China have voiced their voices one after another. On March 8, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued an announcement reminding investors to pay attention to illegal digital asset trading platforms. Statement on potentially illegal online platforms for digital asset trading Online trading platforms have become a popular way for investors to buy and sell digital assets, including the buying and selling of digital currencies and ICO tokens. These platforms claim to allow investors to quickly buy and sell digital assets. Many platforms act as intermediaries and matchmakers for buying and selling information, providing investors with automated systems that can quote, execute transactions and trade data. These trading platforms provide mechanisms for trading assets that must meet the definition of "securities" under the federal securities law. If a platform provides securities digital asset trading services and operates as an "exchange" under federal securities laws, then the platform must be registered as a national stock exchange with the SEC or apply for an exemption from registration. The federal regulatory framework was developed to protect investors and prevent fraud and trading manipulation. In order to receive the protection provided by federal securities laws and SEC regulations when trading securities digital assets, investors should use a platform or entity registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission, such as a National Stock Exchange, Alternative Trading System ("ATS "), or a broker. Securities and Exchange Commission staff are concerned that many online trading platforms appear to investors to be SEC-registered and regulated markets, but are not. Many platforms call themselves "exchanges," which may mislead investors that they are regulated or meet the regulatory standards of national stock exchanges. Although some of these platforms claim to use strict standards to select high-quality digital assets for trading, these standards or the digital assets selected by the platforms have not been reviewed by the SEC, and the so-called standards are not equivalent to national stock exchange standards. Similarly, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission does not review the trading protocols used by these platforms, but these protocols determine how orders interact and execute, and for some users, each access to the platform's trading services may be different. Third, investors should not assume that trading agreements meet the standards of national stock exchanges registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Finally, many of these platforms give the impression that they perform exchange-like functions by providing updates to information such as orders, but there is no reason to believe that this information is as complete as that provided by national stock exchanges. Given the above, investors should ask a few questions before deciding to trade digital assets on an online trading platform: Do you trade securities on this platform? If so, is the platform registered as a national stock exchange? Does the platform operate as an ATS? If so, has ATS registered as a broker and filed an ATS form with the SEC? Does Brokercheck have information about any individuals or companies that operate the platform? How does the platform choose digital assets for trading? Who can trade on the platform? What is a transaction agreement? How to set prices on the platform? Are platform users treated equally? How much does the platform cost? How does the platform protect users 'transactions and personally identifiable information? What is the platform's protection against cybersecurity threats, such as hacking or intrusions? What other services does the platform provide? Does the platform register for these services with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission? Does the platform have user assets? If so, how can these assets be protected? In fact, the emergence of supervision is not a bad thing for exchanges and virtual currency exchanges. Some industry insiders said that comparing virtual currency with securities is tantamount to recognizing the commodity status of virtual currency in disguise. In fact, problems similar to currency security occur around the world. The exchange itself is not safe and is constantly attacked by hackers. This is no longer a question of decentralization, but that the current trading rules are not fair to everyone. Hackers can steal money, dealers can sit in the house, and exchanges can open positions. Each of these has the possibility of clearing the accounts of ordinary investors. At almost the same time as the SEC issued its statement, the Financial Services Agency of Japan issued eight orders in succession, established the "Virtual Currency Trading Practitioners Research Association", closed two exchanges, and required five exchanges to rectify. Japan was the first country to propose regulation of digital currency exchanges. The "Mentougou Incident" of that year directly prompted the Japanese government to formulate relevant regulations, such as the "Amendment to the Banking Law." Moreover, as early as 2016, in order to prevent illegal activities such as terrorism and money laundering, the Japanese government signed the "Fund Settlement Amendment Act" to formally incorporate virtual currency into the legal system. The reason for this rectification by the Financial Services Agency of Japan happened to be caused by a loophole in an exchange. Not long ago, about 58 billion yen in digital currency was stolen from Japanese exchange Coincheck. After the theft, the Financial Services Agency of Japan launched an investigation into security breaches on all crypto digital currency exchanges, and found that these exchanges had loopholes in customer protection and anti-money laundering measures. On the same day, at a press conference held by the Press Center of the First Session of the 13th National People's Congress held in Beijing, Zhou Xiaochuan, Governor of the People's Bank of China, said in response to reporters 'questions about virtual currency:"While considering new technologies, we must be clear in the direction of service. We don't like to create a speculative product, which gives people the illusion of getting rich overnight. If we want to serve the internship economy, digital currency must provide consumers and The market brings efficiency, low costs, security, and privacy protection. We must also consider the overall situation and not conflict with the current financial order. Zhou Xiaochuan did not disclose the details of the central bank's future supervision of digital currencies, but pointed out some directions: future supervision is dynamic and depends on the maturity of technology... We don't like creating speculative products that give people the illusion of getting rich overnight. This is not a good thing. If you want to develop digital currency, if a consumer retail market brings efficiency, low cost, security and privacy considerations, you must also consider the overall situation and not directly conflict with the current financial stability and financial order. However, if your technological development brings changes to the original financial order, it also requires more careful research and introduction. First Japan, then the SEC, and if nothing goes wrong, it will be China. The movements of the three major countries mean that digital currency exchanges are expected to be included in the current securities framework. This kind of supervision and guidance is not necessarily a bad thing for digital currencies-it will curb the current chaos in exchanges and more effectively protect the rights of investors. However, positive signals from regulation seem to have had no effect on boosting market sentiment. On the evening of March 8, virtual currency exchanges such as Binance, OKEx, Huobi pro and bitmex were inaccessible or slow in China, triggering speculation that domestic supervision was "one size fits all". On the second day, global virtual currency prices generally fell sharply, and the price of Bitcoin once fell below US$9000, which was tragic. On the 9th, OKcoin founder Xu Mingxing stated in his employee group that he "had reported to the leaders" and stated that he was "ready to hand over the exchange to the country at any time", which once again caused a shock in the circle. After these "48 hours of panic", I hope that the virtual currency market in 2018 will be more clean and transparent.On March 7, 2018 (January 20, 2018 in the lunar calendar), the beginning and end of the incident when Binan was hacked and stolen coins. March 7, 2018 is destined to be remembered by the currency circle. In the early morning, Binance was reported to have a malfunction. Hackers stole Binan accounts and stole at least 700 million yuan. Immediately afterwards, on the morning of the 7th Beijing time, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued an announcement reminding investors of illegal platforms for digital asset trading and stated that regulatory actions on such trading platforms have become stricter. "These trading platforms provide mechanisms for trading assets that must meet the definition of 'securities' under federal securities laws," the SEC said. If the platform provides securities digital asset trading services and operates in accordance with an 'exchange' under the provisions of the Federal Securities Act." Then, the Financial Services Agency of Japan issued eight "cleanup orders" in succession and issued seven fines. Two exchanges were directly shut down and five were required to rectify. Within one day, a series of accidental incidents involved all people in the currency circle, causing panic. On March 9, Xu Mingxing, founder of OKcoin, one of the world's largest virtual currency exchanges, said in the employee group that "we are ready to donate it to the country at any time in the future." The entire Binance incident occurred late at night. At 1:40 a.m. Beijing time on March 7, the digital currency exchange Binance was exploded and failed. Several users posted on the forum saying that Binan was suspected of being hacked and suddenly sold the cryptocurrency in their accounts. They found that various tokens and digital currencies in their Binan account were instantly traded into BTC. According to media reports and analysis, this was an organized and premeditated hacking operation. The failure originated from the fact that some API robots were hacked. Hackers used the stolen account to buy VIA (viloin) at a high price, causing VIA to explode, with a 110-fold increase. Binance immediately announced that it would suspend withdrawals of all currencies. However, the hackers did not choose to withdraw cash. Instead, they increased the value of VIA on the currency, triggering a chain reaction of currency prices on other exchanges, and the hackers then profit from short orders placed on other exchanges. However, Binance official responded: "There was no theft. API withdrawals need to be confirmed by email, but they were only sold. Now the situation has been stopped. The currency cannot be withdrawn. We are confirming why these users have problems." The stolen person wanted to roll back the transaction, but Binance stated that because the counterparty was not a hacker account, it could not roll back the transaction, and the losses would be borne by the user. Binance is currently the second-largest virtual currency exchange by transaction volume, behind OKEx. This security failure not only caused the credibility of Binance to plummet, but also caused major exchanges to be questioned. "Playing with centralized blockchain virtual currency on a centralized trading platform is itself ironic." Some netizens said. According to statistics from CoinMarketCap.com, affected by this incident, the top ten digital currencies fell across the board, and digital currencies fell into a sustained general decline. At 9 a.m. on March 8, Binance issued an announcement on its official website saying that it had resumed withdrawing cash, and said that this was a large-scale incident of obtaining user accounts through phishing and "attempting" to steal coins. The lesson of "Mentougou" Binan is the second large-scale coin theft incident in the world. The "Mentougou" incident four years ago directly led to the collapse of the world's largest trading platform at that time. Mentougou, the Chinese translation of Mt. Gox, was once the largest Bitcoin trading website. It is headquartered in Tokyo, Japan and was founded in 2010. At that time, Bitcoin was in the ascendant. Due to early participation and little competition, Mt. Got once accounted for 80% of the global Bitcoin trading volume market. On February 7, 2014, Mt. Got issued an announcement stating that it found a large number of invalid withdrawal requests and needed to analyze the reasons, and immediately suspended all withdrawal operations. This instant brought panic to the Bitcoin world. Several well-known Bitcoin trading websites have announced a suspension of withdrawals, and the price of Bitcoin has been halved. Three days later, Mt. Gox issued an announcement stating that the cause had been identified and that the withdrawal transaction was subject to a "forged transaction ID attack" and the culprit was a "transaction extension vulnerability." Simply put, the hacker applies to withdraw currency and modifies the transaction ID after receiving the bitcoin paid by the exchange, making the exchange mistake that the transaction failed and resend the bitcoin. In this way, the hacker will receive double the amount of Bitcoin. According to a document called Mt. Gox Crisis Management Draft, Mt. Gox lost a total of approximately 750,000 bitcoins from investors at the time, with a current price of approximately US$365 million. In the end, due to insolvency, Mt. Gox had to file for bankruptcy. There are different opinions about the reasons for the theft. Some people say that Mt. Gox was indeed hacked, while others say that the exchange stole from itself, taking investors 'bitcoins for its own and selling them to other platforms. Either way, the victims are Bitcoin investors. Exchanges can charge trading fees, stop losses by opening positions, or run away like Mt. Got. Investors, on the other hand, have to pay for the mistakes of the exchange. In fact, exchanges have always been a rich mine for hackers. Recently, news of exchanges being stolen has been frequently reported around the world. On January 26 this year, Japanese crypto exchange Coincheck was hacked and 58 billion yen of new coins were stolen; on February 11, Italian crypto exchange BitGrail worth US$170 million was stolen. In the eyes of currency speculators, apart from the threat of a sharp drop in the currency price, the most feared thing is probably the intrusion of hackers. Regardless of natural and man-made disasters, investors can only look at the ocean and sigh. What hackers are sure is that many countries will not file cases for the theft of virtual currencies. In a legal vacuum, they attack and plunder recklessly. Regulatory authorities in the United States, Japan and China have voiced their voices one after another. On March 8, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued an announcement reminding investors to pay attention to illegal digital asset trading platforms. Statement on potentially illegal online platforms for digital asset trading Online trading platforms have become a popular way for investors to buy and sell digital assets, including the buying and selling of digital currencies and ICO tokens. These platforms claim to allow investors to quickly buy and sell digital assets. Many platforms act as intermediaries and matchmakers for buying and selling information, providing investors with automated systems that can quote, execute transactions and trade data. These trading platforms provide mechanisms for trading assets that must meet the definition of "securities" under the federal securities law. If a platform provides securities digital asset trading services and operates as an "exchange" under federal securities laws, then the platform must be registered as a national stock exchange with the SEC or apply for an exemption from registration. The federal regulatory framework was developed to protect investors and prevent fraud and trading manipulation. In order to receive the protection provided by federal securities laws and SEC regulations when trading securities digital assets, investors should use a platform or entity registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission, such as a National Stock Exchange, Alternative Trading System ("ATS "), or a broker. Securities and Exchange Commission staff are concerned that many online trading platforms appear to investors to be SEC-registered and regulated markets, but are not. Many platforms call themselves "exchanges," which may mislead investors that they are regulated or meet the regulatory standards of national stock exchanges. Although some of these platforms claim to use strict standards to select high-quality digital assets for trading, these standards or the digital assets selected by the platforms have not been reviewed by the SEC, and the so-called standards are not equivalent to national stock exchange standards. Similarly, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission does not review the trading protocols used by these platforms, but these protocols determine how orders interact and execute, and for some users, each access to the platform's trading services may be different. Third, investors should not assume that trading agreements meet the standards of national stock exchanges registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Finally, many of these platforms give the impression that they perform exchange-like functions by providing updates to information such as orders, but there is no reason to believe that this information is as complete as that provided by national stock exchanges. Given the above, investors should ask a few questions before deciding to trade digital assets on an online trading platform: Do you trade securities on this platform? If so, is the platform registered as a national stock exchange? Does the platform operate as an ATS? If so, has ATS registered as a broker and filed an ATS form with the SEC? Does Brokercheck have information about any individuals or companies that operate the platform? How does the platform choose digital assets for trading? Who can trade on the platform? What is a transaction agreement? How to set prices on the platform? Are platform users treated equally? How much does the platform cost? How does the platform protect users 'transactions and personally identifiable information? What is the platform's protection against cybersecurity threats, such as hacking or intrusions? What other services does the platform provide? Does the platform register for these services with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission? Does the platform have user assets? If so, how can these assets be protected? In fact, the emergence of supervision is not a bad thing for exchanges and virtual currency exchanges. Some industry insiders said that comparing virtual currency with securities is tantamount to recognizing the commodity status of virtual currency in disguise. In fact, problems similar to currency security occur around the world. The exchange itself is not safe and is constantly attacked by hackers. This is no longer a question of decentralization, but that the current trading rules are not fair to everyone. Hackers can steal money, dealers can sit in the house, and exchanges can open positions. Each of these has the possibility of clearing the accounts of ordinary investors. At almost the same time as the SEC issued its statement, the Financial Services Agency of Japan issued eight orders in succession, established the "Virtual Currency Trading Practitioners Research Association", closed two exchanges, and required five exchanges to rectify. Japan was the first country to propose regulation of digital currency exchanges. The "Mentougou Incident" of that year directly prompted the Japanese government to formulate relevant regulations, such as the "Amendment to the Banking Law." Moreover, as early as 2016, in order to prevent illegal activities such as terrorism and money laundering, the Japanese government signed the "Fund Settlement Amendment Act" to formally incorporate virtual currency into the legal system. The reason for this rectification by the Financial Services Agency of Japan happened to be caused by a loophole in an exchange. Not long ago, about 58 billion yen in digital currency was stolen from Japanese exchange Coincheck. After the theft, the Financial Services Agency of Japan launched an investigation into security breaches on all crypto digital currency exchanges, and found that these exchanges had loopholes in customer protection and anti-money laundering measures. On the same day, at a press conference held by the Press Center of the First Session of the 13th National People's Congress held in Beijing, Zhou Xiaochuan, Governor of the People's Bank of China, said in response to reporters 'questions about virtual currency:"While considering new technologies, we must be clear in the direction of service. We don't like to create a speculative product, which gives people the illusion of getting rich overnight. If we want to serve the internship economy, digital currency must provide consumers and The market brings efficiency, low costs, security, and privacy protection. We must also consider the overall situation and not conflict with the current financial order. Zhou Xiaochuan did not disclose the details of the central bank's future supervision of digital currencies, but pointed out some directions: future supervision is dynamic and depends on the maturity of technology... We don't like creating speculative products that give people the illusion of getting rich overnight. This is not a good thing. If you want to develop digital currency, if a consumer retail market brings efficiency, low cost, security and privacy considerations, you must also consider the overall situation and not directly conflict with the current financial stability and financial order. However, if your technological development brings changes to the original financial order, it also requires more careful research and introduction. First Japan, then the SEC, and if nothing goes wrong, it will be China. The movements of the three major countries mean that digital currency exchanges are expected to be included in the current securities framework. This kind of supervision and guidance is not necessarily a bad thing for digital currencies-it will curb the current chaos in exchanges and more effectively protect the rights of investors. However, positive signals from regulation seem to have had no effect on boosting market sentiment. On the evening of March 8, virtual currency exchanges such as Binance, OKEx, Huobi pro and bitmex were inaccessible or slow in China, triggering speculation that domestic supervision was "one size fits all". On the second day, global virtual currency prices generally fell sharply, and the price of Bitcoin once fell below US$9000, which was tragic. On the 9th, OKcoin founder Xu Mingxing stated in his employee group that he "had reported to the leaders" and stated that he was "ready to hand over the exchange to the country at any time", which once again caused a shock in the circle. After these "48 hours of panic", I hope that the virtual currency market in 2018 will be more clean and transparent.