Here's how the CFTC could prevent the next FTX

CoinDesk發佈於 2022-11-18更新於 2022-11-21

文章摘要

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission should be responsible for preventing companies like FTX from taking root in the future.

FTX declared bankruptcy this month with $900 million in assets against $9 billion in liabilities. Its founder and former CEO, Sam Bankman-Fried, is being questioned by police in the Bahamas, and many customers are unable to withdraw their deposits. Its holdings of Serum’s SRM, a token Bankman-Fried developed, dropped from a value of more than $2 billion to less than $100 million. Things got worse over the weekend after FTX was apparently hacked, leading to the loss of an additional several hundred million. Some commentators are already calling it cryptocurrency’s “Lehman moment,” referring to the 2008 collapse of Lehman Brothers that signaled we were in a financial crisis.

In the wake of this epic collapse, Congress should get its head out of the sand and pass the Digital Commodities Consumer Protection Act designating the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or CFTC, to regulate the crypto industry. The agency, which regulates commodities and derivatives trading, has already taken on a role in regulating crypto, sharing duties with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. Both agencies are on shaky ground, as no legislation designates either as an enforcement agency or defines whether crypto is a security or a derivative. Both have launched probes into FTX’s handling of customer accounts.

Federal crypto regulation is currently conducted through enforcement actions — lawsuits, fines and audits conducted after an event. But these actions are dependent on the agency’s ability to make a case. As a result, it isn’t always clear what rules are being enforced. Moreover, many actions resulting in crackdowns on crypto firms are legal for traditional firms under certain circumstances. Granting statutory authority to a sole regulator would give the industry clarity and stability. The CFTC is preferable because Chairman Rostin Behnam is perceived as friendlier to the industry than SEC Chair Gary Gensler.

Many of the activities that went on between FTX and Alameda Research that got the firms in trouble were either already illegal or highly regulated for firms dealing in conventional securities or derivatives, and the lack of clear rules in the United States encourages companies to set up shop in countries with little oversight, so risky practices had no consequences until the collapse. Some commentators have compared FTX’s balance sheet to the creative accounting that resulted in the collapse of Enron in 2001.

In particular, its practice of inventing tokens and then basing the value of its own holdings on the value of the small number it sold was similar to Enron’s mark-to-market accounting. FTX issued various tokens, including SRT and FTX Token (FTT), bought some from itself, then used that price to set their valuations. The stock of tokens was then listed as an asset on FTX’s balance sheets or deposited with sister company Alameda Research, an investment firm, to use as collateral.

About $14.4 billion of FTX’s $19.6 billion in assets before last week were represented by coins and tokens FTX created, while just $5.2 billion was in conventional assets. Customer liabilities totaled about $9 billion. Moreover, FTX lent around (at least) $10 billion of its depositors’ money to Alameda. It went under, nonetheless.

Officials such as Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen are already calling for greater regulation to prevent another FTX-style crash. Yellen said the collapse “shows the weakness of this entire sector.”

Agencies like the SEC and CFTC ensure compliance with regulations by requiring firms to report on their activities regularly, by investigating tips from whistleblowers, and, when all else fails, with enforcement actions that can involve fines, lawsuits or getting a judge to subpoena companies’ records. Since the Enron scandal, accounting firms also have compliance they need to conduct. Destroying documents is a federal crime. Most importantly, the agencies have rules on how securities and commodities can be marketed to the general public, with some being restricted to only firms, individuals with specific attainments like certified financial analysts, and “accredited investors” — people wealthy enough they’re regarded as knowing what they’re doing.

One of the consequences is that prospectuses must be clear on actual risks and expected returns, and ones that are too optimistic can indicate an attempt to defraud people. For instance, Alameda Research reportedly promised investors annual returns of 15% with no risk — an impossibility that would have alerted U.S. regulators when it was made in 2018.

CFTC Chairman Behnam has said that the SEC and CFTC are capable of working together to regulate crypto, but designating one regulator would help clear up confusion immediately and avoid jurisdictional conflicts or institutional “siloing” that could prevent the agencies from communicating with each other.

Quality, sensible reforms will be key to restoring confidence in crypto firms and preventing future problems from spiraling out of control.

你可能也喜歡

特朗普总统2031年后量子安全指令引发加密技术紧急升级

美国总统唐纳德·特朗普发布行政命令,旨在提升美国对未来量子计算发展的应对能力。命令为联邦机构设定了严格的时间表,要求其将加密技术升级至抗量子技术。 根据第14409号行政令,联邦机构需在2030年12月前完成对重要信息系统(安全通信、密钥管理等)的升级。此外,政府要求所有联邦数字签名基础设施在2031年12月前迁移至后量子标准。白宫对“现在窃取,未来解密”的攻击模式表示担忧,即外国行为体现在收集加密数据,待未来量子计算机成熟后再进行解密。 为加速准备工作,特朗普总统下令商务部与国家标准技术研究院启动后量子迁移试点计划。另一项行政令则旨在增强国内量子计算能力、加强供应链韧性,并计划在2028年前更新国家量子战略与技术基准。 这一联邦指令也引发了加密货币行业的广泛关注,因为所有区块链网络都严重依赖椭圆曲线密码学。行业参与者已将量子计算视为即将到来的威胁,并开始计划必要的基础设施升级。谷歌量子AI的最新进展显示,攻击密码系统所需的资源已大幅减少,专家发现有效利用肖尔算法可攻击多数常用区块链的签名方案。 以太坊团队已提出经NIST批准的低成本账户保护方案;Algorand基金会计划在2027年前引入Falcon后量子签名方案与混合账户;Ripple则推出了在2028年前实现抗量子性的四阶段计划。比特币也面临额外压力,因其有数百万代币存放在公钥已暴露的旧式地址中。 行业注意力正集中在长期安全上,各大区块链网络持续观察并计划在量子计算能力成熟前调整其安全架构。白宫的指导方针进一步强调了向后量子架构迁移的紧迫性。

TheNewsCrypto5 分鐘前

特朗普总统2031年后量子安全指令引发加密技术紧急升级

TheNewsCrypto5 分鐘前

深度洞察:去中心化推理不是炒作,而是 AI 突破中心化垄断的关键赛道

深度洞察:去中心化推理不是炒作,而是AI突破中心化垄断的关键赛道。文章通过一个未来假想情景(2026年,前沿模型GLM-6遭美国封杀,各大云平台下架)指出,去中心化推理的核心价值在于对抗审查,确保开放权重模型能被无许可地访问和服务。 文章深入剖析了去中心化推理必须解决的四大难题:1)如何用分布式GPU集群运行超大规模模型,解决网络延迟和吞吐问题;2)如何验证节点确实运行了所承诺的模型,而非廉价替代品(介绍了ZKML、opML等多种证明方案及其权衡);3)如何真正保护用户输入(prompt)的隐私,指出单纯的分片不足以保证隐私,需要TEE或FHE等硬件或加密方案;4)如何构建可行的双边市场,找到愿意付费的真实用户(如初创公司、AI智能体),而非仅依赖代币投机。 文章盘点了多个代表性项目,如先驱Petals、注重验证的Inference.net、采用TEE的Morpheus、基于消费级GPU的c0mpute、专注苹果设备的Darkbloom等,指出各自的特点与局限。 最后,文章分析了胜负场景:在低延迟交互场景中,中心化占优;在批量处理、合成数据生成等高吞吐场景中,去中心化可能凭借供给聚合获得成本优势。长期看,去中心化推理网络生成的数据可反哺训练,形成“推理-数据-训练”的增强闭环。文章提供了七点尽调清单,并建议关注那些能清晰说明去中心化层级、拥有真实买家且技术扎实的项目,警惕仅将“去中心化AI”作为营销噱头的炒作。

Foresight News11 分鐘前

深度洞察:去中心化推理不是炒作,而是 AI 突破中心化垄断的关键赛道

Foresight News11 分鐘前

交易

現貨
合約
活动图片