Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-01124
Platform bankruptcy — FTX (2023)
IndeterminateCase description
FTX estate administrators in 2023 began the process of identifying and clawing back funds from various counterparties, including exchanges, lending desks, and investment firms that had received payments from FTX before the bankruptcy. Customers of those counterparties found their accounts subject to scrutiny or temporary freezes as the counterparties themselves faced legal uncertainty about whether they might need to return funds to the FTX estate. The contagion reach of the FTX bankruptcy extended well beyond direct FTX customers.
Custody context
| Stress condition | Vendor lockout |
| Custody system | Exchange custody |
| Outcome | Indeterminate |
| Documentation | Unknown |
| Year observed | 2023 |
| Country | International |
Structural dependencies observed
What this illustrates
Before anyone could access the funds, a legal process had to be completed first. It's not clear whether anyone ever regained access.
Outcome interpretation
Not enough information is available to determine the outcome.
Source
Publicly Reported
Evidence type
News article
Evidence link
Related cases involving vendor lockout
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
Where Bitcoin Custody Intersects Legal and Fiduciary Authority
Where custody creates gaps in estate planning, fiduciary duty, and professional responsibility.
Professional Scope Boundary Matrix
What each professional or product covers, what they do not, and where gaps form between them.
The Independent Assessment Layer in Bitcoin Custody
How independent diagnostic layers emerge when multiple parties depend on shared infrastructure.
Translate