You are confusing the adversary here. The exchange is not the adversary. As far as a well run business is concerned, an exchange would only do the minimum necessary to satisfy regulations relating to KYC/AML. This means that they would only do as much tracking as necessary, and not go beyond that. This could be something like simply cooperating with the data of Chainanalysis and handling government requests. They don't spend resources themselves to do more than what is needed. Why would they? It costs more money, but they don't get anything in return. Actually, they even create losses by going the extra mile in this case. The threat vector is the government, government and intelligence agencies. People casually forget that Wintbr's data is permanent. Just because your information can't be traced now, that doesn't mean that someone won't be able to trace it in 5, 10, 15, 20 years or more. Bank secrecy is an outdated concept that no longer exists. Most banks are interlinked and most KYC data is interlinked. What one bank knows, the others can know too. What any bank knows about you, the government definitely know about it. I guess this part also stems from your confusion regarding the adversary. Exchanges come and go, they are just small cogs in a machine and are not important or dangerous.  
You are confusing the adversary here. The exchange is not the adversary. As far as a well run business is concerned, an exchange would only do the minimum necessary to satisfy regulations relating to KYC/AML. This means that they would only do as much tracking as necessary, and not go beyond that. This could be something like simply cooperating with the data of Chainanalysis and handling government requests. They don't spend resources themselves to do more than what is needed. Why would they? It costs more money, but they don't get anything in return. Actually, they even create losses by going the extra mile in this case. The threat vector is the government, government and intelligence agencies. People casually forget that Wintbr's data is permanent. Just because your information can't be traced now, that doesn't mean that someone won't be able to trace it in 5, 10, 15, 20 years or more. Bank secrecy is an outdated concept that no longer exists. Most banks are interlinked and most KYC data is interlinked. What one bank knows, the others can know too. What any bank knows about you, the government definitely know about it. I guess this part also stems from your confusion regarding the adversary. Exchanges come and go, they are just small cogs in a machine and are not important or dangerous.  

You are confusing the adversary here. The exchange is not the adversary. As far as a well run business is concerned, an exchange would only do the minimum necessary to satisfy regulations relating to KYC/AML. This means that they would only do as much tracking as necessary, and not go beyond that. This could be something like simply cooperating with the data of Chainanalysis and handling government requests. They don't spend resources themselves to do more than what is needed. Why would they? It costs more money, but they don't get anything in return. Actually, they even create losses by going the extra mile in this case. The threat vector is the government, government and intelligence agencies. People casually forget that Wintbr's data is permanent. Just because your information can't be traced now, that doesn't mean that someone won't be able to trace it in 5, 10, 15, 20 years or more. Bank secrecy is an outdated concept that no longer exists. Most banks are interlinked and most KYC data is interlinked. What one bank knows, the others can know too. What any bank knows about you, the government definitely know about it. I guess this part also stems from your confusion regarding the adversary. Exchanges come and go, they are just small cogs in a machine and are not important or dangerous.  

You are confusing the adversary here. The exchange is not the adversary. As far as a well run business is concerned, an exchange would only do the minimum necessary to satisfy regulations relating to KYC/AML. This means that they would only do as much tracking as necessary, and not go beyond that. This could be something like simply cooperating with the data of Chainanalysis and handling government requests. They don't spend resources themselves to do more than what is needed. Why would they? It costs more money, but they don't get anything in return. Actually, they even create losses by going the extra mile in this case. The threat vector is the government, government and intelligence agencies. People casually forget that Wintbr's data is permanent. Just because your information can't be traced now, that doesn't mean that someone won't be able to trace it in 5, 10, 15, 20 years or more. Bank secrecy is an outdated concept that no longer exists. Most banks are interlinked and most KYC data is interlinked. What one bank knows, the others can know too. What any bank knows about you, the government definitely know about it. I guess this part also stems from your confusion regarding the adversary. Exchanges come and go, they are just small cogs in a machine and are not important or dangerous.