2026-01-18 07:32:33

Recently, many people have been discussing security issues of certain trading platforms. I have also placed orders there myself, so I took the time to understand their risk control system in depth. The result is that many concerns actually stem from a lack of understanding.

Basically, the core of this platform's asset custody scheme is quite solid—the user's assets are directly held in smart contracts on Ethereum L1. This means that even if the platform is hacked or faces operational issues, users can still fully withdraw their funds through the contract logic. In other words, your money doesn't truly reside on the platform.

Regarding account security, they employ multiple layers of protection: two-factor authentication, email verification combined with wallet address binding verification, a triple reinforcement. This combination can indeed filter out most risks.

Of course, no platform is completely secure, but from a technical architecture and protection perspective, this scheme is worthy of users' trust.

ETH-1,01%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

21 Likes

Reward
21
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ThreeHornBlasts

· 01-21 07:24

It seems like you've really put in the effort to research, but I still have to ask, who is responsible for the vulnerabilities in the smart contract itself? --- Hmm, having assets on the chain definitely feels more secure, more reliable than storing them on a centralized exchange. --- Multi-layer verification sounds great, but if users can't manage their keys properly, it's all for nothing. --- That's a good point, but saying "worthy of trust" is a bit absolute, remember that some platform also boasted the same before. --- Okay, finally someone explained this clearly. My friend worrying all day long is really unnecessary. --- On-chain custody indeed has advantages, but it still depends on the audit reports. Are there any?

View OriginalReply0

DYORMaster

· 01-21 07:17

Money is directly on the chain, which indeed makes it much more secure. --- Once again, it's a "lack of understanding." I think it's just insufficient platform promotion. --- L1 custody sounds good, but what if something really happens? Who takes the blame for contract bugs? --- Triple authentication might be overkill, but anyway, an extra layer of protection reduces some anxiety. --- Honestly, the phrase "there is no absolute security" is the most sincere; everything else is just adding drama to oneself. --- So the question is—how do you confirm that the money is really in the contract and not backed up somewhere in the backend? --- This level of protection is still too complicated for beginners. I just want to store it simply and withdraw it easily. --- Trust is the most fragile thing; you'll know when something really happens someday. --- Complete contract logic sounds good, but when gas fees are ridiculously high, it just leaves you confused.

View OriginalReply0

ForkPrince

· 01-21 00:15

Damn, it really is true. Smart contract custody is indeed different, now I feel much more at ease. --- Listening to you, I finally understand that most of those panic posts were just due to not understanding the principles. --- Triple protection sounds good, but I still want to ask if there are any precedents of being hacked? --- Finally someone explained this clearly, so I don't have to worry about it all day. --- Assets on the chain are indeed absolute; even if the platform runs away, they can't touch my coins. --- But honestly, no matter how secure the system is, it can't withstand users being inexperienced. --- This set of protective measures can indeed deter many small hackers. Okay. --- I feel like now I truly understand what decentralization means.

View OriginalReply0

WagmiAnon

· 01-18 08:02

Having your money on the chain really makes you feel more at ease, no need to constantly worry about platform跑路

View OriginalReply0

WalletDetective

· 01-18 08:01

They talk a lot, but only a few truly dare to put their money on the line.

View OriginalReply0

ColdWalletGuardian

· 01-18 07:58

Wow, directly hosted on the chain, that does feel much more secure. Holding your money in your own hands is a different experience, isn't it? But you still have to be careful of phishing; no matter how much protection there is, it can't stop your own careless mistakes. Hearing you say that, those rumors from before seem to have been a bit exaggerated. The triple verification combo really works; at least it scared off the script kiddies. That's why doing your homework is important; blindly trusting small groups' claims is a big mistake.

View OriginalReply0

EthSandwichHero

· 01-18 07:55

Oh, now I feel relieved. Turns out the money isn't really on their servers. --- The smart contract escrow trick is indeed powerful; even if the platform runs away, my coins are safe. --- Triple protection sounds good, but having to go through the login process every time is a bit annoying. --- That's right, many people just don't understand the asset architecture and worry unnecessarily. --- The key is direct custody on Layer 1, which is definitely more reliable than centralized exchanges. --- Two-factor authentication plus email and wallet verification—this security layer is solid; who dares to move? --- Wait, what if the smart contract itself has vulnerabilities? How do we handle that? --- Panic caused by lack of understanding is quite common; a good explanation can prevent that. --- Implementing multi-layer protection sounds simple but is really a test of capability when doing it. --- Feels much more secure than the platform I used before; at least I can withdraw funds independently. --- The phrase "there's no such thing as absolute security" is the most painful, but it's still better than locking coins in a centralized cold wallet.

View OriginalReply0

ImpermanentPhobia

· 01-18 07:34

Holding funds on the chain is truly reliable, there's really no doubt about that. --- Wait, is L1 custody really more reliable than centralized exchanges? I need to do more research. --- It's all about triple protection and smart contracts, sounds great... but the main premise is that I have to trust this platform. --- Exactly, many FUDs are because people don't understand the custody logic, really. --- What if the smart contract itself has bugs? Is there an audit report? --- Admit it, choosing a platform ultimately comes down to trust. No matter how good the security mechanisms are, they can't withstand human nature. --- This is the analysis I should listen to, not those alarmist claims. --- Direct contract custody truly outperforms those platforms that embezzle funds. --- Compared to some platforms' cold wallet black holes, this is indeed more transparent.

View OriginalReply0