Dear Securities and Exchange Commission, I am writing to provide my public comment on the proposed rule "Safeguarding Advisory Client Assets." I commend the SEC for taking steps to enhance investor protections and address gaps in the custody rule. However, I have several concerns regarding the proposed rule, particularly in relation to the safeguarding of digital assets and the overlooked privacy and security concerns associated with them. Digital assets, such as cryptocurrencies, have gained significant prominence in today's financial landscape. They are built on innovative blockchain technology and have the potential to revolutionize the way we transact and store value. However, due to their unique characteristics, including digital ownership and decentralized infrastructure, regulatory uncertainties exist, which must be addressed prudently. The proposed rule expands the coverage to include a broader range of investments held in a client's account, but it fails to adequately address the privacy and security concerns associated with digital assets. The nature of digital assets necessitates robust privacy and security measures to safeguard them from unauthorized access, network attacks, and cyber threats. Currently, the proposed rule falls short in providing specific guidelines for investment advisers on how to protect these assets effectively. The SEC should carefully consider the recent rise in cyberattacks and the potential risk that investors' digital assets may become targets. It is imperative to establish clear and enforceable guidelines on security protocols, specifically designed for digital assets. These guidelines should cover topics such as key management, multi-factor authentication, secure custody solutions, and comprehensive cybersecurity protocols. By addressing these concerns, the SEC will not only protect investors' assets but also foster confidence in the rapidly evolving digital asset space. Furthermore, the proposal should consider the challenges investment advisers face in demonstrating exclusive control over digital assets. Unlike traditional assets like stocks or bonds, digital assets are inherently self-custodied, meaning investors retain direct control over their holdings. The proposed rule should account for the distinctive custody arrangements surrounding digital assets and provide clear guidelines on how investment advisers can meet their obligations under the proposed rule while respecting investors' desired level of control. To enhance the safeguarding of digital assets, the SEC should consider engaging with industry experts and relevant stakeholders. Together, they can collaboratively develop regulatory standards that strike a balance between investor protection and industry innovation. Industry consensus and expert guidance will not only ensure proactive regulatory measures but will also encourage responsible innovation and maintain the United States' competitive advantage in this growing global market. In conclusion, I appreciate the SEC's efforts to protect investors' assets and address gaps in the custody rule. However, it is essential to consider the unique challenges and risks associated with digital assets. By providing clear guidelines and fostering collaboration with industry experts, the SEC can effectively safeguard investors' assets in the rapidly evolving digital asset landscape. Thank you for the opportunity to submit my public comment. Sincerely, Melvin McLeod