CustodyStress
Archive › Forced relocation
Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-00492

Forced relocation — exchange custody (2017)

Constrained
Case description
Following the Chinese exchange ban, the PBoC issued further guidance in October 2017 targeting offshore exchanges with Chinese-language interfaces. VPN usage to access these exchanges was specifically flagged as a compliance violation. Chinese users who had migrated to offshore exchanges found themselves in an increasingly precarious legal position regarding both account access and legal status.
Custody context
Stress conditionForced relocation
Custody systemExchange custody
OutcomeConstrained
DocumentationUnknown
Year observed2017
CountryChina
Structural dependencies observed
Legal process requiredInstitutional cooperation required
What this illustrates
Before anyone could access the funds, a legal process had to be completed first. Whether full access was ultimately possible is unclear, but significant delay or outside intervention was involved.
Outcome interpretation
Access remained possible, but only with delay, dependence, or significant difficulty.
Source
Publicly Reported
Evidence type
News article
Related cases involving forced relocation
91 cases involve forced relocation 512 cases involve exchange custody View archive statistics →
This archive documents observed custody survivability failures. It does not attempt to document all Bitcoin losses or security incidents. Submit a case
← All cases
Framework references
Terms guide
Survives
Access remained possible under the reported conditions.
Constrained
Access remained possible, but only with delay, dependence, or significant difficulty.
Blocked
Access was not possible under the reported conditions.
Indeterminate
There was not enough information to determine the outcome.
Single-person knowledge
Recovery depended on information or capability held by one individual who was unavailable.
Institutional dependence
Recovery depended on a third-party institution or service that was inaccessible or uncooperative.
Documentation gap
Recovery depended on instructions that were missing, incomplete, or unclear.
Authority mismatch
The person with legal authority to act did not have operational access, or vice versa.