[2019-07-30] Largest Wallet Blockchain Just Launched Its First Crypto Exchange

[Kakmakr]

Honestly i worry about the security, functionality and ease-of-use of this crypto exchange. Their blockchain is buggy for years, the UI sometimes is confusing and their wallet had severe vulnerability few years ago.

This is becoming a new trend now, because we also saw how https://localbitcoins.com/ changed their service to become 100% KYC/AML Compliant.  

Money and profit is more important than protecting people's financial privacy now.  

Because their only other option is to close their service due to regulation.

The phrase "you either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain" applies on most bitcoin services which has been around for years and unfortunately most of them become "villain"

Well, you do not have to die, if you can simply move your operation to a country where they cannot touch you. We have seen this being done with several Crypto gambling operations and also some Crypto currency services that were forced to shift their operations.

I think a lot of these "Anonymous" operations are hunted down by the regulators and then they are given the option to close their doors or to be subjected to criminal prosecution if they continue.

Blockchain.info/com would not have generated a lot of income from simply providing free wallets, so I guess if they got a taste of some good profits from advertisement income, then the shift to an exchange with their existing user base, was inevitable. <Why make use of Shapeshift and external exchanges, if you can pocket all that profit by doing it yourself.>  

Also let's not forget who has some influence in Blockchain.info/com --->Roger Ver  <He would have taken some massive hits with the failure of BCash>

[CryptoBry]

Am guessing the airdrop they had going for a couple of months was more of a marketing strategy to get more people hooked to its current and future services...and tbh I think everything is falling in place for them and the exchange could easily return this money, just hoping security is on top of their agenda. And with such news we are getting a step closer to mass adoption just Hope they are bringing a healthy competition to the ecosystem above all.

The people behind Blockchain.com know marketing and now they wanted to explore the cryptocurrency more by launching their own exchange which can be complementing their already popular wallet infrastructure in place. I guess this can be good for the sake of competition as people will now have another option they can go to when it comes to buy and sell of digital assets though for now the pairs can be limited as they are just starting. Though we have to undergo the required KYC to avail of its many services so for people who are afraid to do it then this might not be for them as this is not a DEX platform.  Good luck to Blockchain.com, the whole market can be ready for you.

[InvoKing]

It is interesting to see such diversity in the actual limited market.
The only inconvenient is the security issues. We will see if it will be easily hacked or not.

[bbc.reporter]

Does blockchain.info collect personal information for KYC?  I reckon it might soon, if they are not doing it now.

It might also be a good time to begin teaching newbies to use Electrum and other wallets. Once KYC begins, they will certainly leave hehehe.

[bryant.coleman]

Does blockchain.info collect personal information for KYC?  I reckon it might soon, if they are not doing it now.

In a strict sense, no. They don't. You can create a wallet in Blockchain.com and still refuse to undergo the KYC process. However, they won't allow you to convert your BTC or ETH to any other coin, if you haven't undergone the KYC process. Also, they are giving away $25 worth of Stellar Lumens (XLM) for free, for everyone who has completed the KYC process.

Since the authorities have made KYC mandatory for the exchanges, the next step may be making it compulsory for the wallets. But this is not very easy to implement. The decentralized nature of many of the wallets make such a measure almost impossible to be forced upon.

[gentlemand]

Since the authorities have made KYC mandatory for the exchanges, the next step may be making it compulsory for the wallets. But this is not very easy to implement. The decentralized nature of many of the wallets make such a measure almost impossible to be forced upon.

I've never seen any regulator mentioning attempting to do that with proper software wallets.

In blockchain.com's case it's perhaps a little more nuanced as you're accessing a wallet through a portal they host on an ongoing basis, even if they have nothing to do with the private keys. If I were them I'd be looking to clarify and fine tune a few things for potential ball ache in the future.

Perhaps they'll eventually tell non KYC'd users to take their seed elsewhere. It's not as if they make them much money anyway.

[1Referee]

It might also be a good time to begin teaching newbies to use Electrum and other wallets. Once KYC begins, they will certainly leave hehehe.

That's how it should be. The thing here is that mobile clients such as Electrum aren't built to provide people a sleek looking client, but one that works and is secure. Most newbies go for the client they consider to be the prettiest and install it. Unfurtunately, most of these clients are either shitty clients with totally NOT random keypair generation, or just outright scams.

Another thing is that we have some explaining to do when people search for Electrum because of all the phishing attacks it went through. One more indicating that this space is not average joe friendly yet.

[stompix]

I wonder what they hope to achieve by creating this exchange?
The exchange has few pairs, with these few pairs will not attract many customers, they could have worked harder so that they could offer services that other exchanges cannot yet offer, for example:

They are already offering better service coverage than anybody.


I bet 1 BTC it's going to cost them more to host that picture in bandwidth terms that all the possible revenue they could make from those islands.

The islands are currently uninhabited.

Forget Mozambique, they don't offer their service in Japan, Australia , Switzerland and half of the US!!!

[Vishnu.Reang]

Having a bad feeling after reading about all their plans..... My two cents about this is that we don't need another exchange right now. There are thousands of them out there and Blockchain.com would be better if they could just concentrate on the wallet business. I don't want the hackers to target Blockchain.com, after the disaster we had with Cryptopia.

[gentlemand]

I don't want the hackers to target Blockchain.com, after the disaster we had with Cryptopia.

If they get nailed at least there's a chance they're capitalised enough to take it on the chin rather than fold up and disappear.

I'm surprised both blockchain and bitcoin.com have launched exchanges but at least they have names to exploit unlike most.

[BitHodler]

Having a bad feeling after reading about all their plans..... My two cents about this is that we don't need another exchange right now. There are thousands of them out there and Blockchain.com would be better if they could just concentrate on the wallet business. I don't want the hackers to target Blockchain.com, after the disaster we had with Cryptopia.

The more exchanges the better. It's not that you have to use any of the new ones that pop up-- the competition aspect of all these exchanges leads to better overall service at lower cost.

Cryptopia has been a trash exchange from the very beginning while blockchain.com has always been a serious player within crypto and has provided enough utility to new users up to where we are today.

Hackers will attack anything related to crypto so it's not that your funds are safe over at the exchanges you do think are competent-- at best other exchanges can be safer, but safer doesn't mean safe.

[malevolent]

Considering the increasingly hostile stance taken by the governments around the world towards cryptocurrency, I am forced to think about this scenario. My initial conclusion is that it is not possible for Blockchain.com to freeze the funds. Because the wallet itself is decentralized and only the user has access to private keys and passwords.

They could serve malicious javascript to steal users' funds, or require KYC to access the wallet file. If someone hadn't backed it and they don't have the seed with them they'd be screwed.

Very hypothetical, though, as that would bring lots of hate from the entire Bitcoin community onto bc.i.

[Vishnu.Reang]

Considering the increasingly hostile stance taken by the governments around the world towards cryptocurrency, I am forced to think about this scenario. My initial conclusion is that it is not possible for Blockchain.com to freeze the funds. Because the wallet itself is decentralized and only the user has access to private keys and passwords.

They could serve malicious javascript to steal users' funds, or require KYC to access the wallet file. If someone hadn't backed it and they don't have the seed with them they'd be screwed.

Very hypothetical, though, as that would bring lots of hate from the entire Bitcoin community onto bc.i.

How practical is this? I have created multiple Blockchain.com wallets and most of my coins are stored in these wallets. I have also exported the private keys from these wallets in the text format. If Blockchain.com freezes my wallet, I can just go to some other platform and then import the private keys to get access to my wallet, right? There is no requirement to use their platform.

[malevolent]

How practical is this?

You'd be unaffected if bc.i decided to block access to your wallet(s), but if you don't check the javascript they serve you every time you use their online wallet, they could still rob you if they wanted to. In the past there was a browser extension to remedy this threat but I can't find it anymore (bc.i link linking to an unrelated page) so it's probably no longer being maintained.