The title puts "halts proof of reserves work" next to "outflows hit $6B", which on quick reading implies that they halted the actual "audit" presumably because something went wrong , hence why i think it's misleading
And while the article makes it clear that they withheld their report for PR reasons, I'm sure most people here will assume that the "audit" went wrong
It's a journalist's job to be suspicious. Yeah, maybe it's a total coincidence that these things happened together. Maybe the rat just happened to be leaving this listing and waterlogged ship! To visit its relatives! But that's not how a journalist thinks.
Keeping in mind that it is indeed not a coincidence, since the whole reason why binance wanted the "audit" is the whole crypto debacle and FTX, and that auditors did not wish to audit any non-us-based exchange
And while the article makes it clear that they withheld their report for PR reasons, I'm sure most people here will assume that the "audit" went wrong