Bybit EU: key bound to "Siebly SDKs" third-party app always returns 10010 Unmatched IP (apiRegion: 'EU')

[wallneradam]

Setup:

• bybit-api v4.7.0, RestClientV5 with apiRegion: 'EU' (→ https://api.bybit.eu)
• Bybit EU account (created yesterday, UTA, KYC done, Hungary/EEA)
• API key created on Bybit EU via API Key Usage → Connect to Third-Party Applications → "Siebly SDKs" (HMAC)
• The key creation UI offered no IP restriction option, and the API management page shows IP Address Added: --

Problem:

Every private REST call returns:

{"retCode":10010,"retMsg":"Unmatched IP, please check your API key's bound IP addresses."}

Tested from a residential EEA (Hungarian) IP. With BYBITTRACE=1 I verified the SDK sends the expected request (x-referer: Cg000971 + valid X-BAPI-* auth headers) to https://api.bybit.eu/v5/user/query-api — so signing works, it fails only on the IP check. Same result for getQueryApiKey() and getWalletBalance(), with or without the referer header, also via Referer instead of X-Referer.

Question:

Is there an extra step needed to use a "Siebly SDKs"-bound EU API key? Or is the Bybit EU third-party app registration IP-bound on Bybit's side (which would be surprising for a client-side SDK that runs on users' machines)? Happy to provide more debug output if useful.

[tiagosiebler]

Thank you for raising this and the thorough investigation. You have followed the correct steps & the SDK is handling this correctly too. While I have managed to get our SDK added into the third-party list in the key creation page of Bybit EU, there is still a mandatory IP whitelist tied to "Siebly SDKs' that cannot be immediately edited from that interface. That being said, I have been able to get IPs added to the whitelist behind the "Siebly SDKs" option and I'm not yet aware of a limit on how many I can add. If you drop me a private message on telegram (preferred, on my profile) or an email (also on my profile) with the IPs to add, I'll see if I can get them added too.

Bybit have told me they are working on making this openly available to everyone in future, but I do not yet have an ETA.

[wallneradam]

Thank you for the quick and detailed answer — that explains everything we saw. Since I'd need this for a hosted service (where users connect their own keys) rather than personal use, manually whitelisting individual IPs wouldn't scale for my case, so I'll wait and see how Bybit's self-service solution evolves. Meanwhile I'm also looking into the broker program directly. Thanks again for the great SDK and the support!

[tiagosiebler]

When you say hosted service, are you the one hosting it (aka you have a finite number of static IPs)? If so, this can still work - you would just need to ask your users to select "Siebly SDKs" in the dropdown when creating API keys. Nothing else would be needed on their end and it would unblock your integration. That is the exact use case this is designed for, while the self-service self-hosted pathway is still being worked on. Even for the broker side - Bybit have a sub-broker capability in their system, so there might be a way to make this work, even if you aren't available in this dropdown yet. Happy to discuss that further in private if that's a direction you're curious to explore. I'd also like to keep this open for visibility in the meantime as I've seen a rise in the number of questions about this, so I'll just reopen the issue for a while.

[wallneradam]

Thank you, much appreciated! The sub-broker direction could indeed become interesting for me within the next month or two. In the meantime I can do all the development against the global API, so I'm not blocked. I'll reach out in private once I get there. Thanks again!

[tiagosiebler]

Sure! Likewise if you run into any unresolved challenges and for some reason aren't getting the response you had hoped for from the exchange, feel free to reach out. One of the benefits of such popular SDKs is that I have direct channels with all of these exchanges now. All of them. This applies to anyone else reading this too. Happy to make these most of these channels for anyone working with my SDKs. Happy building!

[nunziofiore]

we hit exactly the same 10010 Unmatched IP with a fresh Bybit EU key bound to "Siebly SDKs" (tested from multiple static IPs, with and without the x-referer header — signing fine, only the IP check fails), which confirms the behaviour described here.

Our case is the hosted-service one you mentioned: we run an MCP gateway (AIsuru by memori.ai) with a finite set of static egress IPs, and our users create their own Bybit EU keys selecting "Siebly SDKs". I've just reached out to you on Telegram with the IPs to add to the whitelist.

Thank you for the kindness and transparency in handling this — both the SDK and the support around it are much appreciated. 🙏