Binance Employee Insider Trading Scandal Exposes Regulatory Loopholes

Incident Background: 48 Hours from Whistleblowing to Suspension

On March 23, 2025, Binance’s internal audit team received a tip via its whistleblower email (audit@binance.com), accusing a member of the wallet team, Freddie Ng, of using information about a token listing plan he acquired during his tenure at BNB Chain. He allegedly used this information to pre-purchase project token UUU via a related wallet, and then sold it for an arbitrage profit of USD 113,600 after the token went live.

On-chain data reveals that the employee, via address 0xEDb0, purchased 24.1 million tokens with 10 BNB (approximately USD 31,000) on March 4 after the UUU contract was deployed. He then split the tokens and sold them through a Bitget wallet, later transferring funds to eight different addresses to evade monitoring before Binance’s official announcement. On March 25, Binance confirmed the violation, announced the suspension of the involved employee, and initiated legal proceedings. Additionally, a total of USD 100,000 was awarded to four verified whistleblowers.

This incident has triggered widespread market concerns over the internal risk control mechanisms at crypto exchanges, especially since the employee had been transferred to the wallet team just one month prior yet was still able to profit from outdated job information, exposing a failure in inter-departmental information isolation.

Technical Path: On-Chain Footprints and Risk Control Loopholes

In terms of operational details, Freddie Ng’s misconduct can be divided into three stages:

1. Information Acquisition: Leveraging his access to the UUU token generation event (TGE) plan while working in the BNB Chain business development role, he obtained the token listing time in advance;

2. Fund Deployment: Transferring funds from his verified wallet (freddieng.bnb) to a test address and exploiting a cross-chain vulnerability to bypass standard transaction monitoring;

3. Selling Strategy: Splitting the tokens across multiple wallets and choosing to cash out via non-affiliated exchanges such as Bitget, thereby reducing the risk of triggering alerts on large transactions.

Notably, the on-chain linkage between the involved wallet and the verified identity address is a key piece of evidence. For example, the funding trail shows that the source of funds for address 0xEDb0 can be traced back to Freddie Ng’s verified wallet, which had previously participated in Binance’s IDO activities (requiring KYC verification), further confirming the identity connection. This loophole reflects the exchange’s insufficient monitoring of employee on-chain activities, particularly in cross-chain transactions and analysis of internal address linkages.

Regulatory Dilemma: Escalating Global Crypto Compliance Pressure

This incident intensifies the regulatory scrutiny that Binance faces. The U.S. SEC had already initiated an investigation into Binance insider trading back in 2021, and this incident may reactivate the litigation process that was paused in February 2025. Under the GENIUS Act, if the SEC deems UUU to be an unregistered security, Binance could face additional fines and operational restrictions.
Deeper regulatory challenges include:

1. Jurisdictional Disputes: Binance emphasizes that its global operations and Binance.US operate independently, yet SEC investigations have found potential links—for example, interactions between market makers controlled by Changpeng Zhao and transaction data on Binance.US;

2. Employee Conduct Constraints: Although Binance has a “zero-tolerance” policy and a Security Asset Fund for Users (SAFU), the lack of a real-time monitoring system for employee on-chain addresses means that violations are detected only through whistleblowing rather than proactive oversight;

3. Cross-Border Cooperation Issues: The funds involved were transferred across chains to networks such as Ethereum and Fantom, necessitating coordinated tracking by multiple national regulators, while the current international crypto enforcement framework remains incomplete.

Industry Ripple Effects: Crisis of Trust and the Wave Toward Compliance

The incident has produced a series of impacts on the crypto industry. Binance plans to implement AI models to scan employee on-chain addresses and upgrade inter-departmental information isolation mechanisms to restrict access to sensitive data for non-essential roles. Platforms like Ecoinmerce have launched crypto community watch programs to encourage users to monitor violations through anonymous reporting and reward mechanisms, fostering a “blockchain detective” culture.

It is noteworthy that the whistleblower reward mechanism exhibits a double-edged sword effect. Although Binance incentivizes internal oversight with a USD 100,000 reward, anonymous tips may also lead to false accusations or information misuse. The industry must strike a balance between transparency and privacy protection, for instance by employing zero-knowledge proof (ZKP) technology to verify the authenticity of reports.

Future Implications: A Dual Path of Compliance and Technological Upgrades

This incident offers three key lessons for the crypto industry:

Strengthening Internal Monitoring: Exchanges need to establish databases of employee on-chain addresses (e.g., JuCoin employee UIDs), perform real-time comparisons of trading activities against job-related information, and engage third-party auditors for regular evaluations of risk control systems;

Embracing Regulatory Collaboration: Proactively complying with regulations such as the GENIUS Act—by, for example, disclosing token listing review processes and reserve proofs—can reduce legal risks;

Driving Technological Innovation: Adopting privacy computing technologies (e.g., multi-party computation) can enable secure inter-departmental data sharing with effective information isolation, while automating compliance rules through smart contracts.

In the long run, the maturity of the crypto industry depends on a dual drive of “compliance + technology.” Only by internalizing regulatory requirements into technical protocols can a trustworthy and transparent trading ecosystem be built, paving the way for integration into mainstream financial systems.

For more content, please follow the JuCoin Research Institute!