Imagine a tricky scenario: you purchase a digital asset account from a certain channel, but unexpectedly, the original owner appears afterward. The other party presents valid and complete identification documents such as an ID card or passport, clearly claiming that the account belongs to them, and requests the platform to reset login passwords, withdrawal permissions, and other critical rights.
What should the platform do at this point? Should it trust the party able to provide genuine identification and complete supporting information, or believe the current account holder's unilateral statement?
This question may seem absurd, but it hits the core of account management issues in crypto exchanges. In the Web3 world, the ownership of accounts often lacks clear judicial precedents for reference. Identity verification mechanisms, multi-factor authentication processes, and risk control reviews all directly influence the final decision.
For exchanges, this is not only a technical issue but also a legal and ethical one—one wrong decision could lead to user assets being stolen. Therefore, most reputable platforms will prioritize trusting the applicant who can provide complete and authentic identity information. This is also why KYC (Know Your Customer) procedures are so important for crypto exchanges.
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.
16 Likes
Reward
16
10
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ShamedApeSeller
· 01-14 22:11
That's why I never buy second-hand accounts... it's much better to register one myself.
View OriginalReply0
NotAFinancialAdvice
· 01-14 20:56
Oh no, this is outrageous. Can account ownership really be this disputed?
---
Web3 really encounters all kinds of outrageous things. It feels like platforms are just betting on which documents are genuine...
---
So, although KYC is annoying, it’s really necessary. Otherwise, who knows who is who.
---
The core issue isn’t technical; it’s that it’s impossible to prove who came first or last. Blame the on-chain identity verification, which is still a mess.
---
Wait, doesn’t that mean people who buy accounts are at a huge loss? Seems like legal action is needed.
---
Imagine customer service receiving such complaints—that would be a headache...
---
KYC is a double-edged sword, protecting the platform on one side but also shielding impersonators?
View OriginalReply0
WhaleWatcher
· 01-13 19:47
Haha, this is exactly why I keep saying that crypto platform risk control is inadequate.
The problem of accounts being hacked is really extreme—show your ID and you win? Then I could just make a copy.
KYC can't solve this dilemma either; on-chain there are no legal constraints. To put it simply, it all depends on the platform's mood.
View OriginalReply0
RektCoaster
· 01-12 04:05
Wow, this trap is really incredible. Buying an account can still be counterattacked by the original owner. This is the charm of crypto.
View OriginalReply0
SchrödingersNode
· 01-12 04:04
This account security issue is indeed quite tricky. KYC has become a double-edged sword—does the platform trust the ID card or the holder of the coins? It's really a brain-teasing matter.
View OriginalReply0
StableCoinKaren
· 01-12 04:00
This trick is too clever. Whoever shows their ID first wins? So what if I change my mind now? Should the platform help me change it back?
View OriginalReply0
airdrop_whisperer
· 01-12 03:57
The tricks of buying and selling accounts, web3 is really full of traps
Account ownership is not legally supported, and platforms are just like buddies, awkward
KYC has instead become a talisman, isn't that ironic
Damn, that's why I never touch second-hand accounts
Once you show your ID card, you win, reality is so cruel
Who’s to blame when platforms get caught in such disputes?
No wonder exchanges require verification, so that's the logic
I just want to ask, how do platforms handle accounts without verification? Do they freeze them directly?
View OriginalReply0
GamefiHarvester
· 01-12 03:50
Damn, I've seen this trick before... I should have thought of this when buying accounts.
View OriginalReply0
DiamondHands
· 01-12 03:47
This deal is really incredible; ownership of accounts is more complicated than legal battles.
View OriginalReply0
MetaNomad
· 01-12 03:46
Oh no, this is awkward... Basically, the platform has to bet on which side is real. KYC is essentially just using ID cards to speak.
Imagine a tricky scenario: you purchase a digital asset account from a certain channel, but unexpectedly, the original owner appears afterward. The other party presents valid and complete identification documents such as an ID card or passport, clearly claiming that the account belongs to them, and requests the platform to reset login passwords, withdrawal permissions, and other critical rights.
What should the platform do at this point? Should it trust the party able to provide genuine identification and complete supporting information, or believe the current account holder's unilateral statement?
This question may seem absurd, but it hits the core of account management issues in crypto exchanges. In the Web3 world, the ownership of accounts often lacks clear judicial precedents for reference. Identity verification mechanisms, multi-factor authentication processes, and risk control reviews all directly influence the final decision.
For exchanges, this is not only a technical issue but also a legal and ethical one—one wrong decision could lead to user assets being stolen. Therefore, most reputable platforms will prioritize trusting the applicant who can provide complete and authentic identity information. This is also why KYC (Know Your Customer) procedures are so important for crypto exchanges.