Binance Shared Russian User’s Data in Ukraine Donation Terrorism Case, Reuters Reports

Reuters reported that Binance supplied Russian investigators with Yuri Belenkiy’s identity documents and cryptocurrency transaction records. The information was later used as evidence in a terrorism-financing case over donations to Ukrainian fundraising campaigns, according to law-enforcement documents reviewed by the news agency.

The report does not establish that Binance disclosed comparable information about every person who donated cryptocurrency to Ukraine-linked causes. It documents one reported customer-data disclosure and leaves important questions about the legal basis and process unresolved.

What information did Binance provide?

Investigators requested Belenkiy’s Binance transaction history and received records linking him to transfers totaling more than $700 between January 2023 and March 2024. The transfers were directed to wallets associated with the Ukrainian military and with Azov, which Russian authorities identify as a terrorist or extremist organization.

The reported disclosure also included sensitive identity information:

• Date of birth
• Address and telephone number
• Passport number
• A copy of his Russian passport
• A copy of his Bulgarian residence permit

Russian authorities used the material in the case against Belenkiy, a Russian IT specialist. He was detained in September 2025 and charged the next month; at the time covered by the report, he was awaiting trial.

How could Binance respond after leaving Russia?

Binance announced a full withdrawal from Russia in September 2023. The disclosure described by Reuters concerned historical account information requested by investigators, rather than evidence that Binance had resumed ordinary retail operations in the country.

Binance said it cooperates with lawful information requests from law-enforcement agencies worldwide, subject to applicable legal, privacy and regulatory requirements. The company also said it does not make laws, determine criminal charges or control how governments use information in legal proceedings.

Reuters indicated that the request went through Binance’s law-enforcement information-request process. However, the available reporting does not establish the exact technical submission channel or whether Russian investigators provided a court order.

Why the disclosure raises GDPR questions

Belenkiy’s Bulgarian residence permit is central to the privacy concerns. Legal experts told Reuters that, if Binance treated him as an EU resident, the General Data Protection Regulation could apply. Transferring his personal information to Russia could then require a valid legal basis and additional safeguards.

The evidence available in the report does not establish how Binance classified Belenkiy’s residency or which legal basis it relied on. It also does not resolve whether the transfer complied with GDPR requirements.

Experts additionally questioned whether a court order was necessary or appropriate before highly sensitive personal and financial information was disclosed. That concern is heightened by the use of terrorism and extremism laws in cases involving political or Ukraine-related activity, but Reuters did not establish whether a court order existed in this case.

How does the case connect to earlier Binance-Russia reporting?

The episode recalls Reuters’ earlier reporting that a Binance representative met Russia’s financial-intelligence agency in 2021 when Russian officials sought help identifying people who had donated bitcoin to Alexei Navalny.

It also sits within a broader pattern of Russian prosecutions in which cryptocurrency donations have later been characterized by authorities as support for extremist or terrorist organizations. The distinction matters: the Belenkiy case provides evidence of a specific disclosure, but it does not by itself prove that Binance systematically supplied Russian authorities with data on all Ukraine-related donors.

The central unresolved issue

The reported facts show how historical exchange records can remain relevant even after a platform exits a market. They also illustrate the tension between a global crypto exchange’s stated duty to respond to lawful investigations and the privacy protections that may apply to users with ties to another jurisdiction.

What remains uncertain is whether the request met the relevant legal standards, whether Binance had a court order or another valid basis for the transfer, and how the exchange determined which privacy rules applied to Belenkiy. Reuters’ reporting establishes the disclosure and its use in the Russian case, but not the final answer to those legal questions.