(Context: Quoting He Yi’s response about a “UID collision” on Binance Thailand)
I’ve整理ed the details of what happened and pieced together the sequence of events:
1. The user was originally using the global version of Binance that we all use (the main Binance platform). But because their network—or they themselves—was in Thailand, when they wanted to buy U, the Binance app told them they could only use the Thailand-specific Binance app (similar to the separate Binance.US platform).
2. Following the instructions, the user downloaded the Binance Thailand app. After buying some U through C2C, they planned to transfer it back to their global account and instinctively entered their global UID to make an internal transfer.
3. As it turned out, although both apps are called Binance, Binance Global and Binance Thailand don’t share data. There happened to be someone on Binance Thailand with the same UID as the user’s global account.
4. After entering the UID, the user noticed that the profile picture and nickname didn’t quite match. But they instinctively thought it might be due to network issues or something similar, and carelessly went ahead with the transfer.
And that’s how the mistake happened.
I think both sides bear some responsibility.
As for the user, my understanding is that after switching to the Thailand platform, they must have registered again. If they did, I would generally treat it as a new app. For example, I wouldn’t assume Douyin and TikTok are the same app—their registrations aren’t shared. This wasn’t a small amount of money for the user. When handling funds that matter to you, even the slightest risk is a reason to withdraw to a wallet address first, then deposit again. Or at the very least, if the name or profile picture doesn’t match, try transferring in smaller batches—for example, send 10 U first and see whether the other account receives it. From what I’ve seen, many market makers and large account holders do the same when moving money: they first send a small test amount to confirm, then transfer the rest. In any case, this is a lesson learned, and I’d recommend doing this going forward.
That said, I have to admit this is the first time I’ve learned that, besides the separate Binance.US platform, there’s also a Binance Thailand platform, and there may be others too. Of course, this may just be a gap in my knowledge.
Also, based on my understanding, Binance is a global exchange, so UIDs shouldn’t collide by design—they should be globally unique.
This is an architectural design issue. While it’s a flaw, I don’t mean to assign blame; I hope this can be improved in the future. After all, my money is on Binance too, and I certainly want it to keep getting better.
Finally, since the funds mistakenly transferred to an account on Binance Thailand with the same UID have already been frozen, it should be enough to wait for that user to come online and consent before debiting the funds. But since the user has already filed a police report and is waiting for Binance to take action, I’d recommend reimbursing at least part of the amount upfront if possible. That would also reflect Binance’s principle: users first.
Feel free to ask questions.
I’ve整理ed the details of what happened and pieced together the sequence of events:
1. The user was originally using the global version of Binance that we all use (the main Binance platform). But because their network—or they themselves—was in Thailand, when they wanted to buy U, the Binance app told them they could only use the Thailand-specific Binance app (similar to the separate Binance.US platform).
2. Following the instructions, the user downloaded the Binance Thailand app. After buying some U through C2C, they planned to transfer it back to their global account and instinctively entered their global UID to make an internal transfer.
3. As it turned out, although both apps are called Binance, Binance Global and Binance Thailand don’t share data. There happened to be someone on Binance Thailand with the same UID as the user’s global account.
4. After entering the UID, the user noticed that the profile picture and nickname didn’t quite match. But they instinctively thought it might be due to network issues or something similar, and carelessly went ahead with the transfer.
And that’s how the mistake happened.
I think both sides bear some responsibility.
As for the user, my understanding is that after switching to the Thailand platform, they must have registered again. If they did, I would generally treat it as a new app. For example, I wouldn’t assume Douyin and TikTok are the same app—their registrations aren’t shared. This wasn’t a small amount of money for the user. When handling funds that matter to you, even the slightest risk is a reason to withdraw to a wallet address first, then deposit again. Or at the very least, if the name or profile picture doesn’t match, try transferring in smaller batches—for example, send 10 U first and see whether the other account receives it. From what I’ve seen, many market makers and large account holders do the same when moving money: they first send a small test amount to confirm, then transfer the rest. In any case, this is a lesson learned, and I’d recommend doing this going forward.
That said, I have to admit this is the first time I’ve learned that, besides the separate Binance.US platform, there’s also a Binance Thailand platform, and there may be others too. Of course, this may just be a gap in my knowledge.
Also, based on my understanding, Binance is a global exchange, so UIDs shouldn’t collide by design—they should be globally unique.
This is an architectural design issue. While it’s a flaw, I don’t mean to assign blame; I hope this can be improved in the future. After all, my money is on Binance too, and I certainly want it to keep getting better.
Finally, since the funds mistakenly transferred to an account on Binance Thailand with the same UID have already been frozen, it should be enough to wait for that user to come online and consent before debiting the funds. But since the user has already filed a police report and is waiting for Binance to take action, I’d recommend reimbursing at least part of the amount upfront if possible. That would also reflect Binance’s principle: users first.
Feel free to ask questions.