Apologies for the reduced forum presence - we've been focused on development and user support. We're here and monitoring everything.
I really like the fact that you're focusing on development and supporting users. I was honestly expecting this kind of good news from you and I'm glad I got to know through this post. Making a way for users to talk directly to support is truly commendable because when issues come up during exchange, it will be easier to reach out straight away and get quick solutions without unnecessary delay.
But it's also important for you to stay active in the forum because people will share different kinds of opinions there and through you, solutions can come out of it. Even though you've mentioned that you're always keeping an eye on everything, your presence here is really needed to keep this ANN active and to allow proper, detailed discussions on all matters. I believe and hope we will continue to see you active here at all times.
Thank you for understanding and for the feedback.
You're absolutely right - forum presence is important for community discussion and transparent communication. We've been balancing development work with support, but I hear you on staying more active here.
We've launched on-site support to handle urgent swap issues quickly, but the forum is where broader discussions happen and where we can address concerns publicly. I'll make more effort to stay present here regularly.
Appreciate the constructive feedback.
---
[...]
Remember, you always need to use a non-custodial wallet for dealing with your funds. When you send funds to another platform from your own wallet, then you can explain it's your own funds. If necessary, even you can sign a message from your address to prove ownership of the address. I hope you learnt a lesson, and other users must take a lesson from it.
In my opinion, that's the biggest problem here. Some exchanges actually require a signature from the deposit address used as proof before the coins are released. This is simply not possible with an address for which you do not possess the key.
To make matters worse, b1eXch, as a non-KYC exchange, may be classified as potentially unsafe and rejected despite proof of ownership of the coins. In such cases, even b1eXch support cannot help, and the deposit is blocked. You can simply save yourself all the hassle and stress by using a private wallet.
Exactly right.
The fundamental problem with CEXs:Using centralized exchanges will always carry risk, no matter if your funds are legitimate or you have all the proper documentation. You will always face these issues.
Why this happens:CEXs operate under constant regulatory pressure. They flag transactions arbitrarily, freeze accounts without warning, and demand impossible verification. Even with proof of ownership, they can reject deposits from no-KYC sources simply because we don't provide them customer data.
The better solution:Use peer-to-peer exchanges or OTC traders. Yes, it costs 0.5-1% premium, but your funds are secured and you avoid this entire nightmare.
How we help in these situations:When users face CEX issues after using our service, we provide:
- Full cooperation with verification
- Extended auto-delete periods for order IDs (so you can verify with the CEX)
- Swap confirmation data
- Refunds if absolutely necessary (we'll accept the coins back and refund you)
We're fighting against CEXs that misuse user funds and don't provide instant support. They take weeks to solve issues, but onboarding new accounts only takes 2 hours. That's a massive irony - quick to take your money, slow to help when problems arise.
The real problem:Privacy is a right for everyone. Governments can't control crypto directly, so they control the CEXs. They force KYC, AML checks, source of funds demands - all designed to create friction and surveillance.
There should be more CEXs like TradeOgre - simple, no-KYC, let people trade freely. But most either implement KYC or get shut down eventually.
That's why services like ours exist. And why we fight to stay operational.
---
But after that kind of hassle every time they seek where it came from I made a direct transfer to my own wallet than using a CEX address for a direct deposit.
That's the best approach and with such an approach no centralized exchange will ask anything about the source of funds, but one should also check the safe AML of the coins as well before sending those to a centralized exchange's deposit address for safety.
This is the smart approach.
Always use your own wallet as an intermediary step:Our service → Your personal wallet → CEX (if you must use one)
This way:
- You control the private keys
- You can sign messages if needed for verification
- The CEX sees funds coming from YOUR wallet, not directly from an exchange
- Adds a layer of separation
About "checking AML" of coins:We don't believe in the concept of "tainted" coins or AML scores. Every Bitcoin is the same. Every XMR is the same.
But we understand the reality: CEXs use these arbitrary scores to harass users and lock funds.
If you must use a CEX:Be aware they may flag funds for any reason. Using your own wallet first helps, but doesn't guarantee they won't demand source of funds anyway.
Better solution: Avoid CEXs entirely. Use P2P, use no-KYC services, build circular economies where you spend crypto directly without ever touching fiat CEXs.
---
How is b1ack relevant here? It's unlikely he can actually help resolve issues with Bybit in situations like this. If I understand correctly, Bybit's concerns aren't related to b1exch. Bybit is interested in the original source of the user's funds (maybe the user sent an unusually large amount to Bybit?). So at best, b1ack can offer moral support, but vidabela still has to resolve any issues themself through communication with Bybit.
Yes, understand the point you are making and I also see it that way. Since b1ack has given a positive statement about the matter, that's why we are hopeful for something good. You mentioned that at best b1ack can give moral support but what i'm trying to say is that even moral support alone can be enough sometimes. When Bybit receives moral support from b1ack's actions, they will likely look at the issue in a more positive way.
However, it is also true that if users are facing problems, they still need to reach out themselves and resolve their issues directly. For now, we are just waiting for the next update from vidabela, because if they share further updates, it will help us understand the situation better and know whether the problem has truly been resolved or not.
To be clear about what we can and cannot do:
What we CAN provide:- Swap verification (proof the swap occurred through our service)
- Transaction details and IDs
- Confirmation that the user used our legitimate exchange
- Extended order history access for verification purposes
- Cooperation with reasonable inquiries
What we CANNOT do:- Force Bybit or any CEX to release funds
- Provide KYC information (we don't collect it)
- Verify the original source of funds before our service
- Guarantee CEXs will accept our verification
The harsh reality:CEXs like Bybit don't care about "moral support" or verification from no-KYC exchanges. In fact, learning that funds came from a no-KYC source often makes things worse, not better.
They want:
- Full KYC on the sender
- Source of funds documentation
- Transaction history going back months or years
- Proof of legitimate income
We can't provide any of that because we deliberately don't collect it.
What usually happens:User proves coins came from b1eXch → Bybit says "no-KYC exchange is high risk" → Account remains frozen → User forced to provide extensive documentation about where they got the crypto before sending to us
This is why we always recommend:Never send directly from our service to a CEX deposit address. Always use your own wallet in between.
---
I missed out on remembering the part where they took back the '.io' domain. Today I wrote the address by myself and since I typically find the link through Bitcoin Talk, I could not remember if it was '.io' or '.to' so I accidentally entered the old '.io' and I was redirected. This is good, the two domains were close enough to be confusing.
Not only that, but various sites like Monerica and KYCNOT also listed the .io domain for a long time, and the domain change resulted in an additional entry there, even though it has since been corrected everywhere on those sites. If someone searches for b1exch using a standard search engine, they'll immediately see a notice in Chrome's AI mode, for example, stating that the .io domain has been blocked—which could naturally raise questions for an inexperienced user. It will certainly take some time for such entries to be removed.
Ultimately, however, it is certainly a very positive step that b1exch now has access to the .io domain again.
We're glad we recovered the .io domain. It was causing confusion exactly as you described.
What happened:Njalla suspended our .io domain without warning. We moved to .to temporarily, which created:
- User confusion
- Duplicate directory listings
- Search engine warnings about "blocked" domain
- Trust concerns for new users
Current status:We've recovered the .io domain. Both .io and .to now work and redirect properly to the correct site.
The lingering problem:You're right that search engines and AI summaries will take time to update. Users might still see warnings about the blocked .io domain for weeks or months.
We're working with directory sites (Monerica, kycnot.me, etc.) to update listings and clarify the situation.
Lesson learned:Don't trust "privacy" registrars based on marketing alone. We've moved to a registrar that actually stands by customers when pressure comes.
Official domains:- b1exch.io (primary)
- blexch.io (backup)
- Tor onion (always available)
.io will redirect to .to
All work. Use whichever you remember.
