SEC

The SEC acting chair instructed to review cryptocurrency-related statements to determine whether modifications or retractions are necessary

ChainCatcher news, according to The Block, Acting Chair of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Mark T. Uyeda instructed agency staff on Saturday to review several previously issued employee statements regarding the application of securities laws to cryptocurrency investments and digital assets. This directive was issued under Executive Order 14192 (titled "Promoting Prosperity Through Regulatory Relief") and in response to recommendations from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Uyeda stated that the statements would be reviewed to determine whether they need to be "modified or rescinded" to align with the SEC's current priorities.The specific statements under review include: the 2019 guidance on whether digital assets constitute securities, which involves how to assess whether digital assets fall under securities through the "Howey Test"; the 2021 statement on Bitcoin futures, which advised investors to exercise particular caution when investing in mutual funds involving the Bitcoin futures market, emphasizing the speculative nature of the market, risks of market manipulation, liquidity constraints, and volatility, especially within mutual funds; and the 2022 guidance following cryptocurrency bankruptcy events, which required crypto companies to transparently disclose risks related to the crypto market, highlighting impacts on investors, including custody risks, liquidity issues, reputational damage, and regulatory scrutiny.Additionally, Uyeda also instructed the review of a risk alert issued in February 2021, warning investors about the "unique risks" of trading digital assets, as well as a 2020 statement regarding Wyoming allowing state-chartered trust companies to custody digital assets.

Hyperliquid co-founder responds to concerns about agreement security: Leveraging system and HLP liquidation mechanism have been updated

ChainCatcher message, Hyperliquid co-founder @chameleon_jeff responded on X to concerns that "the Hyperliquid protocol may suffer significant losses due to market manipulation":Hyperliquid's margin design strictly ensures the platform's solvency through mathematical mechanisms, with HLP's losses always limited to its own treasury, and the protocol's operation never relying on HLP------this feature existed prior to the JELLYJELLY incident. The newly added protective mechanisms after the incident only optimize HLP's loss resistance in backup liquidation, and the underlying architecture of the protocol has not changed. In the recent JELLYJELLY incident, an attacker attempted to manipulate HLP (liquidity provider pool) by establishing a massive long and short position on themselves. Although the unliquidated contract limit at that time allowed for the establishment of a position worth 4 million USDC, the logical flaw was that HLP used its entire fund balance as collateral for this liquidation. It should be clarified that the platform itself does not face solvency risks, but HLP did face excessive risk exposure due to market manipulation.Currently, HLP's liquidation component treasury has set a collateral limit, restricting potential losses through the backup liquidation mechanism. Hyperliquid still maintains its original operating mechanism, processing under-collateralized positions in the following order: 1) market liquidation 2) backup liquidation 3) automatic deleveraging (ADL). The current backup liquidation of HLP has added protective mechanisms by setting loss limits, making the cost of manipulating the mark price far exceed the limited gains that can be obtained from HLP.
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovators