28 Indian Crypto Service Providers Have Registered With Country’s Anti-Money Laundering Unit

CoinDeskPolicyPublicado em 2023-12-03Última atualização em 2023-12-04

Resumo

In March, India's Finance Ministry mandated that crypto businesses will have to register with the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU).

As many as 28 Virtual Digital Assets (VDA) or crypto service providers have registered themselves with India’s Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU).

The Indian Minister of State for Finance Pankaj Chaudhary told the Parliament’s Lower House in a written reply to a question on Monday.

In March, India’s Finance Ministry mandated that crypto businesses will have to register with the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), the country's anti-money laundering unit, and comply with other processes under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). This meant crypto businesses became legally obligated to perform verification processes such as Know Your Customer (KYC).

Advertisement
Advertisement

The reply from India’s finance ministry also revealed that “the guidelines and reporting requirements are applicable to offshore crypto exchanges servicing the Indian Market” and that “appropriate action under PMLA" would be taken against non-compliant offshore platforms.

While major exchanges such as CoinDCX, WaxirX and CoinSwitch have all registered with the FIU, none of the 28 entities appear to be offshore companies.

Edited by Parikshit Mishra.

Leituras Relacionadas

The Code Was Fine, But It Was Still Hacked: What Is the 'DVN Configuration Vulnerability' Behind the Biggest Hack of 2026?

Title: Code Was Secure, Yet $293M Stolen: The 2026 DVN Configuration Breach Explained On April 18, 2026, Kelp DAO’s restaking protocol was exploited, losing 116,500 rsETH (worth $293M at the time) due to a configuration flaw—not a smart contract vulnerability. The attacker used a forged cross-chain message to drain funds via LayerZero’s bridge, then dispersed the stolen rsETH across Aave V3, Compound V3, and Euler to borrow real assets, ultimately escaping with $236M in WETH. The root cause was a critical misconfiguration in Kelp’s LayerZero V2 setup: the protocol used a 1-of-1 Decentralized Verifier Network (DVN) threshold, meaning only one node approval was needed to validate cross-chain messages. The attacker compromised that single node, allowing unauthorized minting of rsETH on Ethereum. This configuration choice—permitted by LayerZero but highly risky—left zero fault tolerance. In contrast, protocols like ApeChain using multi-node validation (e.g., 2-of-3 or 5-of-9) remained secure. This incident highlights a blind spot in DeFi security audits: tools like Slither and Mythril scan code for logic flaws but ignore configuration parameters. The 2022 Nomad hack ($190M loss) also stemmed from a config error, bringing total losses from such issues to ~$482M—rivaling private key breaches. The Kelp exploit underscores the need for standardized config audits and higher baseline security in cross-chain designs.

marsbitHá 7m

The Code Was Fine, But It Was Still Hacked: What Is the 'DVN Configuration Vulnerability' Behind the Biggest Hack of 2026?

marsbitHá 7m

The More Frequently They Are Updated, the More Similar Claude Code and Codex Become

OpenAI's recent release of GPT-5.4-Cyber demonstrates a striking convergence with Anthropic's Claude Mythos, reflecting a broader trend of product and strategic alignment between the two AI giants. This is particularly evident in their flagship coding assistants, Codex and Claude Code, which have evolved from distinct philosophies into increasingly similar tools. Initially, Codex emphasized speed and real-time interaction, acting like a fast, junior developer, while Claude Code focused on handling extreme complexity with methodical, large-context analysis. However, both have adopted near-identical solutions to core challenges, such as using isolated sub-tasks or agent teams to prevent context pollution during large-scale code modifications. Benchmark results show a tight race: Codex leads in terminal tasks, while Claude Code excels in complex software engineering benchmarks. Community feedback highlights nuanced differences; Claude Code is faster but can accumulate technical debt, whereas Codex is slower but more deliberate and autonomous. The open-source framework OpenClaw has accelerated this homogenization by standardizing workflows, eroding proprietary advantages. Ultimately, the competition has shifted from pure capability to ecosystem strategy, pricing, and user experience. As these tools become ubiquitous, the developer's role evolves toward higher-level problem definition and architectural thinking, beyond automated code generation.

marsbitHá 8m

The More Frequently They Are Updated, the More Similar Claude Code and Codex Become

marsbitHá 8m

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片