#币安人生 #中本聪🎉🎉🎉✅ DEX and CEX each have their own shortcomings in terms of security and reliability. The former concentrates risks in smart contracts and user operations, while the latter's hidden dangers stem from centralized custody, making it difficult to determine which is superior. Specifically, we can look at two aspects: risk types and protection methods:

1. Centralized Exchanges (CEX): They hold user assets and control private keys, with the core risk being the hidden dangers brought by the custody model. On one hand, they may suffer from hacker attacks; in the past 12 months of 2025, CEX lost $327 million due to hacking incidents. On the other hand, there are issues like internal fraud and platform exits, with FTX's collapse and Mt. Gox's bankruptcy being typical cases. However, compliant leading CEXs provide some assurance; for instance, Coinbase holds licenses in multiple regions, and BiMaoAn stores 100% of user funds in on-chain verifiable reserve wallets, which can reduce some risks.

2. Decentralized Exchanges (DEX): Users hold private keys and independently manage their assets, avoiding custody risks, but security pain points lie in smart contracts and user operations. In the first 6 months of 2025, the amount stolen from DEXs due to contract vulnerabilities reached $115 million, and the problem of vulnerabilities is on the rise. At the same time, if users lose their private keys, mistakenly authorize, or fall victim to phishing attacks, their funds may also suffer losses; in 2025, there were an average of 320 DEX-related scams each month. Fortunately, mainstream DEXs like Uniswap conduct multiple contract audits to reduce risks.

In summary, focusing on self-controllable assets and properly safeguarding private keys, choosing a compliant DEX with comprehensive audits is more appropriate; if convenience in trading is a priority and there is a preference for institutional-level security measures and regulatory backing, leading compliant CEXs are a more prudent choice. $BNB $XRP $SOL