<p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://invezz-wp-media.lon1.digitaloceanspaces.com/2026/05/3.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" alt="" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://invezz-wp-media.lon1.digitaloceanspaces.com/2026/05/3.png"/></p>
<p>Bybit 的黑客事件提醒我们，加密货币面临的最大风险不仅仅是技术性的。它们还包括财务、法律风险，并且越来越难以被保险公司吸收。</p>
<p>尽管数字资产公司购买的保险覆盖范围比以前更多，但全球保险市场仍然缺乏足够的能力来完全保护免受大规模泄露的影响。</p>
<p>这一差距正在影响保险公司对 Web3、人工智能和其他新兴领域的看法。</p>
<p>热钱包、犯罪风险、人工智能责任，甚至针对加密创始人的绑架和赎金保险，正在成为同一讨论的一部分：如何为损失可能严重、快速变化且难以建模的行业提供保险？</p>
<p>在与 <strong><em>Invezz 的采访中，Relm Insurance 的全球分销与创新负责人 Christian Davies</em></strong> 解释了为什么像 Bybit 这样的事件仍然难以投保，人工智能系统造成伤害时责任如何分配，以及为什么专业保险公司必须在提供保险之前了解完整的风险结构。</p>
<p>Davies 还讨论了监管、定价纪律，以及 Relm 如何计划在大型保险公司进入数字资产市场时捍卫其细分市场。</p>
<p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://invezz-wp-media.lon1.digitaloceanspaces.com/2026/05/1-3.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" alt="" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://invezz-wp-media.lon1.digitaloceanspaces.com/2026/05/1-3.png"/></p>
<p><em>Christian Davies，Relm Insurance 全球分销与创新负责人</em></p>
<p><em>摘录：</em></p>
<p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>当人工智能系统造成财务损失或医疗伤害时，责任应如何在开发者、部署者和最终用户之间分配？保险是否已经成为可行的解决方案？</em></p>
<p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> 责任分布在整个结构中，具体取决于谁实际购买了保险。开发者可能会创建出不正常工作的产品，在这种情况下，责任在他们身上。</p>
<p>部署者可能会错误地实施它。通常，部署者和最终用户是同一个人。例如，一家律师事务所可能会部署一个人工智能工具来协助法律工作。</p>
<p>如果他们错误地使用该工具或以错误的方式依赖它，他们就是暴露在风险中的人。</p>
<p>即使存在开发者的问题，您也需要证明在追究他们之前进行了多少定制。</p>
<p>这与任何其他技术结构没有区别。保险绝对是一个可行的解决方案。</p>
<p>我们已经创建了与传统责任保险并行的产品，这些产品可能不包括人工智能，并为与人工智能相关的风险提供明确的保障。</p>
<p> 关键是理解人工智能是如何开发、部署和使用的。这不需要过于复杂，但确实需要对整个结构有扎实的理解。</p>
<p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>Bybit 的黑客事件显示了这个行业的脆弱性。实际上有多少数字资产公司拥有有意义的保险，这个数字为什么仍然令人尴尬地低？</em></p>
<p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> 很多 Web3 和数字资产公司确实拥有保险，但当您查看像 Bybit 这样的事件时，全球市场根本没有足够的能力来覆盖这种程度的风险。保险公司必须管理自己的风险。</p>
<p>他们不会在风险高且保费无法支持的情况下投入数十亿的保险限额。</p>
<p>例如，冷存储可以在相对较低的费率下吸引非常大的限额，因为损失的概率较低。热钱包和犯罪风险则不同。</p>
<p>这是一个更为新兴的市场，虽然一些人认为它很昂贵，但基础数据支持这一定价。</p>
<p>市场上最常见的保险仍然是 D&amp;O，企业通常会承担有意义的限额。对于犯罪和资产保护，保险覆盖则更为有限。</p>
<p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>在美国、欧盟和阿联酋的监管制度碎片化的情况下，您如何在不同法域下承保</em></p>
<p><em>加密风险？</em></p>
<p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> 我们根据每个法域的监管环境进行承保。这包括是否有明确的框架、许可要求以及是否有最低保险要求。</p>
<p>这些因素直接影响风险的评估和结构。</p>
<p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>这说明市场上绑架和赎金保险现在对加密</em></p>
<p><em>创始人来说是相关的，这说明了什么？</em></p>
<p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> 市场变得更加分层。过去几年，数字资产领域实现了显著的收益。</p>
<p> 即使在加密冬季，价值仍然相对历史市场水平较高。这创造了一批财富显著的个体。</p>
<p>人们还认为资金可以快速且轻松地转移，这使得这个领域的个体成为更具吸引力的目标。这就是为什么绑架和赎金保险变得更加相关。</p>
<p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>当太空有效载荷或迷幻疗法诊所几乎没有精算历史时，您实际上在定价什么，您如何向再保险公司解释这一点？</em></p>
<p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> 我们与客户密切合作，使用他们的数据构建模型。</p>
<p>虽然可能没有大量的公共精算历史，但我们有自己在支持这些领域的经验。</p>
<p>我们还借鉴其他行业的可比风险。在风险不太明确的情况下，定价反映了这一点。未知风险要求更高的保费。</p>
<p>这是一种不确定性的表现，而不是其他任何因素。</p>
<p><strong>Invezz:</strong> 您是否担心在使用人工智能为人工智能公司承保时存在盲点？</p>
<p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> 每种类型的承保都有盲点。如果没有盲点，您就可以量化一切，那就没有风险了。</p>
<p>我们不依赖人工智能进行承保。它是支持这一过程的工具。</p>
<p>承保仍然是一个以人为主、基于判断的过程。重点是识别和管理尽可能多的盲点，这与任何其他保险领域没有区别。</p>
<p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>随着大型保险公司对数字资产的接受度提高，您如何看待 Relm 捍卫其细分市场？</em></p>
<p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> Relm 作为一个主要市场运营，在这些领域拥有丰富的经验。一些新进入者以有限的数据进入市场，并且定价非常激进。</p>
<p>我们不会参与一场我们知道索赔来源的低价竞争。我们在这些领域处理的索赔数量远超过大多数新兴市场。</p>
<p>这种经验影响了我们的定价和风险结构。一些业务会转移，而一些则会回归。</p>
<p>我们的重点是与客户保持紧密联系，继续开发产品，并保持来自这种经验的承保纪律。</p>
<p>采访后：Relm 高管表示保险公司缺乏应对 Bybit 规模加密黑客攻击的能力，首发于 Invezz</p>

COIN

BSOL

2 倍做多加密货币行业 ETF - Direxion

<p>在一次采访中，Relm Insurance 的 Christian Davies 讨论了保险公司在覆盖像 Bybit 事件这样的超大规模加密黑客攻击时面临的挑战。尽管数字资产公司对保险的需求增加，但全球保险市场缺乏足够的能力来全面保护此类漏洞。Davies 强调了为 Web3 和人工智能等新兴领域投保的复杂性、人工智能相关事件中责任的分配，以及碎片化法规对加密风险承保的影响</p>

<p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://invezz-wp-media.lon1.digitaloceanspaces.com/2026/05/3.png" alt="" original-src="https://invezz-wp-media.lon1.digitaloceanspaces.com/2026/05/3.png"/></p>
<p>The Bybit hack was a reminder that crypto’s biggest risks are not just technical. They are also financial, legal, and increasingly difficult for insurers to absorb.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Bybit 的黑客事件提醒我们，加密货币面临的最大风险不仅仅是技术性的。它们还包括财务、法律风险，并且越来越难以被保险公司吸收。</p>
</div><p>While digital asset firms are buying more coverage than before, the global insurance market still lacks the capacity to fully protect against a mega-scale breach.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>尽管数字资产公司购买的保险覆盖范围比以前更多，但全球保险市场仍然缺乏足够的能力来完全保护免受大规模泄露的影响。</p>
</div><p>That gap is now shaping how insurers look at Web3, AI, and other emerging sectors.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这一差距正在影响保险公司对 Web3、人工智能和其他新兴领域的看法。</p>
</div><p>Hot wallets, crime risk, AI liability, and even kidnap and ransom cover for crypto founders are becoming part of the same conversation: how do you insure industries where the losses can be severe, fast-moving, and hard to model?</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>热钱包、犯罪风险、人工智能责任，甚至针对加密创始人的绑架和赎金保险，正在成为同一讨论的一部分：如何为损失可能严重、快速变化且难以建模的行业提供保险？</p>
</div><p>In this interview with <strong><em>Invezz, Christian Davies, Global Head of Distribution and Innovation at Relm Insurance</em></strong>, explains why a Bybit-scale event remains difficult to insure, how liability is shared when AI systems cause harm, and why specialist insurers must understand the full risk stack before offering cover.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在与 <strong><em>Invezz 的采访中，Relm Insurance 的全球分销与创新负责人 Christian Davies</em></strong> 解释了为什么像 Bybit 这样的事件仍然难以投保，人工智能系统造成伤害时责任如何分配，以及为什么专业保险公司必须在提供保险之前了解完整的风险结构。</p>
</div><p>Davies also discusses regulation, pricing discipline, and how Relm plans to defend its niche as larger carriers enter the digital asset market.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Davies 还讨论了监管、定价纪律，以及 Relm 如何计划在大型保险公司进入数字资产市场时捍卫其细分市场。</p>
</div><p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://invezz-wp-media.lon1.digitaloceanspaces.com/2026/05/1-3.png" alt="" original-src="https://invezz-wp-media.lon1.digitaloceanspaces.com/2026/05/1-3.png"/></p>
<p><em>Christian Davies, Global Head of Distribution and Innovation at Relm Insurance</em></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><em>Christian Davies，Relm Insurance 全球分销与创新负责人</em></p>
</div><p><em>Excerpts:</em></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><em>摘录：</em></p>
</div><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>When an AI system causes financial loss or medical harm, how should liability be allocated among the developer, deployer, and end user? Is insurance a workable solution yet?</em></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>当人工智能系统造成财务损失或医疗伤害时，责任应如何在开发者、部署者和最终用户之间分配？保险是否已经成为可行的解决方案？</em></p>
</div><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> Liability sits across the whole stack, and it depends on who is actually buying the insurance. The developer could create something that doesn’t work properly, in which case the liability sits with them.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> 责任分布在整个结构中，具体取决于谁实际购买了保险。开发者可能会创建出不正常工作的产品，在这种情况下，责任在他们身上。</p>
</div><p>The deployer could implement it incorrectly. Often the deployer and end user are the same. For example, a law firm might deploy an AI tool to assist with legal work.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>部署者可能会错误地实施它。通常，部署者和最终用户是同一个人。例如，一家律师事务所可能会部署一个人工智能工具来协助法律工作。</p>
</div><p>If they use that tool incorrectly or rely on it in the wrong way, they are the ones exposed.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>如果他们错误地使用该工具或以错误的方式依赖它，他们就是暴露在风险中的人。</p>
</div><p>Even where there is a developer issue, you would need to prove how much customization has taken place before pursuing them.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>即使存在开发者的问题，您也需要证明在追究他们之前进行了多少定制。</p>
</div><p>It’s no different to any other technology stack. Insurance is absolutely a workable solution.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这与任何其他技术结构没有区别。保险绝对是一个可行的解决方案。</p>
</div><p>We’ve created products that sit alongside traditional liability cover, which may exclude AI, and provide affirmative coverage for AI-related exposures.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>我们已经创建了与传统责任保险并行的产品，这些产品可能不包括人工智能，并为与人工智能相关的风险提供明确的保障。</p>
</div><blockquote>
<p>The key is understanding how the AI is developed, deployed, and used. It doesn’t need to be overly complicated, but it does require a solid understanding of the full stack.</p>
</blockquote>
<div class="lb-trans"><p> 关键是理解人工智能是如何开发、部署和使用的。这不需要过于复杂，但确实需要对整个结构有扎实的理解。</p>
</div><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>The Bybit hack showed just how exposed this industry is. What percentage of digital asset firms actually carry meaningful insurance, and why is that number still embarrassingly low?</em></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>Bybit 的黑客事件显示了这个行业的脆弱性。实际上有多少数字资产公司拥有有意义的保险，这个数字为什么仍然令人尴尬地低？</em></p>
</div><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> A lot of Web3 and digital asset companies do carry insurance, but when you look at events like Bybit, there simply isn’t enough capacity in the global market to cover that level of exposure. Insurers have to manage their own risk.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> 很多 Web3 和数字资产公司确实拥有保险，但当您查看像 Bybit 这样的事件时，全球市场根本没有足够的能力来覆盖这种程度的风险。保险公司必须管理自己的风险。</p>
</div><p>They are not going to deploy billions in limits where the risk is high and the premiums wouldn’t support it.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>他们不会在风险高且保费无法支持的情况下投入数十亿的保险限额。</p>
</div><p>For example, cold storage can attract very large limits at relatively low rates because the probability of loss is low. Hot wallet and crime risk is different.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>例如，冷存储可以在相对较低的费率下吸引非常大的限额，因为损失的概率较低。热钱包和犯罪风险则不同。</p>
</div><p>It’s a much more nascent market, and while some see it as expensive, the underlying data supports the pricing.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这是一个更为新兴的市场，虽然一些人认为它很昂贵，但基础数据支持这一定价。</p>
</div><p>The most common coverage in the market is still D&amp;O, where companies generally carry meaningful</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>市场上最常见的保险仍然是 D&amp;O，企业通常会承担有意义的限额。对于犯罪和资产保护，保险覆盖则更为有限。</p>
</div><p>limits. For crime and asset protection, coverage is more limited.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>在美国、欧盟和阿联酋的监管制度碎片化的情况下，您如何在不同法域下承保</em></p>
</div><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>How do fragmented regulatory regimes in the US, EU, and UAE change how you underwrite</em></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><em>加密风险？</em></p>
</div><p><em>crypto risk across jurisdictions?</em></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> 我们根据每个法域的监管环境进行承保。这包括是否有明确的框架、许可要求以及是否有最低保险要求。</p>
</div><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> We underwrite to the regulatory environment in each jurisdiction. That includes whether there is a clear framework, what the licensing requirements are, and whether there are minimum insurance requirements.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这些因素直接影响风险的评估和结构。</p>
</div><p>Those factors directly influence how risk is assessed and structured.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>这说明市场上绑架和赎金保险现在对加密</em></p>
</div><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>What does it say about the market that kidnap and ransom cover is now relevant for crypto</em></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><em>创始人来说是相关的，这说明了什么？</em></p>
</div><p><em>founders?</em></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> 市场变得更加分层。过去几年，数字资产领域实现了显著的收益。</p>
</div><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> The market has become more stratified. There are significant realised gains from the digital asset sector over the past few years.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p> 即使在加密冬季，价值仍然相对历史市场水平较高。这创造了一批财富显著的个体。</p>
</div><blockquote>
<p>Even in a crypto winter, values are still high relative to where the market has been historically. That has created a cohort of individuals with visible wealth.</p>
</blockquote>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>人们还认为资金可以快速且轻松地转移，这使得这个领域的个体成为更具吸引力的目标。这就是为什么绑架和赎金保险变得更加相关。</p>
</div><p>There is also a perception that funds can be moved quickly and easily, which makes individuals in this space a more attractive target. That’s why kidnap and ransom coverage is becoming more relevant.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>当太空有效载荷或迷幻疗法诊所几乎没有精算历史时，您实际上在定价什么，您如何向再保险公司解释这一点？</em></p>
</div><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>When there is little actuarial history for space payloads or psychedelic therapy clinics, what are you actually pricing, and how do you explain that to a reinsurer?</em></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> 我们与客户密切合作，使用他们的数据构建模型。</p>
</div><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> We work closely with our clients and build models using their data.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>虽然可能没有大量的公共精算历史，但我们有自己在支持这些领域的经验。</p>
</div><p>While there may be limited public actuarial history, we have our own experience from supporting these sectors over time.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>我们还借鉴其他行业的可比风险。在风险不太明确的情况下，定价反映了这一点。未知风险要求更高的保费。</p>
</div><p>We also draw on comparable risks from other industries. Where risks are less well understood, pricing reflects that. Unknown risks command higher premiums.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这是一种不确定性的表现，而不是其他任何因素。</p>
</div><p>That’s a function of uncertainty rather than anything else.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> 您是否担心在使用人工智能为人工智能公司承保时存在盲点？</p>
</div><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> Do you worry about blind spots when you use AI to underwrite AI companies?</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> 每种类型的承保都有盲点。如果没有盲点，您就可以量化一切，那就没有风险了。</p>
</div><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> Every type of underwriting has blind spots. If it didn’t, you could quantify everything and there would be no risk.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>我们不依赖人工智能进行承保。它是支持这一过程的工具。</p>
</div><p>We don’t rely on AI to underwrite. It’s a tool that supports the process.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>承保仍然是一个以人为主、基于判断的过程。重点是识别和管理尽可能多的盲点，这与任何其他保险领域没有区别。</p>
</div><p>Underwriting remains a human-led, judgment-based process. The focus is on identifying and managing as many of those blind spots as possible, which is no different to any other line of insurance.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>随着大型保险公司对数字资产的接受度提高，您如何看待 Relm 捍卫其细分市场？</em></p>
</div><p><strong>Invezz:</strong> <em>As large carriers become more comfortable with digital assets, how do you see Relm defending its niche?</em></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> Relm 作为一个主要市场运营，在这些领域拥有丰富的经验。一些新进入者以有限的数据进入市场，并且定价非常激进。</p>
</div><p><strong>Christian Davies:</strong> Relm operates as a primary market with significant experience in these sectors. Some new entrants are coming in with limited data and are pricing aggressively.</p>
<p>We won’t compete in a race to the bottom where we know where claims originate. We have handled significantly more claims in these sectors than most of the newer markets.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>我们不会参与一场我们知道索赔来源的低价竞争。我们在这些领域处理的索赔数量远超过大多数新兴市场。</p>
</div><p>That experience informs how we price and structure risk. Some business will move, and some will return.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这种经验影响了我们的定价和风险结构。一些业务会转移，而一些则会回归。</p>
</div><p>Our focus is on staying close to our clients, continuing to develop products, and maintaining the underwriting discipline that comes from that experience.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>我们的重点是与客户保持紧密联系，继续开发产品，并保持来自这种经验的承保纪律。</p>
</div><p>The post Interview: Relm executive says insurers lack capacity for Bybit-scale crypto hacks appeared first on Invezz</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>采访后：Relm 高管表示保险公司缺乏应对 Bybit 规模加密黑客攻击的能力，首发于 Invezz</p>
</div>

Interview: Relm executive says insurers lack capacity for Bybit-scale crypto hacks

- Bybit 黑客事件突显数字资产保险缺口，全球市场未能完全覆盖重大损失。  
- 随着行业发展，抢劫和赎金保障需求上升，反映财富可视化增加。  
- 专业保险需全面理解风险，方能有效承保 Web3 和 AI 等新兴领域。

invezz

Coinbase

Bitwise Solana Staking ETF

2 倍做多 Riot ETF - Defiance

Invesco Galaxy Bitcoin ETF

COIN 周收益 ETF - Roundhill

ARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF

Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund - ETF

Bitwise Bitcoin ETF

2 倍做多 COIN ETF - GraniteShares

Grayscale Solana Staking ETF

纳斯达克 NexGen 经济 ETF - Reality Shares

VanEck Bitcoin ETF

2 倍做多 Coinbase ETF - Leverage Shares

区块链 ETF - Amplify

2 倍做空 COIN ETF - GraniteShares

2 倍做多 MARA ETF - GraniteShares

CoinShares Bitcoin ETF

iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF

ProShares Bitcoin Strategy ETF

WisdomTree Bitcoin Fund

Franklin Bitcoin ETF

采访：Relm 高管称保险公司无法应对 Bybit 规模的加密货币黑客攻击