South Korean crypto-only exchanges on the brink of closure

In the immediate aftermath of the approval of spot bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in the United States earlier this week, a Hong Kong legislator has spoken out to encourage a proactive response within the Chinese autonomous territory, while asset managers appear to be responding accordingly.Photo by Simon Zhu on UnsplashCompetitive responseLawmaker Johnny Ng has called on the local government to swiftly embrace the recent ETF approval in the United States. In a post on X, Ng emphasized the need for Hong Kong to proactively lead the way in the cryptocurrency space, fostering innovation to secure a global position amidst intense competition. Ng highlighted the Securities and Futures Commission's (SFC) previous expression of readiness to accept applications for spot bitcoin ETFs. He urged Hong Kong to capitalize on the rapidly evolving virtual asset sector, implementing policies and products that position the city as a global hub for virtual assets. "This presents an opportunity to solidify Hong Kong’s position as a global hub for virtual assets," Ng stated, emphasizing the importance of seizing this moment in the market's development. In December, Hong Kong's regulatory bodies, the SFC and the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA), reviewed their existing policies, releasing circulars that outlined the requirements for spot crypto ETFs. Fund managers explore ETFsHashKey, a licensed crypto exchange in Hong Kong, confirmed its potential participation in spot crypto ETFs through engaging in crypto transactions associated with ETFs and providing crypto custody services. The company, which obtained a license from the SFC to offer retail crypto trading services in August, positions itself to play a pivotal role in the emerging market. Livio Weng, COO of the Hong Kong-based crypto exchange, revealed that approximately ten fund managers, backed by Chinese capital and others from Asia and Europe, are exploring the launch of spot crypto ETFs in Hong Kong. Weng, in an interview with Chinese financial news media Caixin, disclosed that seven or eight of these fund managers have already been in contact with the SFC, forming teams to design investment products. Highlighting the importance of education in the crypto space, Ng called on the Hong Kong government to prioritize public education. He stressed the need to increase awareness of virtual assets among the public while simultaneously reducing opportunities for illicit activities involving digital assets. Substantial impactIn an interview earlier this week, Yat Siu, the co-founder of Hong Kong-based crypto venture capital and game software firm Animoca Brands, expressed the view that the spot bitcoin ETF approval in the U.S. would have a more substantial impact on the overall development of crypto in Asia. As Hong Kong prepares to pave the way for spot crypto ETFs, the SFC and the HKMA have already reviewed existing policies, outlining the requirements for such investment products. The December circular from the SFC emphasized that transactions involving spot crypto ETFs should occur through licensed crypto platforms or authorized financial institutions, ensuring regulatory compliance in the growing crypto market. 

The Need to Distinguish Between Security and Non-Security Virtual AssetsWith the recent enactment of the Virtual Asset User Protection Bill in South Korea, there is a need to lay out criteria for determining whether virtual assets qualify as securities, says Kim Ja-bong, a senior research fellow at the Korea Institute of Finance, in his report titled “The Implications of Determining Which Virtual Assets Constitute Securities and Investor Protection” released on Saturday.Photo by Shubham Dhage on UnsplashThe implications of the Virtual Asset User Protection ActThe Virtual Asset User Protection Act — which will take effect in July of next year — aims to protect customer assets, establish regulations against unfair trading practices, and enforce penalties. Notably, it will target virtual assets that are not securities, deeming it necessary for regulators to determine if virtual assets qualify as securities or not in order to enforce the bill. Assets with characteristics of securities will fall under the jurisdiction of the Capital Markets Act.Therefore, if the Virtual Asset User Protection Act does not provide sufficient investor protection, issuers may be incentivized to issue non-security assets rather than security assets to avoid the regulations of the Capital Markets Act. This further necessitates the act of distinguishing between virtual assets that are securities versus those that are not.Determining if a virtual asset is a security or notThere are two approaches to do this, according to Kim: the passive approach, which avoids considering a virtual asset as a security whenever possible, and the active approach, which treats a virtual asset as a security whenever applicable.He argues that it is better to focus on whether an investment contract qualifies as a security if it is considered an investment contract, rather than simply selecting a specific approach.Furthermore, the nature of virtual assets renders them unbound by national borders, so it is necessary to establish assessment criteria that correspond with international standards, such as those used in the US and Europe.This is especially important because if the criteria differ from international standards, there is a risk of domestic investors suffering damages due to an issuer’s pursuit of regulatory arbitrage between countries.Equitable recognition and potential for security tokensAccording to Kim, the importance of determining whether virtual assets are securities lies in ensuring that security tokens receive the same recognition and trading treatment as traditional securities such as stocks. With such a measure, security token offerings can serve as an efficient and reliable method for raising funds. Although there may be concerns that such a regulation may hinder the development of virtual assets, it may well be an opportunity for security tokens to be qualified and trusted as high-quality financial instruments just like existing securities, Kim claims.Even for virtual assets that are not considered securities, there are many types of assets that are financial in nature, such as e-money tokens — therefore, it is necessary to actively protect investors in non-security virtual assets through financial regulations such as reinforcing disclosure obligations, which is being done in the EU through the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA).Empowering regulators for enhanced investor protection and market integrityKim underscored that investor protection and healthy growth of the virtual asset market are made possible mainly through expanding regulators’ authority to protect economic interests and prevent damages. The author also suggested institutional reforms that grant regulators substantial authority, which would enhance their ability to protect investors effectively and provide compensation for damages.He added that regulators should also have the authority to enforce liability for damages or impose civil penalties for unfair trading practices conducted using classified information.

Mixin Network Suspends Services Amid $200 Million HackOn Monday, Mixin Network, a decentralized peer-to-peer network whose project team is based in Hong Kong, officially confirmed a substantial security breach that resulted in the loss of approximately $200 million in crypto assets from its mainnet.Photo by GuerrillaBuzz on UnsplashSeptember 23 hackThis incident, disclosed via an X (formerly Twitter) post, prompted the immediate suspension of all deposit and withdrawal services on Mixin Network until further notice.The project team outlined that the hack occurred on September 23, exposing vulnerabilities that allowed malicious actors to compromise the database of a third-party cloud service provider. Mixin Network has taken action to address the situation, enlisting the expertise of Singapore-headquartered blockchain security investigator SlowMist and the support of Google to conduct a thorough investigation and formulate a recovery plan.At the time of the breach, Mixin Network’s holdings included $94.48 million in Ether, $23.55 million in Dai, and $23.3 million in Bitcoin, as reported in an independent investigation by PeckShield. The total value of assets affected amounted to $141.32 million.Cyvers, an Israeli Web3 security firm, has also been looking into the matter on Monday. In a social media post, the firm stated:”Our internal investigation has uncovered suspicious funding transactions involving @MixinKernel hacker addresses. Two of hacker addresses received 51 $ETH from 0x1795F0eBDa5A836aE63F28CE546E72de069A8bd2 who was interacted with @HuobiGlobal and @binance.”The firm goes on to call on Binance and its CEO Changpeng Zhao (CZ) and Huobi to help identify the wallet address in question.Halting withdrawalsIn response to the security breach, Mixin Network has temporarily halted all deposits and withdrawals on its platform. These services will only resume once the vulnerabilities have been identified and fully resolved. On X, the project stated:”Deposit and withdrawal services on Mixin Network have been temporarily suspended. After discussion and consensus among all nodes, these services will be reopened once the vulnerabilities are confirmed and fixed. During this period, transfers are not affected.”Details regarding the plans to recover the lost assets for affected users have yet to be announced.Despite initial promises that Mixin Network’s Founder, Feng Xiaodong, would address the incident in a public Mandarin live stream on September 25, links to the live stream were not provided on the official social media channels or the website mixin.network.The incident has garnered criticism on the basis of a lack of decentralization. One commentator stated:”Some of those blockchain protocols are so decentralized that when their cloud database is hacked, coins are also gone.”Ongoing hacksThis security breach on Mixin Network is the latest in a series of high-profile crypto-related incidents. Ethereum Co-Founder Vitalik Buterin recently fell victim to a SIM swap attack, which resulted in the compromise of his X (formerly Twitter) account.In a statement, Buterin revealed that the hackers had successfully executed a SIM swap, a type of attack that targets the victim’s mobile phone number to gain unauthorized access to various online accounts, including social media, banking, and cryptocurrency platforms.The repercussions of the Mixin Network hack underscore the ongoing challenges faced by the crypto industry in ensuring the security and protection of digital assets. As investigations continue, affected users await further developments and the eventual resumption of deposit and withdrawal services.