Japan's FSA requires exchanges to hold liability reserves to cover hacks and fraud.Japan's FSA requires exchanges to hold liability reserves to cover hacks and fraud.

Japan's FSA requires exchanges to hold liability reserves to cover hacks and fraud

2025/11/25 12:31
4 min read

Japan is moving ahead with tougher regulations for the crypto industry, as the Financial Services Agency now requires that cryptocurrency exchanges maintain substantial safety reserves to protect users in the event of a failure or crisis.

Under the proposed amendments to the Payment Services Act, exchanges would be required to maintain a portion of customer assets domestically, thereby reducing the risk of loss or unauthorized outflows. The FSA’s working group is currently finalizing the details of these new rules, which follow revisions to the Payment Services Law passed in June 2025.

Japan’s FSA said it would bring in the new rules sooner after reports that another exchange, Japan Digital Design Inc. (JDD), had experienced problems with its internal system and signed a letter of intent with external security experts, including Japan’s Mitsui Knowledge Industry Co. The decision had also been partly motivated by recent hacking attacks on overseas exchanges, the financial regulator said.

Japan moves to strengthen crypto user protections

The move represents the nation’s cryptocurrency regulatory reform, the largest of its kind in Japan in two years. Exchanges are now required to maintain a liability reserve — a separate buffer fund to protect users. There will be no longer any impact on customers from hacks, unauthorized access, or fraudulent outflows; all losses on these fronts will be covered by an insurance fund, allowing reimbursements to be processed quickly.

The action came amid growing concerns about security in the cryptocurrency sector. Hundreds of millions of dollars were lost in a massive hack at one of Japan’s largest cryptocurrency platforms in 2024. The breach highlighted vulnerabilities not in the exchange’s own systems, but rather in third-party providers that service some of its trading architecture.

To prevent further misconduct, the FSA wants all third-party custodians and wallet providers that are accessed by exchanges to register as well. Client assets will only be held by licensed firms. This is all in an effort to have both the exchanges themselves and their partners meet rigorous technical and operational standards. 

The FSA has identified supply chain risk as one of its main concerns. Those kinds of risks create vulnerabilities throughout the network that can be exploited by attackers to compromise the network. The new rules are designed to fill those gaps. 

Regulatory authorities are also promoting the adoption of security measures based on international standards in exchanges and increasing the level of information security management. 

Regulatory measures have been established predominantly by trade associations, such as the Japan Virtual and Crypto Assets Exchange Association (JVCEA). Exchanges have also promised to put internal auditors through retraining and to strengthen their risk-control rules in line with the stricter guidelines from the FSA. Through this partnership, the parties aim to enhance market confidence and increase its accessibility.

Japan’s regulators push to integrate crypto into the financial system

Japan’s Financial Services Agency (FSA) intends to classify certain cryptocurrencies as bank-tradable financial products. A working group under the Financial Services Council, an advisory council to the Prime Minister, is completing a report that includes recommendations for a broader set of rules around crypto, including the creation of liability reserves.

A prime target is a proposed revision to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA). Under this proposal, specific crypto assets would be given a new legal definition as financial instruments akin to stocks or bonds. This would place them under more stringent market regulation. As part of the change, potential new rules for insider trading could extend to crypto, whereby trading on undisclosed non-public information is unlawful.

The FSA is expected to introduce a formal bill to revise the law within a year. Regulators are also explaining how they will oversee crypto lending, staking, and other ”credit‑exposure” services. These services require users to lend or stake their tokens, which can create risk if the platform collapses or mismanages funds.

Another report suggests that the FSA has been considering relaxing regulations to allow banks to play a larger role in the crypto sector. Banking conglomerates would be allowed to operate a crypto trading platform and hold digital assets on their balance sheets, provided certain risk management standards are met.

Claim your free seat in an exclusive crypto trading community - limited to 1,000 members.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security

Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security

BitcoinWorld Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security Ever wondered why withdrawing your staked Ethereum (ETH) isn’t an instant process? It’s a question that often sparks debate within the crypto community. Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin recently stepped forward to defend the network’s approximately 45-day ETH unstaking period, asserting its crucial role in safeguarding the network’s integrity. This lengthy waiting time, while sometimes seen as an inconvenience, is a deliberate design choice with profound implications for security. Why is the ETH Unstaking Period a Vital Security Measure? Vitalik Buterin’s defense comes amidst comparisons to other networks, like Solana, which boast significantly shorter unstaking times. He drew a compelling parallel to military operations, explaining that an army cannot function effectively if its soldiers can simply abandon their posts at a moment’s notice. Similarly, a blockchain network requires a stable and committed validator set to maintain its security. The current ETH unstaking period isn’t merely an arbitrary delay. It acts as a critical buffer, providing the network with sufficient time to detect and respond to potential malicious activities. If validators could instantly exit, it would open doors for sophisticated attacks, jeopardizing the entire system. Currently, Ethereum boasts over one million active validators, collectively staking approximately 35.6 million ETH, representing about 30% of the total supply. This massive commitment underpins the network’s robust security model, and the unstaking period helps preserve this stability. Network Security: Ethereum’s Paramount Concern A shorter ETH unstaking period might seem appealing for liquidity, but it introduces significant risks. Imagine a scenario where a large number of validators, potentially colluding, could quickly withdraw their stake after committing a malicious act. Without a substantial delay, the network would have limited time to penalize them or mitigate the damage. This “exit queue” mechanism is designed to prevent sudden validator exodus, which could lead to: Reduced decentralization: A rapid drop in active validators could concentrate power among fewer participants. Increased vulnerability to attacks: A smaller, less stable validator set is easier to compromise. Network instability: Frequent and unpredictable changes in validator numbers can lead to performance issues and consensus failures. Therefore, the extended period is not a bug; it’s a feature. It’s a calculated trade-off between immediate liquidity for stakers and the foundational security of the entire Ethereum ecosystem. Ethereum vs. Solana: Different Approaches to Unstaking When discussing the ETH unstaking period, many point to networks like Solana, which offers a much quicker two-day unstaking process. While this might seem like an advantage for stakers seeking rapid access to their funds, it reflects fundamental differences in network architecture and security philosophies. Solana’s design prioritizes speed and immediate liquidity, often relying on different consensus mechanisms and validator economics to manage security risks. Ethereum, on the other hand, with its proof-of-stake evolution from proof-of-work, has adopted a more cautious approach to ensure its transition and long-term stability are uncompromised. Each network makes design choices based on its unique goals and threat models. Ethereum’s substantial value and its role as a foundational layer for countless dApps necessitate an extremely robust security posture, making the current unstaking duration a deliberate and necessary component. What Does the ETH Unstaking Period Mean for Stakers? For individuals and institutions staking ETH, understanding the ETH unstaking period is crucial for managing expectations and investment strategies. It means that while staking offers attractive rewards, it also comes with a commitment to the network’s long-term health. Here are key considerations for stakers: Liquidity Planning: Stakers should view their staked ETH as a longer-term commitment, not immediately liquid capital. Risk Management: The delay inherently reduces the ability to react quickly to market volatility with staked assets. Network Contribution: By participating, stakers contribute directly to the security and decentralization of Ethereum, reinforcing its value proposition. While the current waiting period may not be “optimal” in every sense, as Buterin acknowledged, simply shortening it without addressing the underlying security implications would be a dangerous gamble for the network’s reliability. In conclusion, Vitalik Buterin’s defense of the lengthy ETH unstaking period underscores a fundamental principle: network security cannot be compromised for the sake of convenience. It is a vital mechanism that protects Ethereum’s integrity, ensuring its stability and trustworthiness as a leading blockchain platform. This deliberate design choice, while requiring patience from stakers, ultimately fortifies the entire ecosystem against potential threats, paving the way for a more secure and reliable decentralized future. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Q1: What is the main reason for Ethereum’s long unstaking period? A1: The primary reason is network security. A lengthy ETH unstaking period prevents malicious actors from quickly withdrawing their stake after an attack, giving the network time to detect and penalize them, thus maintaining stability and integrity. Q2: How long is the current ETH unstaking period? A2: The current ETH unstaking period is approximately 45 days. This duration can fluctuate based on network conditions and the number of validators in the exit queue. Q3: How does Ethereum’s unstaking period compare to other blockchains? A3: Ethereum’s unstaking period is notably longer than some other networks, such as Solana, which has a two-day period. This difference reflects varying network architectures and security priorities. Q4: Does the unstaking period affect ETH stakers? A4: Yes, it means stakers need to plan their liquidity carefully, as their staked ETH is not immediately accessible. It encourages a longer-term commitment to the network, aligning staker interests with Ethereum’s stability. Q5: Could the ETH unstaking period be shortened in the future? A5: While Vitalik Buterin acknowledged the current period might not be “optimal,” any significant shortening would likely require extensive research and network upgrades to ensure security isn’t compromised. For now, the focus remains on maintaining robust network defenses. Found this article insightful? Share it with your friends and fellow crypto enthusiasts on social media to spread awareness about the critical role of the ETH unstaking period in Ethereum’s security! To learn more about the latest Ethereum trends, explore our article on key developments shaping Ethereum’s institutional adoption. This post Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security first appeared on BitcoinWorld.
Share
Coinstats2025/09/18 15:30
XRP holders hit new high, but THIS keeps pressure on price

XRP holders hit new high, but THIS keeps pressure on price

The post XRP holders hit new high, but THIS keeps pressure on price appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Ripple [XRP] remains one of the top five cryptocurrencies
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/02/17 08:49
Will Bitcoin Price Drop to $50,000 by March 2026?

Will Bitcoin Price Drop to $50,000 by March 2026?

The post Will Bitcoin Price Drop to $50,000 by March 2026? appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Bitcoin is trading around $68,700, down nearly 22% year to date
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/02/17 08:59