Insurers Respond to Fears of Crypto-Related Kidnappings

Submit
Insurers Respond to Fears of Crypto-Related Kidnappingsbitcoinblog.de
bitcoinblog.de

Insurers respond to fears of crypto-related kidnappings

AI summary of the linked article

Insurers are developing specialized policies to cover kidnappings of crypto investors as such cases rise. At least three insurers are reportedly working on such policies, and Andrew Kurz of Hylant Capital calls the policies "insanely lucrative" because actual claims are rare while premiums remain inexpensive. Joseph Ziolkowski, CEO of Relm, says his company is still developing ways to assess the physical security of insured parties and faces the risk that a client might simulate a kidnapping to make a claim. Ryyan Lackey, CEO of Evertas Insurance, has also announced a kidnapping policy and says holders should be known to keep most of their coins where they cannot access them without others' help.

avatar
Ryyan Lackey, CEO of Evertas Insurance—a specialist insurer for digital assets—also announced a kidnapping policy. Part of this will likely be establishing a sort of best practice for how wealthy and well-known Bitcoiners can protect themselves: on the one hand physically—with bodyguards, cameras, dogs, and so on—and on the other hand, by communicating that they only have access to part of their coins. The majority should be stored in such a way that they cannot access it without the help of others.
“This has to be something widely adopted, so that even the dumbest possible kidnapper in the world knows about it, otherwise there’s no reason for them to believe you,” Lackey explains. “You’ll want to be known as someone who has this”—perhaps some kind of badge or marker that Evertas itself may issue?—“because it shows you don’t have access.”
This is the beneficial effect of insurance: Insurers don’t just profit by compensating people for losses—they do even better when they effectively prevent their customers from suffering losses in the first place.

Do we agree that this type of violence against self-custodial BTC holders ultimately serves the state?

1. Custody your own BTC and you'll be violently attacked and robbed
2. Use solutions that lessen self-custody and you'll be safe, but there's then also a good chance that idk the CIA also will gain access to your coins too, especially if these solutions start to become institutionalized