How does attestation make sense when customer liability is provided

by Nexo API? Can't nexo simply understate the customer liability in stress time to make it look that assets >= liability.

Armanino (Nexo's independent auditor) has already confirmed that they check for wallet and custodian account ownership. Also, Armanino is PCAOB- and AICPA-certified. We know that the procedures are Agreed-Upon. And when I read 'Agreed-Upon Procedures Engagements' (AICPA, 2021) it says that: "The practitioner should obtain evidence from applying the procedures to provide a reasonable basis for the finding or findings expressed in the practitioner's report".

I am talking about customer liability. How do Armanino check that customer liability (I think which is loan given out by nexo) is returned correctly by nexo api. Do they regularly audit the codebase of nexo? Isn't it possible for nexo to under report the customer liability. For example, if nexo has 10 btc as collatral and 100 btc as customaer liability, can nexo return 10btc as respons eto Armanino to show that collateral ratio is 100%+. I am pretty sure answer to my question is no, nexo cannot return 10btc as response but I am interested in measures they are taking to ensure this.

As shown, the AUP procedures delineated by both Armanino and Nexo are required to be reasonably based. If they were as easily manipulatable and/or unmonitored as you imagine they couldn't be called reasonably based.

Doesn't answer my question I am talking about customer liability. How do Armanino check that customer liability (I think which is loan given out by nexo) is returned correctly by nexo api. Do they regularly audit the codebase of nexo? Isn't it possible for nexo to under report the customer liability. For example, if nexo has 10 btc as collatral and 100 btc as customaer liability, can nexo return 10btc as respons eto Armanino to show that collateral ratio is 100%+. I am pretty sure answer to my question is no, nexo cannot return 10btc as response but I am interested in measures they are taking to ensure this. In case you don't know the answer, please let moderator answer this, I am not interested in generic AICPA.

The answer is simple. This “audit” is BS.

Your question has been answered multiple times. Armanino's pages indicate that they follow more than reasonable standards to justify the conclusions that they publish. I referenced documents for you to understand the agreed-upon procedures (AUP) delineated by both parties. These auditors follow the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) and American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) standards which DON'T don't let you work with unreliable data! Armanino are highly reputable auditors, top 20 nationwide, and the largest in California, with 53 years of experience. It's clear that they know more than you do about working with reliable data.

I am asking how do they verify, I am not asking what is written, I think you are not eligible to answer this so please let admin answer this. I am interested in knowing what are these reasonable standards and how it is made sure that data returned by Nexo API is correct.

It's all explained: the procedures are agreed-upon by BOTH parties, so that they're not manipulatable. And the auditor confirmed they check for wallets and accounts ownership.

Do you even understand the question or you have set of answers which you keep on posting, I am talking about how it is validated that customer liability returned by nexo api is correct.

Public bockchain data and bank accounts verifications.

They can only see how many assets are their in nexo wallet. Question is how do they know that amount leaving from NEXO wallet is a loan or withdrawal? The audit report says, it use NEXO api to get that data and if they are actually using NEXO api, it is like trusting NEXO with data which makes the whole audit report useless until or unless there is any other party involved which confirms that data return by NEXO is correct. I am not saying that Nexo is scam, fraud or try to spread FUD. I am just looking for clarity on how it works so that in future, if I end up starting similar company, I know how things are done.

Wallet segregation. Different wallets, different purposes. All agreed preemptively and monitored by the reputable PCAOB- and AICPA-certified auditor Armanino.

If you read Nexo real-time proof of reserves FAQ you'll see: "What Types of Crypto-related Instruments does TrustExplorer support? Crypto-backed Exchange Traded Product (ETP): Liability Issued: Security Instrument tradeable on a Stock Exchange Assets held as Collateral: Cryptocurrency held in custody on behalf of ETP holders" Therefore, collaterals and loans data are monitored and accounted by the independent auditor in real-time.

Still in the FAQ: "No matter the type of crypto-related instrument, TrustExplorer: Real-Time Attest  can provide attest to and independent data related to both the Liabilities Issued and Assets held as Collateral in real-time, giving users the highest degree of transparency possible."

How the data is monitored ? Isn't it says it call the NEXO api to monitor it? Still doesn't answer the quesgtion