Compliance Daily · 2026-11-03. This digest covers compliance news verified for that day from 00:00 to before 00:00 the following day, Beijing time, and will not be changed after finalization.
01CZ Discusses Binance's Approximately USD 6.3 Billion Hack: Acknowledges Insufficient Industry Security Investment, Plans to Promote a Security Alliance
In a Talking Tokens podcast interview, Binance founder CZ reviewed the response after Binance suffered a hack of approximately USD 6.3 billion. The FBI attributed the attack to the North Korean hacking group TraderTraitor. CZ said that at the time of the incident it was close to midnight in the UAE, and he learned of the news almost simultaneously from the Binance team and on X; because he no longer directly manages Binance, he mainly conveyed information to the community. He believes that Binance and the crypto industry as a whole have invested insufficiently in security, that malicious actors have begun to use AI, and that more security problems may emerge in the short term. He said the industry has discussed establishing a security alliance under which participants would share best practices, conduct cross-audits and assist in promptly freezing funds after incidents, but the specific form has not yet been determined. He also said he had not contacted Trump or Washington regarding the incident, but hoped that governments able to communicate with North Korea, such as the United States and China, would provide assistance. He said Binance's prompt commitment to cover losses alleviated market concerns about contagion, and that only about 6% to 10% of the outflowed funds went to other centralized exchanges; the interview did not specify the source of that figure.
Business impact
CZ no longer directly manages Binance, and his statements do not constitute a formal commitment or regulatory obligation of Binance, but two points have practical implications for exchanges: first, the commitment to cover user losses, which determines how the platform allocates losses and liability in a security incident; second, the proposed security alliance, which involves cross-platform sharing of best practices, cross-audits and assistance in freezing funds after incidents, and once implemented would change information-sharing and mutual-investigation relationships among exchanges. At present the alliance is only at the discussion stage and its specific form has not been determined, so it is not yet sufficient to determine any mandatory membership or disclosure obligations.
Key points to watch
- Confirm whether the security alliance establishes formal membership rules and conditions for joining
- Verify the specific scope of the platform's commitment to cover losses in security incidents
02Hong Kong SFC: Tokenized Gold ETF May Be the Next Pilot, With 17 Tokenized Products Already
On November 2, Julia Leung, Executive Director of the Investment Products Division of the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), stated at the Hong Kong FinTech Week that, following the approval of the first batch of tokenized money market funds for round-the-clock secondary market trading on licensed virtual asset trading platforms, tokenized gold ETFs may become the next phase of pilot products. She also disclosed that Hong Kong currently has 17 tokenized products for retail investors, covering money market funds, gold products and ETFs, with assets under management of approximately USD 1.3 billion. The SFC will also explore combining the digital renminbi (e-CNY) with tokenized funds, including the subscription and redemption of RMB-denominated funds and the use of e-CNY to settle investments in government notes, and will launch an "innovation channel" and consider providing regulatory flexibility for innovative products with practical benefits. The above content reflects statements made by a regulatory official at a public event; tokenized gold ETFs have not yet entered the approval process for specific products.
Business impact
Licensed platforms and asset management institutions need to distinguish between two types of arrangements: the first batch of tokenized money market funds has been approved for round-the-clock secondary market trading on licensed virtual asset trading platforms, which is a permission already in effect; tokenized gold ETFs are currently only named as the direction for the next phase of pilots, and no specific product has been approved. If an institution plans to issue tokenized gold products or RMB-denominated tokenized funds, the product structure, custody of underlying assets and subscription and redemption settlement paths will determine whether it needs to apply for a separate license and whether it can seek regulatory flexibility under the "innovation channel." Before the SFC publishes a specific product list or applicable conditions, it is more prudent to prepare materials in accordance with the requirements for tokenized products already in effect than to proceed based on pilot expectations.
Key points to watch
- The scope of the round-the-clock secondary trading permission for the first batch of tokenized money market funds
- Whether tokenized gold ETFs enter formal approval and the applicable conditions
- Whether e-CNY subscription, redemption and settlement arrangements give rise to clear regulatory requirements
03US CFTC approves first single-stock perpetual futures contracts, which may be traded on regulated US exchanges
The US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has approved the first perpetual futures contracts linked to US individual stocks, allowing such products to be listed and traded on regulated US exchanges for the first time. The approved instruments are single-stock perpetual futures contracts, i.e., futures products linked to a single US stock with no fixed expiry date. The available materials do not disclose the specific underlying stocks of the approved contracts, the names of the exchanges involved, the approval document numbers, or the effective or listing dates. The approval has been made and announced, and the products may be listed on regulated exchanges.
Business impact
The CFTC's approval brings single-stock perpetual futures within the U.S. regulated futures framework, and directly binds U.S.-regulated exchanges and their clearing and brokerage functions: contracts must be listed within the approved scope and traded and cleared through regulated venues, failing which the activity constitutes unapproved derivatives business. For platforms offering offshore single-stock perpetual contracts, this approval does not constitute a basis for legalizing their products in the United States; their contract underlying, venue and clearing arrangements must still be checked item by item against the scope of the CFTC's approval.
Key points to note
- Verify the underlying stocks and listing exchanges of the approved contracts
- Confirm whether the contract clearing arrangements fall within regulated venues
04The U.S. CFTC approves the listing and trading of single-stock perpetual futures, extending regulatory scope from crypto assets to traditional stocks
Michael Selig, Chairman of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), announced on November 3 that single-stock perpetual futures (Equity Perps) have for the first time been approved for listing and trading on qualifying U.S.-regulated exchanges. The relevant exchanges must be registered with the CFTC and must also complete notice registration with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as exchanges for security futures products. Selig stated that the relevant contracts have been deemed approved under CFTC rules and are security futures products subject to both CFTC and SEC regulation. This measure extends the scope of U.S.-regulated perpetual futures products from digital commodities to traditional stocks, providing U.S. traders with a domestic compliant trading channel.
Business impact
Following the inclusion of single-stock perpetual futures in the U.S. regulatory system, trading venues must satisfy both conditions: CFTC registration and SEC notice registration as an exchange for security futures products. The contracts themselves take effect by deemed approval under CFTC rules, and venues that have not completed dual registration are not eligible to list such contracts. For offshore platforms offering perpetual contracts, this arrangement brings traditional stock exposure within the scope of U.S. security futures regulation, and product design and client onboarding must be handled as security futures products rather than digital commodities. The approval currently targets qualifying U.S.-regulated exchanges; the materials do not address whether offshore platforms may rely on it to offer similar contracts to U.S. traders.
Key points to note
- Confirm whether the trading venue has completed CFTC registration and SEC notice registration
- Review whether the proposed listing contract falls within the scope of securities and futures products
- Distinguish the applicable regulatory standards for digital commodity perpetuals and single-stock perpetuals
05Kraken freezes accounts linked to approximately USD 133 million in suspected stolen funds involving a European institution and is cooperating with law enforcement in the investigation
Kraken has restricted accounts linked to a suspected crypto asset theft exceeding USD 133 million involving an unnamed European institution, and Kraken is cooperating with law enforcement on fund recovery efforts. Kraken stated that the incident did not originate on its platform, that its security systems were not compromised, and that customer accounts were not taken over. On-chain investigator ZachXBT found that the suspected stolen amount had increased by a further USD 27 million over the previously disclosed USD 106 million. Bitquery data shows that approximately USD 62.98 million in stablecoins was converted into 27,553 ETH within approximately four hours. Kraken, Crypto.com and OKX have all been reported to be involved in the related flow of funds, among which Crypto.com has taken measures to prevent the relevant funds from being transferred through its platform, while OKX stated that it is investigating. As of the statistical point described in the report, approximately USD 78.3 million remained in wallets associated with the attacker, while a further approximately USD 30.5 million had been transferred out. The identity of the victim and ZachXBT's speculation that a major Western European financial institution was attacked and sought to cover up the incident have not been verified.
Business impact
Kraken's restriction of the accounts involved constitutes account control measures taken by the platform itself within the framework of law enforcement cooperation, rather than a regulatory penalty or judicial ruling; the direct subjects of such restrictions are the holders of the flagged accounts, not all customers. For institutions that hold or handle funds on platforms such as Kraken, Crypto.com and OKX, once an address is flagged by on-chain analysis as related to the fund flows in this case, they may face interception of deposits, delays in withdrawals or restrictions on account functions, and platforms generally do not bear an obligation of prior notice. Because the identity of the victim institution, the legal ownership of the stolen assets and the trigger standards for freezes by each platform have not been made public, it is currently insufficient to determine on this basis whether other platforms bear an equivalent obligation to freeze.
Key points to note
- Check whether your own addresses have been flagged by on-chain analysis as involved in the fund flows in this case
- Confirm the notification arrangements for account restrictions and freezes in the platform's terms of service
- Retain records of transactions with the addresses involved for law enforcement inquiries
06Police in Chongqing's Liangjiang New Area handled a new type of telecom fraud money-laundering case involving "purchasing virtual assets plus offline gold purchases," urgently stopping losses for an elderly person living alone
Recently, the Renhe Police Station of the Liangjiang New Area Branch of the Chongqing Municipal Public Security Bureau promptly handled a telecom and online fraud money-laundering case using the method of "purchasing virtual assets plus offline gold purchases," urgently stopping losses for a defrauded elderly person. Zhang Mei (pseudonym), an elderly person living alone in Liangjiang New Area, had previously received a call from an unknown number; the caller claimed to be a "rehired retired military service member" and approached her under the pretext of making friends, carrying out the fraud through attentive and caring conversation. The available material is an excerpt; the specific fraud scripts, the amount involved, the fund-flow paths for the virtual assets and gold, and the current procedural stage of the case are all insufficient to fully reconstruct the matter, and substantive reporting must await supplementation from the original text.
Business impact
The conduct addressed in this case is the transfer of fraud-related funds through "purchasing virtual assets plus offline gold purchases," which directly affects merchants and platforms in the virtual currency trading segment and the offline gold trading segment. For institutions providing virtual currency buying, selling, and exchange services, the obligation to verify the source of customer funds and the purpose of transactions is triggered once fraud-related funds pass through; failure to identify abnormal transactions may bring their own accounts and personnel within the scope of investigation. Because the available material does not disclose the amount involved or the specific trading platforms, it is not yet possible to determine whether any service providers have already been held accountable, and relevant entities should for the time being refrain from adjusting their business rules on this basis.
Key points to watch
- Check whether customer transactions exhibit the fund-transfer characteristic of "buying virtual assets and then purchasing gold offline"
- Confirm whether source-of-funds verification records are retained for large or abnormal virtual asset transactions
View this issue's daily report in Global Regulatory Developments
