Categories
News

Severe Liquidity Shock Ahead for Bitcoin Market, Warns JPMorgan (www.blockcast.cc)

A piece of excerpt allegedly taken from a JPMorgan & Chase’s report is warning its clients about a potential “liquidity shock” in the Bitcoin market.

The extract praises the cryptocurrency industry for improving its on-screen liquidity better than traditional asset classes on a relative basis. Nevertheless, it simultaneously warns about how most such liquidity provisions come from high-frequency-style traders who flee the markets when volatility picks up.

March Crisis

JPMorgan took the discussion back to March 2020’s global market rout, wherein liquidity shrank dramatically in the LIBOR, repurchase agreement, short-term commercial paper, and other large-volume money markets. The US dollar’s purchasing power soared, leaving even the safest of all US Treasuries in a critical condition.

Bitcoin was one of the victims of the said illiquid period.

It was not until the Federal Reserve decided to step in with its quantitative easing program that the global market recovered, taking the flagship cryptocurrency upward in tandem. The US central bank’s decision to slash interest rates to almost zero and buy government and corporate debts indefinitely prompted a lengthy bull cycle across stocks, bonds, gold, and even Bitcoin markets.

Bitcoin, cryptocurrency, BTCUSD, BTCUSDTBitcoin, cryptocurrency, BTCUSD, BTCUSDT
Bitcoin reached its record high near $42,000 in January 2021. Source: BTCUSD on TradingView.com
Bitcoin reached its record high near $42,000 in January 2021. Source: BTCUSD on TradingView.com

The cryptocurrency has now rebounded by more than 700 percent from its mid-March nadir of $3,858. Nevertheless, its potential to pare those gains is higher as long as the global market anticipates a March-like liquidity crisis. Moreover, according to JPMorgan analysts, Bitcoin’s biggest liquidity risks come from within the cryptocurrency industry.

“Most Bitcoin trading occurs, not against fiat USD, but USDT, a stablecoin issued by Tether Ltd and pegged 1:1 to the US dollar,” they explained, adding that the Hong Kong-based company avoids falling under the same strict supervisory and disclosure regime as traditional banks.

“Tether Ltd claims reserve assets of cash and equivalents equal to their outstanding liabilities, but has famously not produced an independent audit and has claimed in court filings that they need not mention full backings,” the JPMorgan note reads.

Risks to Bitcoin Bulls

According to data fetched by CoinMarketCap, Tether has a circulating supply of $25.52 billion, up more than 500 percent from its January 1, 2020’s market cap open of $4.096 billion. Its parent company iFinex, which also owns popular trading platform BitFinex, faces allegations of losing $850 million worth of its client funds to an entity allegedly based in Panama.

tether, usdt, stablecoin, cryptocurrencytether, usdt, stablecoin, cryptocurrency
Tether’s market capitalization crosses the $25 billion mark. Source: CoinMarketCap.com
Tether's market capitalization crosses the $25 billion mark. Source: CoinMarketCap.com

The New York attorney general’s filings against iFinex states that BitFinex “faced extreme difficulty honoring its clients’ requests to withdraw their money from the trading platform” in 2018. In October 2018, the USDT stablecoin had lost its 1:1 peg to the US dollar, falling to as low as $0.86. Two months later, Bitcoin established its yearly low near $3,200.

Nevertheless, Tether still controls 80 percent of all the Bitcoin trade volumes daily.

“A sudden loss of confidence in USDT would likely generate a severe liquidity shock to Bitcoin markets,” stated JPMorgan, adding that it “could lose access to by far the largest pools of demand and liquidity.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Go to Source

Image Credit: Refer to Source
Author: Refer to Source Yashu Gola

Categories
News

Interpretation of the Ethereum 2.0 Slash mechanism: How to avoid severe punishment? (www.blockcast.cc)

Slash means a sharp reduction, and is a commonly used punishment mechanism for malicious validators in PoS consensus public chains. The slash rule of Ethereum 2.0 may be the most complicated of all PoS public chains. By studying the Ethereum 2.0 design specifications and source code, the slash rules are interpreted as follows.

Types of slash

Slash generally refers to punishment for serious malicious behavior, rather than punishment for ordinary offline nodes. The latter is generally called inactivity penalties. In general PoS public chains, generally only “double sign” behaviors will trigger slash, while in Ethereum 2.0, the following behaviors are specific:

Propose two conflicting blocks in the same slot;

Vote for two conflicting blocks in the same slot;

Voting conflicts with historical voting.

Behavior a, b will cause unnecessary forks on the blockchain, and behavior c is an attempt to tamper with history.

Validator status after slash

After slashing, the verifier will be forced to enter the verifier exit queue and then exit.

The validator will be deducted the effective balance/128 as a fine immediately. If the effective balance is 32ETH, it is 0.25ETH. (It should be noted that the original penalty amount is the effective balance/32, which is 1ETH, but it is temporarily reduced to a quarter of the original value during the beacon chain stage)

After 8192 epochs (about 36 days), the validator account is allowed to withdraw (after Ethereum 2.0 supports transaction functions).

Before allowing withdrawal, the slashed node will receive a penalty of 3 times the online reward at the beginning of each epoch.

The slashed verifier is not allowed to return to the verifier queue again, and can only rebuild a new verifier and re-stake.

Multi-node slash at the same time

In addition to the effective balance/128 penalty and the offline penalty for each epoch, there will be another additional penalty in the middle half of the epoch that is slashed and the epoch that allows withdrawal, that is, 4096 epochs after being slashed.

The penalty ratio is proportional to the ratio of the total balance of all slashed validators to the total balance of active validators on the entire network during this period.

The original proportional coefficient is 3, and the current beacon chain stage is temporarily reduced to one third of the original value, that is, the coefficient is 1. In other words, the extra penalty for multi-node slash will be 3 times the current one.

Therefore, a validator node will be punished three times after slashing:

The effective balance/128 will be deducted immediately (it will be adjusted to the effective balance/32 later)

Punishment at the beginning of each epoch (current data is about 0.009 ETH per day)

Additional penalty for simultaneous slash of multiple nodes

Report reward

The slash mechanism not only punishes the node that triggers slash, but also rewards the “reporter” who reports slash. Normally, the reward is divided into two parts, one is to reward the “reporter” who submits slash, the amount is larger (currently about 0.1 ETH), the other is to reward the block producer who packs the slash block, the amount is smaller (currently about 0.025 ETH). At present, in most cases, the two parts of the reward are directly transferred to the blocker.

The reason for triggering slash

Unless intentionally, most faulty slash occurs because the same validator key is run on two servers, that is, the two servers run the same node. “One use, one backup” is a common practice for traditional server redundancy to prevent downtime. Unfortunately, the problem of PoS public chain node operation with slash mechanism cannot be handled so simply.

Security is not equal to reliability in the blockchain field. In the traditional Internet, security and reliability are not contradictory, and security and reliability can be improved by increasing system redundancy. However, in the blockchain, if the block producing node is designed for redundancy, it is very likely that multiple nodes will produce blocks at the same time, resulting in double signatures; but if the node is not designed for redundancy, a single point of failure will occur . If this node goes offline, it will cause the entire system service to go down and affect the reliability of the system.

In addition, the client generally has a slash protection history record by default, which prevents slash by recording all historical attestation and proposal records. If the record is accidentally deleted during operation, it may also cause slash problems.

Staking and establishing a validator node is just the first and easiest step.

Categories
News

Interpretation of the Ethereum 2.0 Slash mechanism: How to avoid severe punishment? (www.blockcast.cc)

Original title: “Detailed Explanation of Ethereum 2.0 Slash Mechanism”

Written by: InfStones

Slash means sharp reduction and is a commonly used punishment mechanism for malicious validators in PoS consensus public chains. The slash rule of Ethereum 2.0 may be the most complicated of all PoS public chains. By studying the Ethereum 2.0 design specifications and source code, the slash rules are interpreted as follows.

解读以太坊 2.0 Slash 机制:如何避免重度惩罚?

Types of slash

Slash generally refers to punishment for serious malicious behavior, rather than punishment for ordinary offline nodes. The latter is generally called inactivity penalties. In general PoS public chains, generally only “double sign” behaviors will trigger slash, while in Ethereum 2.0, the following behaviors are specific:

  • Propose two conflicting blocks in the same slot;
  • Vote for two conflicting blocks in the same slot;
  • Voting conflicts with historical voting.

Behavior a, b will cause unnecessary forks on the blockchain, and behavior c is an attempt to tamper with history.

Validator status after slash

After slash, the verifier will be forced to enter the verifier exit queue and then exit.

The validator will be deducted the effective balance/128 as a fine immediately. If the effective balance is 32ETH, it is 0.25ETH. (It should be noted that the original penalty amount is the effective balance/32, which is 1ETH, but it is temporarily reduced to a quarter of the original value during the beacon chain stage)

After 8192 epochs (about 36 days), the validator account is allowed to withdraw funds (after Ethereum 2.0 supports transaction functions).

Before allowing withdrawal, the slashed node will receive a penalty of 3 times the online reward at the beginning of each epoch.

The slashed verifier is not allowed to return to the verifier queue again, and can only rebuild a new verifier and re-stake.

Multi-node slash at the same time

In addition to the effective balance/128 penalty and the offline penalty for each epoch, there will be another additional penalty at the halfway position between the slashed epoch and the epoch allowed for withdrawal, that is, 4096 epochs after being slashed.

The penalty ratio is proportional to the ratio of the total balance of all slashed validators to the total balance of active validators on the entire network during this period.

解读以太坊 2.0 Slash 机制:如何避免重度惩罚?

The original proportional coefficient is 3, and the current beacon chain stage is temporarily reduced to one third of the original value, that is, the coefficient is 1. In other words, the additional penalty for multi-node slash will be 3 times the current one.

Therefore, a validator node will be punished three times after slashing:

  • Immediately deducted effective balance/128 (will be adjusted to effective balance/32 later)
  • Punishment at the beginning of each epoch (current data is about 0.009 ETH per day)
  • Additional penalty for simultaneous slash of multiple nodes

Report reward

The slash mechanism not only punishes the node that triggers slash, but also rewards the “reporter” who reports slash. Normally, the reward is divided into two parts. One is to reward the “whistleblower” who submits slash with a larger amount (currently about 0.1 ETH); the other is to reward block producers who package slash blocks with a smaller amount (currently about 0.025) ETH). At present, in most cases, the two parts of the reward are directly transferred to the blocker.

The reason for triggering slash

Unless deliberately, most faulty slash occurs because the same validator key is run on two servers, that is, the two servers run the same node. “One use, one backup” is a common practice for traditional server redundancy to prevent downtime. Unfortunately, the problem of PoS public chain node operation with slash mechanism cannot be handled so simply.

InfStones CEO Jonathan Shi mentioned in a public speech that security is not equal to reliability in the blockchain field. In the traditional Internet, security and reliability are not contradictory, and security and reliability can be improved by increasing system redundancy. However, in the blockchain, if the block producing node is designed for redundancy, it is very likely that multiple nodes will produce blocks at the same time, resulting in double signatures; but if the node is not designed for redundancy, a single point of failure will occur . If this node goes offline, it will cause the entire system service to go down and affect the reliability of the system.

In addition, the client generally has a slash protection history record by default, which prevents slash by recording all historical attestation and proposal records. If the record is accidentally deleted during operation, it may also cause slash problems.

Staking and establishing a validator node is just the first and easiest step.

Categories
News

The new regulations continue to exert force, the most severe freezing card tide in the OTC industry hits (www.blockcast.cc)

01

The current situation and reasons of the new round of “freezing card tide”

Since September, a new wave of “freezing cards” once again hit the currency circle. Not only did many readers report to reporters that bank cards participating in OTC transactions were frozen, but also a large number of investors on Weibo and other social platforms talked about similar situations. “Many people I know around have frozen cards, and transactions as large as hundreds of thousands to as low as 2,000 yuan have frozen cards.” Xue Xu (a pseudonym), a cryptocurrency investor who was frozen this time, told reporters .

Although the phenomenon of freezing cards is not uncommon in the cryptocurrency industry, in terms of coverage and extent, the freezing card tide is more violent than the past few times, and even the phenomenon of users’ subway cards being frozen together, and many more Users reported that they could not reopen accounts in mainstream banks, which caused a lot of inconvenience to life.

At the same time, the depth of the OTC platforms of major exchanges has also decreased significantly. The unit price gap between the USDT buying area and the selling area often has a price difference of more than 2 points. The OKEx platform also has a maximum price difference of 5 points. This phenomenon reflects OTC merchants. Both the number and activity of are declining sharply.

Another obvious sign is that most of the pending orders on the OTC platforms of most major exchanges no longer support Alipay transactions and can only be traded through bank cards. A person in charge of an OTC merchant told reporters that the reason is that the Alipay account has been “abolished” in three days recently, indicating that third-party payment channels are likely to be carrying out anti-money laundering operations that are no less powerful than bank card channels.

The relevant person in charge of Huobi also told reporters that a large number of users have recently reported that bank cards used for OTC transactions have been frozen, but in fact, it is not only the cryptocurrency industry, but also related information in many fields such as foreign trade and finance. It can be seen from some social media information that there are indeed a large number of people in the foreign trade industry complaining that bank cards have been frozen, and some articles have spread widely.

The problem reflected by this phenomenon is that the large-scale freezing of cards is not aimed at the cryptocurrency OTC field, but the domestic police has strengthened the anti-money laundering work, and the OTC transaction field will inevitably be affected.

According to reporters’ interviews with people in various industries and sorting out online data, the reasons for this large-scale freezing of cards can be roughly summarized into two points.

First, domestic telecommunications fraud, killing pigs, pyramid schemes and other scams continue to occur frequently. A large amount of funds are defrauded from ordinary people. Coupled with long-term active overseas gambling platforms, there is an increasing demand for money laundering. As a more suitable money laundering medium, cryptocurrency has become the preferred tool for many scammers or gambling platforms to transfer funds and launder money. Some criminal groups also cooperate with cryptocurrency OTC merchants to launder money. This year, many well-known OTC merchants have been investigated by the police. Recently, many related crackdowns have been publicly reported.

According to Hebei News Network, on September 3, Hebei Cangzhou police successfully detected a large telecom network fraud case, arrested Zhu Mouhui and other 12 criminal suspects, and seized 3.95 million yuan of stolen money on the spot. Upon questioning, members of the criminal gang confessed to the fact that since 2020, they have helped overseas electronic fraud gangs to split and transfer funds to obtain benefits after “whitewashing” on virtual currency trading platforms such as OKEX and Huobi.

According to reports from the payment industry, the People’s Court of Yongqiao District, Suzhou City recently heard the suspected pyramid scheme of the LON project. The project used methods such as investing LON currency rebates and developing member rebates to attract registered investment from people from all over the world online and offline, and a total of 13,251 members were developed. Defrauded investment funds of more than 50 million yuan. In the process of handling stolen money, the principal criminals and others, in order to avoid detection by domestic regulatory authorities, convert the investment and rebate money into virtual currencies such as Litecoin through Huobi, in order to achieve the purpose of money laundering.

According to a report from the Beijing News on September 24, Liao Jinrong, director of the International Cooperation Bureau of the Ministry of Public Security, said at the 9th China Payment and Settlement Forum that preliminary statistics have exceeded one trillion yuan in gambling funds flowing out of China each year, and some gambling gangs used virtual currency to collect The transfer of gambling funds has brought great challenges to the crackdown.

Second, the relevant state departments have continuously increased their anti-money laundering efforts and issued more stringent guidance documents, and the relevant regulatory policies of major banks have become more stringent. OTC industry veteran Fu Mo (anonymous) told reporters that the freeze card wave is likely to be related to the “Decision of the Ministry of Public Security on Amending the “Procedural Provisions for the Handling of Criminal Cases by Public Security Organs” that was reviewed and approved in early July this year. There are 141 amendments to the rules and regulations, many of which involve the determination of case jurisdiction.

According to reporters’ inquiries, with regard to crimes committed against or using computer networks, the new regulations have added victims to the public security authorities on the basis of identifying the location of the site creator or administrator and the location of the computer information system used by criminals and victims. The public security organs at the location at the time of the infringement and the place where the victim’s property suffered damage may have jurisdiction.

Since today’s telecommunication fraud cases often involve people from all over the country, this adjustment is equivalent to giving the public security organs in most parts of the country the power to exercise jurisdiction over related fraud cases, instead of being limited to a handful of areas where the public security organs have jurisdiction.

According to the existing regulations, as long as the public security organ at or above the county level approves it, the public security organ can prepare a notice of assistance in freezing property and notify financial institutions and other units to implement it. Considering that the public security organs in different regions have subtle differences in their understanding of the legal rules and case rules, as well as the degree of emphasis and work energy, the aforementioned adjustments will easily lead to a sharp increase in the phenomenon of freezing cards.

At the same time, the aforementioned amendment decision came into effect on September 1 this year. This time point is also in line with the trend of high incidence of freezing cards since September this year.

It is foreseeable that with the further tightening of relevant regulatory policies, the freezing card phenomenon in cryptocurrency OTC transactions will become the norm in the industry for a long time. Therefore, it is especially necessary for most cryptocurrency OTC traders to understand more preventive measures for frozen cards and how to deal with the phenomenon of frozen cards.

02

How to deal with the frozen card incident

To deal with possible frozen cards, the most important thing for users is to learn to prevent them and reduce the risks in OTC transactions as much as possible through some techniques.

Based on relevant interviews and network information, OTC transactions usually have the following points of attention: find trusted merchants to establish fixed deposit and withdrawal channels, take safety as the core consideration, and do not need to pursue the best price every time; maintain sufficient legal currency cash flow , Reduce the frequency of OTC transactions; use cards of small and medium banks or local banks for transactions; use unusual bank cards for transactions, reducing the inconvenience caused by bank card freezing.

It is understood that there are usually two situations when bank cards are frozen. One is bank freezing, which is also called stop payment by some industry professionals. That is, bank cards can only receive payments but not make payments. Generally, the bank’s risk control system is triggered by the user’s transaction behavior. , The bank will freeze on its own. If the user’s funds do not involve illegal funds, this situation will usually be automatically unfrozen after three days;

The other is judicial freezing. Generally, the public security organ freezes the bank cards that have fund transactions with the parties involved in the case, usually for half a year or one year, and unfreeze after the case is finished. But Xue Xu told reporters that there are many cases around him that have not been thawed for more than a year, which may mean permanent freezing of the card.

Regarding user response measures, Fu Mo pointed out to reporters that if a user encounters a bank card being frozen after OTC transactions, he can wait about three days to determine the nature of the frozen card. If it has not been unfrozen after three days, he needs to find the bank and the public security agency to find out the situation.

Guo Yatao, head of the chain law lawyer team, told reporters that users should find out the reason why the bank has understood the frozen card and the investigative agency that applied for the frozen card in the first time, try to get in touch with the investigative agency in time, explain the whole story, provide corresponding materials, if the investigative agency If it is necessary for the investor to go to the local area to cooperate with the investigation, it is recommended to be accompanied by someone or directly seek professional legal assistance.

“For those who have provided sufficient supporting materials and still cannot be unfrozen, or if the case-handling personnel are found to have violated the rules during the communication process (for example, it has been verified that the money involved in the case is not related to the case but is not unfrozen), you can appeal or complain in accordance with the regulations. According to the law, the public security agency must deal with the matter within the statutory time limit,” said Guo Yatao.

Xue Xu also described his contacts with the police in detail. “The criminal investigation teams in Shanghai and Inner Mongolia explained the freezing of the cards in writing on the grounds that they were fraudulent, and then asked me to provide transaction order records and income statements. I’m consulting a lawyer to see how to appeal,” Xue Xu said.

However, the relevant person in charge of Huobi told reporters that according to user feedback they received, most of the bank cards in the card freezing tide were only frozen for three days, and they were automatically unblocked after three days.

In the cryptocurrency OTC transaction, the exchange, as the platform party, also plays an important role in the frozen card incident, and even needs to bear certain responsibilities. Many interviewed users have complained that the platform party does not strictly review the qualifications of OTC merchants, resulting in a lot of black money. Pour into the OTC market.

To this end, reporters interviewed mainstream exchanges such as Huobi and Binance. They all stated that they will further improve the qualification review mechanism of OTC merchants in the future, and at the same time strengthen the construction of transaction risk control systems and user safety education.

At the same time, Huobi also explained in detail how the platform handles user complaints about frozen cards. “We usually guide users to understand the detailed information of frozen cards, such as the freezing period, freezing agencies, and their contact information. If necessary, follow-up. If you cooperate, Huobi will let users contact the police, and then the police will contact Huobi to cooperate.”

The relevant person in charge of Binance further told reporters that after the police issue a transfer order, relevant departments of Binance will cooperate with the police to give relevant transaction information to help users unfreeze bank cards as quickly as possible. Throughout the Q3 quarter, Binance’s fiat currency department assisted the police in investigating dozens of cases, including many fraud cases involving hundreds of millions of dollars.

In addition, industry anti-money laundering standards are also advancing. According to Sina News, the Blockchain Industry Application Anti-Money Laundering Standards Seminar was held in Beijing on September 22. The conference discussed the basic anti-money laundering technology security code of conduct for blockchain industry applications or platforms, and the “Blockchain Industry Application The content of “General Requirements for Anti-Money Laundering” may also help to further standardize the OTC market.

Cryptocurrency trading is a gray area of ​​legal supervision, and various asset security issues will inevitably occur. This depends on the joint cooperation of supervisors, exchanges, OTC merchants and other parties. A good mechanism is used to minimize similar incidents and promote industry cooperation. Planned development.

Categories
News

Analysts Call XRP “Crippled” as Trend of Severe Underperformance Persists (www.blockcast.cc)

XRP – the token closely associated with Ripple – has seen faltering momentum as of late, with its community dissipating as the company struggles to garner widespread adoption for the token.

It does remain loosely correlated to Bitcoin’s price action, but it has been failing to garner any significant momentum as it remains below a multi-month resistance level.

This has caused it to severely underperform both Bitcoin and most of its peers throughout the latest market-wide upswing, which could indicate that further downside is imminent in the near-term.

One trader is noting that the cryptocurrency’s lack of strength during any upside movements has come about due to it being “crippled,” indicating that further downside is imminent.

He is now looking to exit his XRP positions at its first resistance level, which sits just above where it is currently trading at.

Once this resistance is hit, the chart he put forth suggests that a move down towards its multi-month lows within the lower-$0.20 region is imminent.

XRP Struggles to Gain Momentum as Selling Pressure Ramps Up

At the time of writing, XRP is trading up marginally at its current price of $0.25.

This is a slight rise from its weekly lows of over $0.23 set during its latest dip, but it is important to note that this 10% rise marks a serious underperformance of many of its peers.

Throughout the past month, XRP has struggled to garner any sustainable momentum as it ranges between $0.22 and $0.26. The upper boundary of this range has been quite intense, with each visit here sparking harsh rejections.

Unless XRP shatters the selling pressure between $0.26 and $0.30, it may continue seeing technical weakness.

Analyst Claims the Embattled Token is “Crippled” Due to Lack of Buying Pressure 

One analyst believes that XRP is crippled from a technical standpoint, with its lack of buying pressure not allowing it to match the momentum seen by the aggregated crypto market.

He now is looking to offload his long positions as soon as the crypto reaches its next key resistance level.

“Stupid thing has moved like 2% while everything moved like 10%. I…hate this coin with a passion and looking to sell the first resistance. Everything moves exponentially compared to XRP. Ripple is crippled.”

XRP

XRP

Image Courtesy of Loma. Chart via TradingView.

Because there are no immediate catalysts for XRP to see any intense upwards momentum, it may continue severely underperforming Bitcoin and the aggregated crypto market.

Featured image from Unsplash.
Charts from TradingView.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Go to Source

Image Credit: Refer to Source
Author: Refer to Source Cole Petersen