Hi . do we need to do KYC to recover stolen

funds?

Hi. Exploited funds haven’t been recovered. What’s being allocated is a grant from kyberswap to affected users. And yes, you’d need to kyc to register for the grant.

That means in our decentralized world we have to do Kyc to recover our own money stolen under your platform??! Unless the affected addresses are not clear! What does the need to do kyc mean?

What’s allocated isn’t users funds, it’s a grant, hence the ZkKyc. Users whose pools were exploited by frontrun bots and funds were partially recovered, were able to claim recovered funds without kyc.

The grant is optional. Users will be kept posted if there’s any new update about exploited funds.

How do we know that we have included the option to withdraw without kyc?

How do you mean, please?

Does this mean that the stolen funds may never be recovered and those who have not done kyc will never get their money back?

You said that a group was able to withdraw money without doing kyc, I asked what were its conditions?

Do you mean those who have done Kyc and claimed the grant?

There was no condition(s) attached to that category of affected users.

No, I mean those who have not done it. Can these people claim their funds in the future?

If funds are recovered in the future, then those who opt out of registering for the grant should be able to claim their funds.

Btw, the grant registration is still ongoing, though the first batch has been concluded, after the deadline to register elapsed.

So should we hit the opt out option at this stage? Or Can we do nothing? Do we have to register a opt out?

You can do either.

Doing kyc goes against the basic principles of privacy and decentralization, especially in crypto

Thanks

It’s a voluntary action.

Then you can wait for hacker to send back funds. If you are some crypto maximalist then you can also consider that code is law and according to the code your money is gone.

This grant can be done without kyc. In addition, I was not responsible for the protection and review of the codes

Yes, it is voluntary to do kyc to return part of your money (if it is not necessary and everything is clear at the moment of snapshot) or forget the stolen funds.

What’s being allocated isn’t users funds, it’s a grant.

What’s being allocated isn’t users funds, it’s a grant.

The Galaxy platform was also hacked, did he ask for kyc?! They returned 10% more instead of granting 60% of the original amount.

The treasury grant is separate from our permissionless product offerings, and as such, Qualified Affected Users who select an option to receive Treasury Grants will also have to complete a KYC process in order to receive Treasury Grants. This is to verify Qualified Affected User status, and to ensure compliance with Grant Terms. We are aware that this may concern some users, and we explored solutions such as zero-knowledge KYC.

What is the difference between these two? For example, if you return 50% of the amount instead of 100%, it will be the same

Can’t compare both platforms. And I’m sure, if not wrong the amount of exploited funds differs

I understand what you are saying, but it is not feasible for many users to do kyc, you know it yourself. anyway, thank you for your time to talk.

It is true that the amount of funds is different and this was an example of how kyc was not required even for paying 10% more, as opposed to refunding 60% of the original amount under the title of grant.

A refund isn’t being offered. Also affected users can choose grant option of either A(60%), B(100%) or C(opt out), though both option A and B have different spread time.

Grant 100% the same as refund! Play with words again!🤦‍♂🤦‍♂🤦‍♂

As stated earlier, it’s not a refund. I’d advise you read the grant terms before proceeding.