CustodyStress
Archive › Legal or authority constraint
Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-01404

Garantex—a sanctioned Russian cryptocurrency exchange—had its infrastructure seized by

Blocked
Case description
In March 2025, Garantex—a sanctioned Russian cryptocurrency exchange—had its infrastructure seized by US and German law enforcement in a coordinated operation. While the action was directed at dismantling a criminal exchange, it illustrated how government enforcement operations targeting platforms could simultaneously eliminate access for any legitimate users who had retained balances on the platform, regardless of their individual legal status. The operation froze Garantex's domains and wallet infrastructure, rendering inaccessible any user funds that remained on the platform at the time of the seizure.
Custody context
Stress conditionLegal or authority constraint
Custody systemExchange custody
OutcomeBlocked
DocumentationUnknown
Year observed2025
CountryUnited States
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 legal or authority constraint
39 cases involve legal or authority constraint 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.