Where you’re funding your Bybit account from matters, be careful.

[Rgram]

The need for regulations has being one of the reasons why government have being going toe to toe with Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies in general and it’s not obvious the centralized systems within the space remains where they can tighten their grip and make this pseudo regulations happen.

I received a notification from Bybit not so long ago about certain changes in their policy on how, you are not allowed to transact with certain firms or companies while using their platform.

 

 

(Link to restricted sources)

Some of the under listed companies include the likes of Mixers which have being banned from this space, the list also includes A7 Africa and A7 Nigeria which is a Russian backed cross boarder payment facilitator.

A7 Africa and Nigeria had come under scrutiny before hand on facilitating laundered money as well as other related charges, these are just backlashes from those charges.

What’s there to note:
Ideally, sending coins from your wallet to any CEX remains the safe means anyone can use in transacting within the cryptospace. It’s not ideal to use certain firms or services in funding certain CEX or other companies of its like in the cryptocurrency space.

Most of these companies have known address that gets flagged instantly as you send funds to them and blockchain transactions are completely open to the public for verification. Your consent isn’t needed to affect these policies.

Let’s be guided so, we don’t end up loosing our precious BTC on good grounds.

[Homemade-IQ]

This is an important update we all need to be aware of, in other not to face the consequences of ignorantly breaking the rules, but I don't think I will lose any sleep over this because the few transactions I have done in the past with my bybit account is between moving my crypto asset from my trust wallet to my bybit or I make a direct purchase of usdt through the p2p services, so hopefully i wouldn't get into a situation whereby my bybit account will be in trouble because of this.

[Sticky Bomb]

Some on the list are actually fraudsters related like Lazarus group and Kraken Darknet market and some are just political and to place more embargo on countries which their political interests does not align with the US. A good example is QVAPAY which is owned, developed and maintained by Cuban devs, we all know America has placed a long time embargo and sanctions against Cuba for six decades or so.

A good quantity of companies currently restricted in the list might just be as a result of trade wars and not really that they did something bad, but the US and Europe dominates the markets, so in a bid not to loose their stake in the European markets, these exchanges tend to comply readily to avoid being on the wrong books of the big players.

[Hypnotizer]

I also received same email yesterday though I wasn’t able to access the link to the full list of the restricted counterparties because it took forever to load. I’ve never heard of most of these sanctioned parties before but informing every individual customer is the right thing to do, some of these parties are part of the counterparties restricted by Bitget earlier.

To avoid indirectly funding your Bybit account or other CEXs account with coins connected to these counterparties, you should consider using an AML bot to confirm the risk scores of the coins especially for coins you’re a bit skeptical about.

[Agbamoni]

What has Iran done to be sanctioned? Iran and Israel are in this war together. Israel is not sanctioned, and Iran is sanctioned. Meanwhile, Israel and the US started this war.

From my understanding, the sacntioned affects group of fraudsters, groups with a past history of money laundering, and groups considered terrorists, which is where Iran falls under.

[Hypnotizer]

What has Iran done to be sanctioned? Iran and Israel are in this war together. Israel is not sanctioned, and Iran is sanctioned. Meanwhile, Israel and the US started this war.

From my understanding, the sacntioned affects group of fraudsters, groups with a past history of money laundering, and groups considered terrorists, which is where Iran falls under.

Probably because they’re adhering to the US OFAC’s sanctions and Iran is under the sanctions from the US and if they continue serving the costumers from Iran, they risk being cut off by the US which is a big market for the platform and they wouldn’t risk losing that because they’re not only going to lose the US market alone, they might lose more because of the influence of the US.

So the restrictions isn’t directly because Iran is considered “a terrorists group” rather it’s because of the US complete sanctions on Iran, and Israel would obviously not fall under this because they’re close allies of the US..

[Ashawowo(OS)]

When they say "Directly or Indirectly" it gets more confusing as per what they mean by "Indirectly". Is it that they view transaction histories to ensure that funds have not earlier passed through these platforms before arriving on theirs?

What if You receive funds from these platforms in a non-custodial wallet before sending it to the exchange for P2P, would they accept it or would it fall under the category of restricted platforms or tainted coins?

[Rgram]

What has Iran done to be sanctioned? Iran and Israel are in this war together. Israel is not sanctioned, and Iran is sanctioned. Meanwhile, Israel and the US started this war.

Of course there is always a political aspect to these forms of regulations pending its origin. It’s not strange to find that, this is attributed to the US, using these form of sanctions as a tool to ensure some computation on the sides they are not allied with and the cryptocurrency community would have something to suffer in it as well by the removal of these services, hence we stand notified.

When they say "Directly or Indirectly" it gets more confusing as per what they mean by "Indirectly". Is it that they view transaction histories to ensure that funds have not earlier passed through these platforms before arriving on theirs?

It would be unlawful and a misapplication of policies to punish customers or users of a service prior to the amendment of certain policies. Policies enacted can only apply from the day they were made and not before. Past history on services used here doesn’t apply.

What if You receive funds from these platforms in a non-custodial wallet before sending it to the exchange for P2P, would they accept it or would it fall under the category of restricted platforms or tainted coins?

Receiving funds from these restricted services on a non custodial wallet and later sent to Bybit for your own purposes doesn’t have anything to do with them. Though, blockchain history can always track the chain link of transactions, so long as you directly funded Bybit from your non custodial wallet, you don’t haven’t violated the policy as much as I understand it.

[Doan9269]

I can see some Mixers listed as well as some terrorist organizations that have been flagged, we have to be careful of getting involved with any form of dirty coins being transferred to our exchange account, Bybit will definitely take a drastic action against such, but what I don't know is how they could be able to differentiate between a dirty coin transferred from unreliable source and the one that you genuinely have, without being involved with any of these illegal addresses or platforms.

Honestly I don't really know what measure they are going to take to distinguish between these, how will an Innocent user not be affected when he only make a trade with a merchant and never knows the source of his coins? This is also getting more interesting, and everyone should be getting more ready to use a decentralized exchange rather than relying on the use of a centralized exchange.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

In the message, they are saying that one can not send coins to those platforms directly or indirectly, an indirect transaction for example (if that's what they mean) is maybe when I withdraw money from my bybit account to my self custody wallet and then send the money to those platforms using my custody wallet, if that's what they mean, then it doesn't make any sense because as long as I didn't move coins directly from my bybit account to any of those platforms, it doesn't concern them again, but if that's the case, there are many options to still send and receive money from those platforms.  Thanks for the update @OP,  I wonder why I didn't get the same email from bybit.

[Roseline492]

When they say "Directly or Indirectly" it gets more confusing as per what they mean by "Indirectly". Is it that they view transaction histories to ensure that funds have not earlier passed through these platforms before arriving on theirs?

What if You receive funds from these platforms in a non-custodial wallet before sending it to the exchange for P2P, would they accept it or would it fall under the category of restricted platforms or tainted coins?

The direct and indirect they're talking about is that whichever means you use to transact with those restricted account and they find out, you would also face the same restriction from the exchange. As for your question regarding receiving from your noncustodial before exchange, it will almost have the same problem as those who would receive directly to their exchange from those restricted account because nothing is hidden from those transactions and what most exchanges usually do whenever they receive a deposit from a noncustodial wallet is to scan some or all the transactions that has ever took place on the wallet so when that happens they would definitely know that you were indirectly transacting with those people.