After one of the users of Binance claimed to be a victim of a $2.6 million attack, the High Court of London ordered Binance, one of the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchanges, to identify the hackers and freeze their accounts.

A High Court judge accepted demands by artificial intelligence (AI) company Fetch.ai for Binance to take steps to identify the hackers, track and seize the assets, in a decision that was made public this week.

Despite the little amount at stake, the case is one of the first public ones involving Binance and will serve as a test of the English legal system’s ability to combat cryptocurrency platform fraud.

“We can confirm that we are helping Fetch.ai in the recovery of assets,” a Binance spokesperson said.
“Binance routinely freezes accounts that are identified as having suspicious activity occurring in line with our security policies and commitment to ensuring that users are protected while using our platform.”

Binance has been subjected to severe regulatory scrutiny as part of a global crackdown on cryptocurrencies, amid concerns that such exchanges may be used for money laundering or to allow customers to fall victim to scams or runaway bets.

Binance has increased its worldwide compliance team and advisory board, stating that it is dedicated to following appropriate local legislation everywhere it operates.

“We need to dispel the myth that cryptoassets are anonymous. The reality is that with the right rules and applications they can be tracked, traced and recovered,” Syedur Rahman, a partner at Rahman Ravelli, which is representing Fetch.ai, told Reuters.

On June 6, Fetch.ai claimed hackers allegedly hacked into their cryptocurrency accounts on the Binance exchange. Fetch.ai is a company based in England and Singapore and develops AI projects for blockchain databases.

They allegedly sold the assets to a linked third party for a fraction of their worth in under an hour after being unable to remove them due to account restrictions.

Binance, which had warned Fetch.ai of odd activity in its account, had already frozen a sum and indicated that it would obey the orders, according to Rahman.

Before requesting a recovery order, the claimants must demonstrate that they have been victims of fraud.