So that's very curious, not really the private exchange between 2 high level executive, but rather how that exchange ended up at the SEC... The SEC doesn't tell how they acquired this quote, nor even whether it's a legitimate quote at all. We all believe the SEC is not gonna lie, right? Well, then that let us with 2 options: the executive cooperated with the SEC (huh, how and why? was he threatened or was he offered a better paycheck?), or they have some spying tools (also weird..). Any other option?
Binance operates out of the US and I'm not confident they would comply with a subpoena. Maybe they're using some chat service with a US presence which is subpoenable -- Slack or whatever.
Maybe, but given the powers the SEC have to prevent them operating in the US financial system at all, and sanctioning anyone who wants to operate in the US if they deal with them, it’s usually less risky to hand over the data and hope they don’t find anything.
> Well then, since you're absolutely confident with the SEC integrity, please suggest how they acquired this quote?
This is an absolutely ridiculous demand, of course. I don't have any special access to the SEC, and yet I am very confident they are not fabricating quotations from Binance. First, because crypto operators really are dumb enough to commit this kind of thing to writing -- it is very plausible. And second, because the incentives are all wrong for the SEC to fabricate evidence. It would eventually come out, and then they would lose all credibility. There's just no upside in it for the SEC.
> Just to be clear, Binance is operating out of the US so it's very doubtful they provided much logs to the SEC, let alone compromising logs.
If they used a hosted chat service, like Slack, Teams, or iMessage, the US would have had access to that via subpoena. I expect it is something along those lines.
