CustodyStress
Archive › Forced relocation
Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-01258

Forced relocation — exchange custody (2025)

Blocked
Case description
Bitcoin holders in areas of Myanmar controlled by the military junta continued to face severe internet restrictions and communication blackouts in 2025. Regions under active military operations experienced extended connectivity outages lasting weeks. Holders with self-custody wallets could not transact during these outages. Exchange-custody users faced full access blockages because exchange websites were blocked by the junta's internet controls. Bitcoin remained in use among opposition-aligned communities as a means of preserving and transferring value outside the junta-controlled banking system, but access reliability was highly dependent on geography and network conditions.
Custody context
Stress conditionForced relocation
Custody systemExchange custody
OutcomeBlocked
DocumentationUnknown
Year observed2025
CountryMyanmar
Structural dependencies observed
Legal process required
What this illustrates
Before anyone could access the funds, a legal process had to be completed first. Access was not recoverable.
Outcome interpretation
Access was not possible under the reported conditions.
Source
Publicly Reported
Evidence type
News article
Related cases involving forced relocation
91 cases involve forced relocation 471 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.
Original text
Rate this translation
Your feedback will be used to help improve Google Translate