In this sense, technological evolutions have allowed to address some of the operational risks inherent to financial activities, especially to curb operating errors in processes (representing a significant source of losses relative to operational risks). From this point of view, cyber-activities are a source of economic growth and progress, being essential for the financial sector. However, despite the fact that internet development and electronic transactions growth allowed a better control of operational risks due to diminishing human or operating errors factors, it also triggered the emergence of new risks. The rapid expansion of networks and technologies, the opening of IT systems to external exchanges, the growing amount of electronic transactions have caused the emergence of a new type of crime called “Cybercrime”. The financial sector is indeed an attractive target for cybercriminals: an American study1 led by Symantec shows that the finance and insurance sector is among the principal sectors affected by cyber-attacks, just behind Public Administration. This of course has not remained unnoticed by supervisory authorities which have taken already a number of steps to help the industry address the issue but in so doing face a number of difficult issues. I. Indeed guidance from supervisory authorities, like the Guidance on operational risk issued by the Basel Committee, published in 20112, point out that prevention and proper management of this risk is a financial stability issue to the extent that operational failures can be a source of systemic risk. 1  Internet Security Threat Report 2014 http://www.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/other_resources/bistr_main_report_v19_21291018.en-us.pdf.

Regulating cryptos adequately and comprehensively Second, regulators should refrain from implying that regulation can transform crypto-assets into safe assets. Efforts to legitimise unsound crypto models in a bid to attract crypto activities should be avoided. [35]  Moreover, the principle of "same activity, same risk, same regulation" should be endorsed. Cryptos cannot become as safe as other assets and investors should be aware of the risks. Anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism rules should be enforced, and crypto activities of traditional firms should be carefully monitored. While some jurisdictions attempt to apply existing regulatory frameworks to crypto-assets, the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation offers a customised regulatory structure that applies to all 27 EU Member States and draws on existing regulation where appropriate (e-money being one example). The EU has also updated existing regulation, for instance by extending the travel rule to crypto transactions. [36] Despite the EU taking the lead in establishing a comprehensive framework regulating crypto activities, further steps are necessary. All activities related to the crypto industry should be regulated, including decentralised finance activities like crypto-asset lending or non-custodial wallet services[37]. Moreover, the regulatory framework for unbacked crypto-assets may be deemed lighter than for stablecoins as it relies mainly on disclosure requirements for issuing white papers[38], and on the supervision of the service providers which will offer them for trading. The risks posed by unbacked crypto-assets, which are largely used for speculative purposes, should be fully recognised.