Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Why North Korea hacks crypto instead of evading sanctions like Russia and Iran

Published

on

OpenClaw GitHub phishing scam uses fake $5,000 token airdrops gain wallet access

North Korea’s six-month infiltration campaign at Drift rattled a crypto industry already reeling from billion-dollar exploits.

But as the news settled, a bigger question came into focus: why does North Korea keep coming back to crypto in the first place, and why does its approach look so different from every other state-backed hacking operation on the planet?

The short answer, according to security experts, is that crypto helps give the regime a revenue stream and keep them afloat.

“North Korea doesn’t have the luxury of patience,” said Dave Schwed, chief operating officer at SVRN and the founder of the cybersecurity masters program at Yeshiva University. “They’re under comprehensive international sanctions and they need hard currency to fund weapons programs. The UN and multiple intelligence agencies have confirmed that crypto theft is a primary funding mechanism for their nuclear and ballistic missile development.”

Advertisement

That urgency explains a dynamic that has long puzzled investigators: why North Korean hackers carry out large-scale, traceable heists on public blockchains instead of quietly using crypto to evade sanctions the way other state actors do.

The answer, Schwed argues, is structural. Russia still has an economy: oil, gas, commodity exports, and trading partners willing to use workarounds. It needs crypto as a payment rail, but not for much else. Iran, too, has goods to move — sanctioned oil, proxy financing networks, willing intermediaries across the Middle East. North Korea has almost nothing left to sell.

“Their exports are almost entirely sanctioned. They don’t have a functioning economy that needs a payment rail. They need direct revenue,” Schwed said. “Crypto theft gives them immediate access to liquid value, globally, without needing a counterparty willing to do business with them.”

That distinction — crypto as infrastructure versus crypto as a target — is what separates North Korea not just from Russia, but from Iran as well. While Russia routes money through crypto to work around sanctions, and Iran uses it to fund proxy networks across the Middle East, North Korea is running something closer to a state-sponsored heist operation.

Advertisement

“Their targets are exchanges, wallet providers, DeFi protocols and the individual engineers and founders who have signing authority or infrastructure access,” said Alexander Urbelis, chief information security officer at ENS Labs and a professor of cybersecurity at King’s College London. “The victim is whoever holds the keys or access to the infrastructure that holds the keys.”

Russia and Iran, by comparison, treat crypto as incidental, a means to broader geopolitical ends.

“Russia targets elections, energy infrastructure and government systems. Iran goes after dissidents and regional adversaries,” Urbelis said. “When either of them touches crypto, it’s to move money, not to steal it from the ecosystem.”

That singular focus has pushed North Korean operatives to adopt tactics more commonly associated with intelligence agencies than criminal hackers: months-long relationship building, fabricated identities and supply chain infiltration.

Advertisement

The Drift campaign is only the most recent example.

“You’re not defending against a phishing email from a random scammer,” Urbelis said. “You’re defending against someone who spent six months building a relationship specifically to compromise one person who has the access you need to protect.”

Crypto’s own architecture makes it a uniquely attractive hunting ground. In traditional finance, even successful hacks run into friction in the form of compliance checks, correspondent bank checks, settlement delays and the possibility of reversing fraudulent transfers. When North Korea’s hackers pulled off the Bangladesh Bank robbery in 2016, the heist took days to process and most of the funds were eventually recovered or blocked. In crypto, none of those safeguards exist at the protocol level.

“Once a transaction is signed and confirmed, it’s final,” Urbelis said. The Bybit exploit earlier last year moved $1.5 billion in roughly 30 minutes, a pace and scale that would be nearly impossible in the traditional banking system.

Advertisement

That finality fundamentally changes the security calculus. In banking, a reasonable defense can be built across prevention, detection and response, because there’s always a window to freeze funds or reverse a wire. In crypto, that window barely exists, which means stopping an attack before it happens isn’t just preferable — it’s essentially the only option.

And while banks operate under decades of regulatory guidance and audit requirements, many crypto projects are still improvising — often prioritizing speed and innovation over governance and controls.

That gap creates an environment where even sophisticated teams can be vulnerable, particularly to the kind of long-term infiltration tactics North Korea has been refining.

“This is the hardest operational security problem in crypto right now,” Urbelis said of the challenge of vetting against sophisticated fake identities and third-party intermediaries. “I don’t think the industry has solved it.”

Advertisement

Read more: How North Korea’s 6-month long secret espionage program has crypto community rethinking security

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

BTC adds to weekend losses on Trump blockade order

Published

on

Trump met Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong before criticizing banks over crypto bill

Crypto prices are under further pressure during U.S. morning hours on Sunday after President Trump announced a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.

“Effective immediately, the United States Navy … will begin the process of blockading any and all ships trying to enter, or leave, the Strait of Hormuz,” said the president in a social media post.

The president’s move came hours after Vice President J.D. Vance late Saturday announced that U.S. and Iranian negotiators had failed to agree to an extended ceasefire after long weekend meetings in Pakistan.

Trading above $73,000 for most of Saturday, bitcoin quickly pulled back to the $71,500 area following the Vance comments. In the minutes since President Trump announced the blockade, BTC has slid further to $70,900, now lower by 2.5% over the past 24 hours.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

The case for bringing Wall Street’s darkest corners to crypto

Published

on

The case for bringing Wall Street's darkest corners to crypto

The largest traders have a problem: how to keep their activity quiet enough to not influence market prices or reveal any long-term strategies.

In traditional markets like equities, they’ve had that ability for decades through so-called dark pools and off-exchange venues. Even as far back as January 2025, more than half of all U.S. equities trading took place off public exchanges, according to Bloomberg data.

Crypto has never had an equivalent, and the absence is increasingly difficult to ignore. Every trade on Hyperliquid, every order on a decentralized exchange, is visible to anyone paying attention, and companies like DeFiLlama and Arkham exist to collect and present that data in a digestible way.

The crypto market, which prides itself on disrupting traditional finance, has replicated one of TradFi’s most persistent structural problems: If you’re big enough to move markets, everyone can see you coming. As a result, firms providing liquidity on public decentralized exchanges say their strategies get reverse-engineered quickly

Advertisement

“On Hyperliquid, one of the top market makers told us they have to rotate their trading strategies every three weeks because they get copied,” Denis Dariotis, co-founder of GoQuant, a crypto trading infrastructure firm backed by GSR, said in an interview. “That’s the alpha problem.”

There are other consequences, too. Market makers — the firms providing the liquidity that keeps crypto markets functioning — operate in full public view, and the industry has developed a habit of making them the villain whenever something goes wrong. Recent scrutiny of Jane Street‘s involvement in the Terra/Luna collapse is only the latest example. A large firm’s onchain activity gets traced, a narrative forms and the company spends weeks managing a PR crisis over trades that, on a traditional venue, would have been entirely unremarkable.

GoQuant’s answer is GoDark, a decentralized exchange (DEX) set to start up on Solana in May. That platform uses zero-knowledge proofs to conceal trade details not just from other market participants, but also from the node operators running the order book. The ambition is radical: a matching engine where nobody in the system can see what they’re matching.

The immediate question is whether that’s technically achievable at any useful speed. Zero-knowledge proofs are computationally expensive, and the architecture adds latency that privacy-agnostic systems don’t have to absorb. Internal testing puts order matching at 25 to 50 milliseconds — Dariotis frames this as fast relative to most decentralized exchanges, where execution often runs into the hundreds of milliseconds, and he’s right. But it’s also an order of magnitude slower than what’s available to firms co-located with a centralized exchange. For retail traders that gap probably doesn’t matter. For the market makers GoDark is banking on to provide liquidity, it might.

Advertisement

Which brings up the harder problem. A private exchange with no volume is just a dark room. GoDark’s plan to seed liquidity mirrors what Hyperliquid did with its HLP vault — users deposit funds, the funds get deployed as market-making liquidity, participants take a cut of fees and first access to liquidations.

It worked for Hyperliquid. But it has not worked for most of the DEXes that have tried to replicate the model since, which have generally seen volume collapse once the incentive period ends.

Then there is the regulatory question, which the team has so far avoided having to answer directly. Traditional dark pools are private in the narrow sense that they conceal pre-trade order information, but they operate under post-trade reporting requirements and regulatory oversight.

GoDark’s privacy is more absolute by design, it’s structurally incapable of producing a full audit trail. The inclusion of automated OFAC screening is a gesture toward compliance, but it is unlikely to satisfy regulators who have spent the past three years pushing crypto toward more transparency, not less. How that tension resolves — and whether it limits institutional participation to jurisdictions with lighter oversight — remains to be seen.

Advertisement

GoDark is separate from GoQuant’s existing institutional product of the same name, a spot DEX built with Copper and GSR that enters production next month and targets a different, narrower client base. The May launch is the retail-facing version.

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Europe’s Stablecoin Adoption Enters Execution as Firms Select Partners

Published

on

Europe’s Stablecoin Adoption Enters Execution as Firms Select Partners

Banks and corporates across Europe are moving beyond exploration and are now actively selecting infrastructure partners to support stablecoin adoption, according to Lamine Brahimi, co-founder and managing partner at crypto custody technology provider Taurus.

Brahimi told Cointelegraph that eighteen months ago, most conversations were still educational, focused on understanding stablecoins and their risks. Today, firms with board-level approval are preparing to go live. He said the introduction of Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) has accelerated that transition by replacing fragmented national rules with a single regulatory regime.

“In the past twelve months alone some of Europe’s most stringent financial institutions are all arriving at the same conclusion, digital assets, including stablecoins, belong inside the existing banking stack, not beside it,” he said.

Stablecoin market cap. Source: DefiLlama

Corporate treasury teams are driving much of the demand. Initially focused on payments and settlement, companies are looking to use stablecoins to move funds faster, reduce costs and operate outside traditional banking hours, Brahimi said.

Related: Bank of France calls for tougher MiCA limits on stablecoin payments

Advertisement

Demand drives stablecoin adoption in Europe

Brahimi said adoption is increasingly driven by practical needs rather than long-term strategy. “Once clients start asking for better settlement, more flexibility, or more efficient cross-border movement of value, the conversation becomes much more immediate and much more practical,” he added.

On Thursday, ClearBank Europe announced that it has become the first Dutch credit institution to secure approval under MiCA to operate as a crypto asset service provider. A consortium of major European banks, including ING, UniCredit, CaixaBank and BBVA, is also developing Qivalis, a MiCA-compliant euro stablecoin initiative designed to enable regulated onchain payments and settlement across Europe.

European banks are also moving ahead with stablecoin initiatives. Societe Generale has positioned its stablecoins around cross-border payments, onchain settlement, FX and cash management, while Oddo BHF has launched a MiCA-compliant euro stablecoin. Meanwhile, a consortium of banks, including ING, UniCredit and BNP Paribas is preparing a Swiss-franc stablecoin for the second half of 2026.

Source: Cointelegraph

Konstantin Vasilenko, co-founder and chief business development officer at Paybis, said the platform has seen rising demand for compatible stablecoins in Europe. Between October 2025 and March 2026, USDC (USDC) volume on Paybis in the EU climbed about 109%, while its share of total stablecoin activity increased from roughly 13% to 32%.

Vasilenko added that in the EU, Paybis stablecoin buy volume remained roughly five to six times higher than sell volume between October 2025 and March 2026. He also noted that average stablecoin transaction sizes were about 15% to 35% larger than typical Bitcoin (BTC) or Ether (ETH) trades. “That usually points to working capital, settlement use and more deliberate business flows,” he said.

Advertisement

Related: Hong Kong grants first stablecoin licenses to Anchorpoint and HSBC

Stablecoin volumes could reach $1.5 quadrillion by 2035

A new report from Chainalysis projects that stablecoin transaction volumes could grow dramatically over the next decade, reaching as high as $719 trillion by 2035 under organic growth scenarios, up from about $28 trillion in 2025.

In a more aggressive scenario, volumes could climb to $1.5 quadrillion if stablecoins become a dominant payment infrastructure and wealth transfer from baby boomers to younger, more crypto-native generations accelerates adoption.

Will Harborne, CEO of stablecoin infrastructure provider Rhino.fi, said that stablecoins will become increasingly important for corporate treasury, cross-border settlement, and FX between euro and dollar stablecoins over the next few years.

Advertisement

“I think every business will eventually start accepting and using stablecoins in some form, and the companies that prepare early will be in the best position when that shift becomes mainstream,” he said.

Magazine: How crypto laws changed in 2025 — and how they’ll change in 2026