Blocore Determined to Expand Global Presence in Web3 from Korea and Singapore

Bithumb and Korbit Struggle to Gain Traction Despite Zero Trading FeesSouth Korean cryptocurrency exchanges Bithumb and Korbit have recently eliminated trading fees, but their bold decision hasn’t yielded much results. Bithumb was the first to implement this change and attracted users for about a week, but it is now seeing a loss in market share. Korbit, following Bithumb’s example, is also struggling to achieve meaningful outcomes.Photo by Alexander Grey on UnsplashLimited impactLocal media outlet Chosun Biz used data from crypto data platform CoinGecko to draw this conclusion. On October 26, Korbit’s daily trading volume represented 0.19% of the total trading volume among South Korea’s top five crypto exchanges (Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone, Korbit, and Gopax). This figure marked a 0.14 percentage point increase compared to the 0.05% recorded on October 19. Korbit had implemented a zero trading fee policy at 9 a.m. (KST) on October 20. Additionally, they launched a promotion offering KRW 5,000 ($3.69) worth of bitcoin to users who transferred virtual assets totaling KRW 1 million or more from Travel Rule-compliant exchanges to Korbit. While the promotion did contribute to Korbit’s market share, it still remains below 1%.Bithumb’s performance showed some improvement, albeit briefly. As of October 26, Bithumb’s market share stood at 18%, marking a 4.7 percentage point increase from its 13.3% share on October 3, the day before it eliminated trading fees. However, it’s worth noting that its market share had reached almost 30% shortly after the promotion’s launch. This indicates that its strategy is losing efficacy over time.The less-than-enthusiastic results from their daring marketing endeavors can be attributed to their inability to draw in retail investors. To begin with, Upbit, the leading player in the market, had already been providing a relatively low fee of 0.05%. Furthermore, adapting to new user interfaces on these exchanges posed a challenge. Zero trading fees weren’t attractive enough for crypto investors to leave their current platforms.Trading volume mattersIn the case of Korbit, its lower trading volume was a disadvantage when it came to attracting users. On crypto exchanges, a higher trading volume typically translates to faster trade executions. As a result, users of Korbit might experience delays in executing trades at their preferred price.Jeong Hye-won, a research associate at crypto data analytics platform Xangle, told Chosun Biz that users on exchanges with lower trading volumes tend to experience slippages due to slower transaction speeds and sparsely populated order books. A slippage means the difference between the initially placed order price and the executed order price. Jeong further explained that Korbit’s zero trading fee policy didn’t have a significant impact because it offers fewer listed tokens compared to Upbit and Bithumb.There is speculation that the free-trading fee promotions introduced by Bithumb and Korbit, despite their revenue sacrifices, might conclude sooner than initially anticipated due to their perceived ineffectiveness. Bithumb derives 99.95% of its revenue from trading fees, while Korbit relies on trading fees for 99.79% of its income. An industry insider has commented that trading fees play a vital role in an exchange’s revenue, and given Bithumb’s reported loss in earnings during the second quarter, there are concerns about their capacity to sustain this strategy.

Singapore’s UniPass Plays Role in ERC-4337 Vulnerability FixSmart contract wallet provider UniPass and crypto infrastructure firm Fireblocks have successfully addressed a significant vulnerability in the Ethereum ecosystem.Photo by Nenad Novaković on UnsplashAccount abstraction vulnerabilityThis vulnerability, identified as the ERC-4337 account abstraction vulnerability, posed a critical security risk to hundreds of mainnet wallets. The joint effort between Fireblocks and UniPass was detailed in a blog post published to the Fireblocks website on Thursday.This vulnerability, if exploited, could have enabled a malicious actor to execute a complete takeover of the UniPass Wallet by manipulating Ethereum’s account abstraction process. The vulnerability represented a substantial threat to the security of smart contract wallets, as it could lead to unauthorized access and fund drainage.Improving user experienceAccount abstraction, as dealt with via ERC-4337, is a mechanism that introduces a novel way of processing transactions and interacting with smart contracts on the Ethereum blockchain. It allows for a more flexible and efficient handling of transactions, transcending the traditional distinction between externally owned accounts (EOAs) and contract accounts.EOAs are controlled by private keys and can initiate transactions, while contract accounts are governed by the code of a smart contract. When an EOA initiates a transaction with a contract account, it triggers the execution of the contract’s code. Account abstraction introduces the notion of abstracted accounts, which are not tied to a specific private key and can initiate transactions and interact with smart contracts, similar to EOAs.In the context of ERC-4337, an account executing an action relies on the EntryPoint contract to ensure that only signed transactions are executed. Typically, these accounts trust a single audited EntryPoint contract to validate user operations before executing commands. However, the vulnerability resided in the fact that a malicious or buggy EntryPoint contract could potentially skip the validation step and directly call the execution function, bypassing essential security measures.This vulnerability, identified by the two firms, had allowed attackers to seize control of UniPass wallets by replacing the trusted EntryPoint of the wallet. Once this takeover was completed, the attacker could access the wallet and drain its funds.It’s worth noting that the vulnerability posed a threat to several hundred users who had activated the ERC-4337 module in their wallets, making them susceptible to exploitation by any actor on the blockchain. Fortunately, the wallets affected by this vulnerability contained only small amounts of funds, and swift mitigation efforts were successful in preventing further harm.Company mergerEarlier this year, Singapore’s UniPass merged with Chinese wallet provider Keystone to form Account Labs, a company which has been incorporated in Singapore. At the time, Keystone founder Liu Lixin outlined that further developing account abstraction-derived products was the objective of the creation of Account Labs. He stated:“We are on the cusp of a Web3 Account Abstraction revolution. Together, we’ll drive rapid transformation, making the transition from Web2 to Web3 effortless for users. Our goal is to ensure everyone can securely and smoothly manage a decentralized account. We welcome partners to join us in advancing the Web3 account domain.”In furthering that objective, Account Labs announced on Thursday that it had raised $7.7 million in a funding round led by Amber Group, MixMarvel DAO Ventures, and Qiming Ventures.

About three years ago, in March 2021, the South Korean financial regulators implemented the Specific Financial Transaction Information Act to ensure that local cryptocurrency exchanges provide safe and sound crypto trading services to investors. It was also a move to prevent exchanges and investors from engaging in illicit money laundering practices.  However, the law has come across as a hassle to many crypto exchanges, as they were required to undergo verification processes to prove their reliability and to receive real-name accounts from banks. These accounts enable their users to trade crypto against the Korean won, helping exchanges stand out in the fiercely competitive crypto market amid surging Bitcoin prices. At the moment, only five crypto exchanges in Korea are qualified to provide such services. Bithumb, one of these few qualified fiat-to-crypto exchanges, has renewed its real-name account contract with NH Nonghyup Bank (NH Bank) for six more months, according to local news media Yonhap News Agency. Photo by Robin Jonathan Deutsch on UnsplashVarious factors in play for relatively short renewalCrypto insiders say that extending the contract for only six months appears to be quite a conservative move, as Bithumb has been making a year-long contract with NH Bank every year since 2018. Experts suggest various factors may have influenced Bithumb's decision, including the volatile crypto market, the Virtual Asset User Protection Act becoming effective in July and the exchange's planned initial public offering (IPO).  Some say the relatively short renewal of the contract comes after a flurry of complaints from Bithumb users about the unfavorable user experience, including the cumbersome process they must go through to increase the deposit limit of their real-name accounts linked to Bithumb. This appeared to have prompted Bithumb to feel reluctant about the 6-year-long collaboration and seek a partnership with another bank such as KB Kookmin Bank or the online-only Kakao Bank, according to local media Bizwatch. One bank official said that the relatively short renewal reflects Bithumb and NH Bank's commitment to addressing the inefficiencies of crypto transaction services, as the two companies plan to enhance their investor experience and marketing efforts over the next six months.  Crypto boom drives partnership between exchanges and banks NH Bank appears to be persuading Bithumb to maintain their partnership, one bank official said, because providing real-name accounts to crypto exchanges not only benefits exchanges but also banks. Having young crypto investors – mostly in their 20s to 40s – open real-name accounts at banks is seen as a significant opportunity to expand their customer base. One crypto insider said the ability to issue real-name accounts usually puts banks in a superior position when entering a partnership with crypto exchanges, but that doesn't seem to be the case in times like this when the crypto market is bullish more than ever.