The post Ripple (XRP) News: SEC Officials Ignored XRP’s Security Status Talks, Focused on Ripple’s Tech Instead appeared first on Coinpedia Fintech News
A recent discovery, courtesy of famous crypto analyst and sleuth Mr. Huber, indicates that officials at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) may have sidestepped significant concerns regarding XRP’s security status.
Ripple’s “Purgatory”: A Meeting Behind Closed Doors
According to Huber’s findings, in late August 2018, Ripple’s top brass, including CEO Brad Garlinghouse and CTO David Schwartz, found themselves in a meeting with key representatives from the SEC’s Chairman’s Office. The conversation, scheduled to last around 50 minutes, was set to focus on Ripple’s operations and technology.
As the meeting progressed, Ripple’s executives did manage to share their insights into the workings of the company and its core technology. Even though the officials seemed attentive and asked occasional questions, something seemed amiss.
Towards the end of the meeting, Garlinghouse’s subtle mention of XRP’s ambiguous security status met with a swift response.
The chairman’s response was clear and immediate: “This is not the place to discuss such matters.”
The conversation was quickly steered back towards Ripple’s business and technology. The session concluded on an encouraging note but left the crucial matter of XRP’s legal status untouched.
Connection with Ethereum
Further digging reveals an intriguing connection between the former SEC’s officials and ConsenSys, a prominent client of Jay Clayton’s law firm, and also linked with JPMorgan. In April 2018, a friendly email from William Hinman reached Joseph Lubin at ConsenSys. The email was a warm invitation for a call, perhaps to discuss another meeting, assumed Huber. But what makes this communication interesting?
In the documents Huber shared, a list of questions targeted at understanding the nuances of Ethereum’s development, its network, and its utility value adds another layer to this unfolding story.
From the early days of development to the possibility of moving from proof of work to proof of stake, the questions aim to unravel Ethereum’s internal workings. But why were these questions raised, and what was the connection with the meeting with Ripple?
While the information at hand doesn’t necessarily imply wrongdoing, it certainly shines a spotlight on an area that warrants closer scrutiny. Whether further investigation will uncover more is yet to be seen.