參議員挑戰司法部對加密隱私工具的打擊

參議員 Cynthia Lummis 和 Ron Wyden 對司法部最近針對比特幣隱私服務的行動表示擔憂，敦促重新考慮。他們認為，司法部對未經許可的「貨幣服務業務」的解釋與財政部的指導和國會的意圖相矛盾。參議員認為，這種解釋可能會將非託管加密資產軟體服務定為犯罪，因為他們聲稱這些服務是未經註冊的貨幣傳輸者。

Senators Challenge DOJ Interpretation of Cryptocurrency Privacy Services

參議員挑戰司法部對加密貨幣隱私服務的解釋

United States Senators Cynthia Lummis and Ron Wyden have penned a letter to the Department of Justice (DOJ), expressing their concerns regarding the agency's recent enforcement actions against Bitcoin privacy services. The Senators argue that the DOJ's interpretation of what constitutes an unlicensed "money services business" (MSB) contradicts guidance from the Treasury Department and the intent of Congress.

美國參議員辛西婭·魯米斯 (Cynthia Lummis) 和羅恩·懷登 (Ron Wyden) 致函司法部 (DOJ)，表達了他們對該機構最近針對比特幣隱私服務的執法行動的擔憂。參議員認為，司法部對未經許可的「貨幣服務業務」（MSB）的解釋與財政部的指導和國會的意圖相矛盾。

DOJ's Interpretation Raises Concerns

美國司法部的解釋引發擔憂

The DOJ's recent actions, including the arrest of the founders of Bitcoin mixer Samourai Wallet, have sparked a legal debate about whether non-custodial crypto asset software services should be considered money transmission under the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). Samourai Wallet's software facilitated CoinJoin transactions, a privacy-enhancing technique, without controlling users' funds.

美國司法部最近的行動，包括逮捕比特幣混合器Samourai Wallet 的創始人，引發了一場關於非託管加密資產軟體服務是否應被視為《銀行保密法》(BSA) 規定的資金傳輸的法律辯論。 Samourai Wallet 的軟體促進了 CoinJoin 交易，這是一種隱私增強技術，無需控制用戶的資金。

However, the DOJ alleges that the service was used for money laundering by criminals. This has raised concerns that the DOJ's interpretation could criminalize individuals and companies offering such services, even if they do not have actual control over funds.

然而，司法部聲稱該服務被犯罪分子用於洗錢。這引發了人們的擔憂，即司法部的解釋可能會將提供此類服務的個人和公司定為犯罪，即使他們對資金沒有實際控制權。

Senators Seek Clarification

參議員尋求澄清

In their letter, Senators Lummis and Wyden emphasize the importance of clear definitions to prevent confusion and unintended consequences. They argue that the DOJ's interpretation of the BSA, which deems any service that facilitates the transfer of funds—even without actual control—as money transmission, is overly broad and problematic.

參議員盧米斯和懷登在信中強調了明確定義的重要性，以防止混淆和意外後果。他們認為，司法部對 BSA 的解釋過於寬泛且有問題，該解釋認為任何促進資金轉移的服務（即使沒有實際控制權）都是資金轉移。

The Senators highlight the need to differentiate between custodial and non-custodial crypto asset software services. Custodial services, such as exchanges and wallets that hold users' private keys, clearly fall under the definition of MSBs. However, non-custodial services, like Samourai Wallet, merely provide tools and do not control users' funds.

參議員強調需要區分託管和非託管加密資產軟體服務。託管服務，例如保存用戶私鑰的交易所和錢包，顯然屬於 MSB 的定義範圍。然而，像 Samourai Wallet 這樣的非託管服務僅提供工具，並不會控制用戶的資金。

Impact on Innovation and Privacy

對創新和隱私的影響

The Senators caution that subjecting developers of non-custodial crypto asset software to potential criminal liability would stifle innovation and undermine confidence in the DOJ's commitment to the rule of law. They believe that the DOJ's interpretation could extend to internet service providers and postal code carriers, which would have far-reaching consequences for the digital economy.

參議員警告說，讓非託管加密資產軟體的開發者承擔潛在的刑事責任將扼殺創新並削弱人們對司法部對法治承諾的信心。他們認為，司法部的解釋可能會延伸到網路服務供應商和郵遞區號營運商，這將對數位經濟產生深遠的影響。

They also express concern over the DOJ's warning to crypto users about potential loss of funds in wallets provided by non-regulated entities. Such warnings, they argue, could create a chilling effect on the use of privacy-enhancing technologies.

他們也對司法部向加密貨幣用戶發出的警告表示擔憂，即非監管實體提供的錢包中的資金可能會損失。他們認為，此類警告可能會對隱私增強技術的使用產生寒蟬效應。

Comparison to Physical Property Transmission

與物理性質傳輸的比較

The DOJ's comparison of money transmission to the transfer of data via a USB cable or heat via a frying pan has further fueled the debate. Senators Lummis and Wyden question the validity of this analogy, arguing that physical property transmission is fundamentally different from the facilitation of financial transactions.

美國司法部將資金傳輸與透過 USB 電纜傳輸資料或透過煎鍋加熱進行的比較進一步加劇了爭論。盧米斯參議員和懷登質疑這一類比的有效性，他們認為實體財產傳輸與金融交易的便利化有著根本的不同。

Need for a Clear Definition of MSBs

需要明確定義 MSB

The contrasting views between Senators Lummis and Wyden and the DOJ underscore the need for a clear definition of what constitutes an MSB in the context of cryptocurrency. The outcome of this debate could have significant implications for the development of crypto asset software and the privacy rights of users.

參議員 Lummis 和 Wyden 以及司法部之間的截然不同的觀點強調，需要對加密貨幣背景下 MSB 的組成進行明確定義。這場辯論的結果可能會對加密資產軟體的開發和用戶的隱私權產生重大影響。

Conclusion

結論

The ongoing dialogue between the Senators and the DOJ highlights the challenges of regulating the rapidly evolving cryptocurrency industry. It remains to be seen how the DOJ will respond to the Senators' letter and whether it will adjust its enforcement actions against non-custodial crypto asset software services. The outcome of this debate will shape the future of crypto asset innovation and the balance between financial regulation and individual privacy.

參議員和司法部之間正在進行的對話凸顯了監管快速發展的加密貨幣產業所面臨的挑戰。美國司法部將如何回應參議員的信，以及是否會調整針對非託管加密資產軟體服務的執法行動，還有待觀察。這場辯論的結果將塑造加密資產創新的未來以及金融監管和個人隱私之間的平衡。