Another episode of "Not your keys, not your Coins"

[PX-Z]

With a truly decentralized exchanges such as Bisq, your coins are only sent to an escrow address. The escrow address is a 2-of-2 multi-sig address between you and the person you are trading with. Bisq have no control over the address. This is a truly decentralized model.

This is good for bitcoin tx and p2p tx. Best practice is still on the work of smart contracts.

But if we consider about a system hacked, this lines of codes can be altered with malicious one if this codes are held in traditional hosting servers. If there will be a decentralized hosting servers, idk how it will be made, but it could be the best IMO.

[witcher_sense]

This is good for bitcoin tx and p2p tx. Best practice is still on the work of smart contracts.

For a bitcoin transaction to occur, there have to be satisfied certain conditions specified in a special script. A script executes automatically once a sender of funds provides certain information. This script is no different from a smart-contract except that it is written in Turing-incomplete language that doesn't allow for loops and DDoS attacks. All transactions in bitcoin, including a multisignature one used for escrow, are therefore very robust smart-contracts albeit simple.

But if we consider about a system hacked, this lines of codes can be altered with malicious one if this codes are held in traditional hosting servers. If there will be a decentralized hosting servers, idk how it will be made, but it could be the best IMO.

It is an open-source project https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq which means the code is available for everyone to review, share, fork, and download. It will be difficult for Bisq developers try to inject malicious code without being caught by those constantly monitoring and reviewing the changes.

[o_e_l_e_o]

If there will be a decentralized hosting servers, idk how it will be made, but it could be the best IMO.

Yeah, as witcher_sense has said (and at risk of sounding like a broken record), the answer here again is Bisq. The best way of having decentralized hosting is for every user to host their own instance. This is similar to what happens with bitcoin (ignoring of course all the people who use custodial or light wallets rather than running their own node). All the code of Bisq is open source, you can download it and build it from source, you run it locally and connect directly to other users (over Tor). There are no central wallets to deposit coins to and no central servers to connect to.

I'm not aware of any other exchange which comes close to such a decentralized model. Even other good DEXs such as LocalCryptos still depend on a centralized websites and its servers.

[Cookdata]

I believe that a lack of knowledge about private keys, public keys, and addresses contributed to many users preferring to let their coins get stuck on an exchange.
Crypto. com exchange is just a normalized broker that operates similarly to a bank, and I don't see why anyone would want to keep their money on a well-regulated exchange by the US.
This attack may be painful, but it serves as a reminder that your coins are not safe on an exchange except with you and no one else.

[PX-Z]

/snip..

I'm not aware of any other exchange which comes close to such a decentralized model. Even other good DEXs such as LocalCryptos still depend on a centralized websites and its servers.

Thanks to both of you, I get it now. So far with the bisq tx/trading practice I considered it as the safest, at least for now and for what I know.

While I'm reading several reviews of bisq, it's sad to read as others considered decentralization as cons and not for everyone, at least for the eye of investors, institutional or even those not. They are more comfortable of having a platform that can be hacked together with their funds and petsonal information instead of having full control of their funds and safe from identity thief.
This may be one of the reasons why dex still need a long run before it will be used by the majority.