Well done you can access wikipedia.
Please point out how your (or the wikipedia) definition of an "audit" differs from the documents demonstrated above.
An audit validates a financial statement. Where is that statement?
To prove solvency, an exchange must basically show that (A+B)-(X+Y) is positive, or at least not too negative; where A and B its assets in BTC and national currencies, X and Y are the client account balances in BTC and national currencies, say converted at current prices; or, better than A-X is not negative, AND B-Y is not negative. (The math should include all assets and debts, including bank loans, but let's simplify for this discussion).
By moving the coins, Bitstamp "proved" that (in december) A = 194,933 BTC. (It did not prove such thing actually; do I need to tell you why? But let's pretend it did.)
The letter from the auditor says that A-X is positive. How did they get X?
When Antonopoulos "audited" Coinbase, he used the value of X that Coinbase gave him. (That is what I understood, and I cannot imagine how he could have got it except through them. Correct me if I am wrong.)
I have seen some audit reports before, including from the "inside", and I think I can tell when they are stretching the words to cover the holes. What I read in that terse letter is that they verified A as above, but (like Antonopoulos) they trusted the value of X that Bitstamp provided them.
The letter does not mention B and Y.
Poll
