Connect with us

Crypto World

What is a mainnet? Production blockchain explained

Published

on

Robinhood debuts Layer 2 mainnet for tokenized stock trading

A mainnet is the production version of a blockchain network where transactions carry real economic value and are permanently recorded. When a cryptocurrency project launches its mainnet, it moves from concept to reality, and every line of code becomes a financial commitment.

Summary

  • A mainnet is a fully operational blockchain network where tokens have real market value, transactions are irreversible, and the consensus mechanism secures actual economic activity.
  • Mainnet launches are milestone events that typically follow months or years of testnet development, security audits, and community governance processes.
  • Hard forks and protocol upgrades on a mainnet are high stakes operations because bugs cannot be rolled back without consensus from the entire network of validators and users.
  • Major mainnet launches in 2026 include Robinhood’s layer 2 for tokenized stock trading, Firedancer on Solana, and multiple stablecoin mainnets including Tether’s USAT on Celo.
  • The security assumptions of a mainnet differ fundamentally from a testnet because real economic incentives create both stronger security guarantees and more sophisticated attack vectors.

In software development, production is where the stakes are real. A bug in a development environment is a learning opportunity. A bug in production is an incident report. In blockchain, the gap between these two states is even wider because blockchain transactions are, by design, difficult or impossible to reverse.

A mainnet is a blockchain’s production environment. It is the live, operational network where tokens have market prices, smart contracts control real funds, and the consensus mechanism protects real economic value. Everything that happens before mainnet, including testnets, audits, and governance votes, exists to reduce the probability that something goes wrong after mainnet launch.

Advertisement

This article explains what a mainnet is, how mainnet launches work, what happens when mainnets are upgraded through hard forks, and what risks remain even after a successful launch. If you hold cryptocurrency on any blockchain, you are interacting with a mainnet, and understanding how it works is fundamental to understanding the security of your assets.

What makes a mainnet different from a testnet

The technical infrastructure of a mainnet and its corresponding testnet is largely identical. Both run the same node software, use the same consensus algorithm, and process transactions using the same virtual machine. The differences are economic and social rather than technical.

On a mainnet, tokens have market value. This means validators and miners have financial incentives to act honestly because their staked tokens or mining hardware represents real capital at risk. It also means attackers have financial incentives to exploit vulnerabilities because successful attacks can be monetized. This duality, where real value creates both stronger defense and stronger offense, is the fundamental characteristic of a mainnet.

The validator set on a mainnet is typically much larger and more geographically distributed than on a testnet. Ethereum mainnet has over 1 million active validators as of mid 2026. Its testnets have a few thousand. This scale difference affects network behavior, propagation times, and the difficulty of coordinating upgrades.

Advertisement

State size is another critical difference. Ethereum’s mainnet state, the accumulated data from every transaction since genesis in July 2015, is hundreds of gigabytes. Testnets are reset periodically and never accumulate state at this scale. Performance issues related to state bloat, database fragmentation, and node synchronization time are mainnet problems that testnets rarely surface.

The anatomy of a mainnet launch

A mainnet launch is the moment a blockchain network goes live with real economic value. For new layer 1 chains, this means activating the genesis block and enabling token transfers. For layer 2 networks, this means deploying the bridge contracts to the parent chain and opening the network to public transactions.

Robinhood’s layer 2 mainnet launch in mid 2026 illustrates the typical process. The team first ran a public testnet that processed 4 million transactions in its first week. After testnet validation, security audits, and regulatory approvals, the mainnet launched with tokenized stock trading functionality. The launch was phased, with a limited set of assets available initially and additional assets added over subsequent weeks.

Mainnet launches carry risks that testnet deployments do not. Bridge contracts that control the flow of value between layers are high value targets for attackers. Smart contract bugs that were not caught during testing become exploitable the moment real value is deposited. The coordination required to launch a mainnet, involving exchanges, wallet providers, infrastructure operators, and application developers, introduces organizational risks that are absent from testnets.

Advertisement

Some projects use a staged mainnet launch where the network goes live with training wheels: centralized sequencers, admin keys that can pause the protocol, or spending limits on smart contracts. These safety measures reduce the blast radius of potential bugs but require users to trust the project team, which partially contradicts the decentralization promise. Most projects commit to removing these training wheels on a published timeline, though some have taken years to do so.

Hard forks and mainnet upgrades

A mainnet is not static. Blockchain protocols evolve through upgrades that add new features, fix bugs, or change economic parameters. When an upgrade requires all nodes to update their software simultaneously, it is called a hard fork. When an upgrade is backward compatible and does not require all nodes to update at once, it is called a soft fork.

Hard forks on a mainnet are high stakes coordination events. If a significant portion of validators do not upgrade their software before the fork height, the chain can split into two incompatible networks. This happened with Ethereum and Ethereum Classic in 2016, with Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash in 2017, and with several smaller chains since. Chain splits create confusion, duplicate transactions, and can permanently fragment a network’s community and economic value.

Cardano’s van Rossem hard fork in 2026 demonstrated modern hard fork governance. The upgrade went through an on chain voting process where stake pool operators signaled their readiness before the protocol activated the new rules. This governance mechanism reduces the risk of chain splits by making upgrade coordination explicit and measurable.

Advertisement

Ethereum’s approach to hard forks has evolved toward coordinated network upgrades with names like Shanghai, Cancun, and Pectra. Each upgrade bundles multiple protocol changes, goes through extensive testnet validation, and is activated at a predetermined block number or slot that all node operators know in advance. The Firedancer client for Solana represents a different approach, where a new validator client implementation is deployed alongside existing clients to increase client diversity without requiring a hard fork.

Mainnet security in practice

The security of a mainnet rests on three pillars: the correctness of the protocol software, the economic incentives of the consensus mechanism, and the diversity and distribution of the validator set.

Protocol correctness is addressed through code audits, formal verification, and testnet deployment. But audits are not guarantees. The history of blockchain exploits includes multiple incidents where audited contracts were exploited through vulnerabilities that the auditors missed. Formal verification, which mathematically proves that code behaves according to a specification, offers stronger guarantees but is expensive and only as good as the specification it verifies.

Advertisement

Economic security comes from the cost of attacking the network. On a proof of work mainnet, this cost is the energy and hardware required to sustain a 51 percent attack. On a proof of stake mainnet, this cost is the capital required to acquire a controlling stake, plus the risk of that stake being slashed if the attack is detected. Both models tie security to real economic value, which only exists on a mainnet.

Validator diversity means running multiple independent client implementations. If all validators run the same software and that software has a bug, the entire network is vulnerable. Ethereum currently has multiple execution clients, including Geth, Nethermind, and Besu, and multiple consensus clients, including Prysm, Lighthouse, Teku, and Lodestar. No single client implementation has a majority share, which means a bug in any one client cannot bring down the entire network.

What mainnet status does not cover

A project being on mainnet does not mean it is safe, decentralized, or battle tested. Many projects launch their mainnet with centralized components, limited validator sets, or admin keys that give the founding team control over critical protocol parameters. Mainnet status is a necessary but not sufficient condition for trustworthiness.

Mainnet status does not guarantee permanence. Several blockchain projects have launched mainnets that were later abandoned, shut down, or migrated to new chains. The tokens associated with those mainnets lost their value. Launching a mainnet is not the finish line. Sustaining it requires ongoing development, community participation, and economic viability.

Advertisement

Mainnet status does not indicate regulatory compliance. A blockchain can be technically operational while operating in legal gray areas. Tether’s USAT stablecoin launching on Celo as its second mainnet deployment illustrates how stablecoin projects must navigate both technical mainnet requirements and regulatory frameworks across multiple jurisdictions simultaneously.

Mainnet performance metrics should be read with context. A blockchain reporting high transaction throughput may be running with a small validator set, minimal decentralization, or artificial test traffic. The throughput that matters is sustained throughput under adversarial conditions with a geographically distributed validator set, not peak throughput on a permissioned or lightly loaded network.

Practical checks for evaluating mainnets

When evaluating whether a blockchain’s mainnet is robust, several indicators are more informative than marketing claims.

Check the age of the mainnet. A blockchain that has been running continuously for years with significant value at stake has survived conditions that a newly launched network has not. Bitcoin’s mainnet has run since January 2009 without a single hour of downtime. Ethereum’s has run since July 2015 with brief interruptions during consensus incidents. Newer chains have shorter track records and correspondingly less demonstrated reliability.

Advertisement

Check the validator count and distribution. A mainnet with thousands of validators distributed across dozens of countries is more resilient than one with a few dozen validators in a single data center. Block explorers and network dashboards for most chains publish this data.

Check whether admin keys or upgrade mechanisms exist that could allow a small group to modify the protocol without community consensus. Many new mainnets launch with multisig admin controls that could theoretically be used to drain funds, pause the network, or censor transactions. Understanding who holds these keys and under what conditions they can be used is essential due diligence.

Check the total value locked and the duration for which that value has been locked. A mainnet securing billions of dollars for years has a stronger security track record than one that recently attracted a spike of deposits following a token incentive program. The depth of the security test is proportional to both the amount of value at risk and the time period over which that value has been at risk.

Advertisement

Frequently asked questions

What is a mainnet in simple terms?

A mainnet is the live, production version of a blockchain where real transactions happen with real money. It is the opposite of a testnet, which uses fake tokens for testing. When you buy, sell, or transfer cryptocurrency, you are using a mainnet.

What happens during a mainnet launch?

During a mainnet launch, a blockchain network goes live for the first time with real economic value. The genesis block is created, validators or miners begin processing transactions, and tokens become tradable on exchanges. Mainnet launches typically follow months of testnet development and security auditing.

Can a mainnet be shut down?

A truly decentralized mainnet cannot be shut down by any single entity because it runs across thousands of independent computers worldwide. However, less decentralized mainnets with few validators or centralized control points could theoretically be stopped. Some smaller blockchain projects have had their mainnets shut down or abandoned.

What is a hard fork on a mainnet?

A hard fork is a protocol upgrade that is not backward compatible, meaning all nodes must update their software to remain on the same network. If some nodes do not update, the chain splits into two separate networks. Hard forks are used to add major new features or fix critical bugs.

Advertisement

How do I know if a project has launched its mainnet?

Check the project’s official website and social media channels for mainnet launch announcements. You can also check block explorers to see if the network is producing blocks with real transactions. Token listings on major exchanges typically coincide with mainnet launches. Be cautious of projects that claim mainnet status but actually run on another chain’s infrastructure.

Is mainnet the same as layer 1?

Not exactly. A mainnet is any production blockchain network. Layer 1 refers specifically to the base chain that provides its own consensus and security. Layer 2 networks like Arbitrum, Optimism, and zkSync also have mainnets, but they rely on a layer 1 mainnet for final settlement and security. Both layer 1 and layer 2 networks have mainnets.

What risks exist on a mainnet that do not exist on a testnet?

On a mainnet, smart contract bugs can result in permanent loss of real funds. Economic attacks like front running, sandwich attacks, and oracle manipulation only work when tokens have real value. Regulatory risks, validator collusion, and bridge exploits are all mainnet-specific risks because they depend on real economic incentives.

How long does it typically take from testnet to mainnet?

The timeline varies widely. Simple projects may go from testnet to mainnet in weeks. Complex layer 1 launches can take months to years. Ethereum’s transition from proof of work to proof of stake spent over two years in testnet and development phases before the mainnet Merge in September 2022. The more value a mainnet will secure, the longer the testing period should be.

Advertisement

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Cryptocurrency investments carry significant risk. Always conduct your own research before making any investment decisions. Information is accurate as of August 1, 2026.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Bitcoin ETFs gain fresh case after $89M Coldcard drain

Published

on

US Bitcoin ETFs bleed $527m as IBIT’s losing run deepens

Bloomberg Intelligence senior ETF analyst Eric Balchunas said on Aug. 2 that the Coldcard security failure strengthens the case for U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs, especially for investors who want long-term price exposure without managing private keys. 

Summary

  • Galaxy traced 1,367.05 BTC across 4,585 addresses, valuing observed Coldcard losses near $88.6 million total.
  • Balchunas argued institutional custody makes Bitcoin ETFs preferable for investors seeking only long-term price exposure.
  • ETF investors avoid seed management but surrender direct ownership, payments, and round-the-clock Bitcoin network access.

His comments followed Galaxy Research’s estimate that three suspected attack waves drained 1,367.05 BTC, worth about $88.6 million, from 4,585 addresses.

Balchunas wrote, Yes, an ETF fixes this,” while noting that some self-custody advocates dismiss the funds as “paper bitcoin.” That is his view on custody, not evidence that investors have moved money into ETFs because of the incident. U.S. markets were closed when he posted the weekend comments, leaving no verified post-comment fund-flow reaction.

Advertisement

Coldcard drain renews the Bitcoin ETF argument

Block’s Bitcoin engineering team found that a firmware integration error routed random-number generation through a deterministic MicroPython fallback instead of the intended hardware source. Its report said Mk2 and Mk3 devices on vulnerable firmware added no cryptographic entropy through that path. Later models used a limited secure-element reseed.

Coinkite’s security advisory covers Mk2 and Mk3 firmware from version 4.0.1 through 4.1.9, plus seeds generated on Mk4, Mk5 and Q devices before their fixed releases. The company released corrected firmware, but warned that updating software does not repair seeds created earlier. Users must generate a new seed and move their funds.

Advertisement

Galaxy’s latest estimate covers three suspected draining waves. The third removed 207.7294 BTC from 1,912 addresses and followed a different transaction pattern. Galaxy called $88.6 million its “estimated observed size,” meaning the figure remains an on-chain estimate rather than a final total confirmed by Coinkite or law enforcement.

Balchunas also questioned whether a reportedly small hardware-wallet company should protect life-changing sums. He called the reported staffing level “a red flag.” Coinkite has not publicly confirmed the headcount cited in his post, and company size alone does not establish whether a security system is adequate.

U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs remove seed-management risk

A spot Bitcoin ETF removes the investor from seed creation, firmware updates, backups and wallet migration. The fund and its service providers manage those duties. BlackRock says its iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF, or IBIT, simplifies the operational and custody work involved in holding Bitcoin directly. IBIT reported $46.52 billion in net assets on July 31 and charges a 0.25% sponsor fee.

Advertisement

IBIT’s SEC filing says Coinbase Custody holds the trust’s private keys in segregated cold-storage wallets. It also names Anchorage Digital Bank as an additional custodian that BlackRock may use. The filing describes limited employee access, external control reviews and a process in which no single custodian employee has access to complete private keys.

Fidelity uses Fidelity Digital Assets to custody Bitcoin for its Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund. Such products let U.S. investors gain exposure through brokerage, trust and tax-advantaged accounts without operating a hardware wallet. That can matter to advisers and retirement investors who only seek price exposure.

However, the term “regulated ETF” needs context. IBIT is an SEC-reporting, Nasdaq-listed product, but BlackRock states that the trust is not registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940. It therefore does not receive every protection that applies to conventional registered mutual funds and ETFs.

Bitcoin ETFs transfer custody risk instead of erasing it

The ETF structure replaces individual seed risk with institutional custody, operational and counterparty risk. IBIT’s annual filing warns that hackers, employee misconduct, technical failures or unauthorized transfers could still cause losses. It also says Coinbase’s shared insurance may be insufficient for every possible event.

Advertisement

The filing states that shareholders cannot bring direct claims against the Bitcoin custodian under the custody agreement. No party guarantees all trust assets or service-provider obligations. These disclosures do not show that ETFs are less secure than personal wallets. They show that the risk moves to institutions and contractual arrangements.

ETF shareholders also own securities rather than spendable Bitcoin. IBIT shares trade on Nasdaq, and redemptions occur through authorized participants in baskets of 40,000 shares. Retail investors cannot withdraw ETF holdings to a personal address, make Bitcoin payments or transact whenever the network is open.

As previously reported in crypto.news’ Bitcoin ETF explainer, the wrapper offers easier access and professional custody but removes direct ownership and 24/7 use. In related coverage, a technical review of the Coldcard bug found that the failure involved seed generation rather than phishing or physical theft.

The $89M drain is not yet an ETF inflow catalyst

Balchunas’s argument may appeal to investors who only want Bitcoin’s price performance. The incident may also encourage holders to divide funds among personal wallets, multisignature setups and regulated custodians instead of relying on one device or provider. These remain possible responses rather than confirmed investor behavior.

Advertisement

Still, no verified data shows that the Coldcard drain has created new Bitcoin ETF demand. BlackRock’s latest official figures cover July 31, before Balchunas’s Aug. 2 comments. IBIT’s NAV fell 2.78% that day, but the move cannot be tied solely to the wallet incident.

The next U.S. trading session may show whether ETF flows change, although one day of activity would not prove a connection. Bitcoin prices, economic conditions and portfolio rebalancing also drive fund creations and redemptions.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Legacy crypto on-ramps and bridges will disappear as payments become invisible, Fun CEO says

Published

on

Legacy crypto on-ramps and bridges will disappear as payments become invisible, Fun CEO says

While those applications have become increasingly visible, the infrastructure that enables deposits, withdrawals and settlement has largely remained behind the scenes.

Fun is one of the companies building that infrastructure. The firm said it powers 100% of deposits and withdrawals on Polymarket and deposit flows into Aave’s largest vaults, while processing more than $3 billion in monthly transaction volume.

The company has raised more than $75 million to date.

From payment rails to funding flows

Fine said today’s crypto payments ecosystem remains unnecessarily fragmented, with developers forced to stitch together different card processors, banking partners, crypto assets, blockchains and bridges to create funding experiences.

Advertisement

Instead of relying on individual payment rails, platforms should optimize around the end goal of getting users funded as quickly and seamlessly as possible, he says.

“In Web2, payments are highly fungible,” Fine said. “In Web3, they’re much more complex because every payment method behaves differently. Teams keep rebuilding the same infrastructure over and over again instead of building unified optimized funding flows.”

That shift means many existing crypto payment businesses risk becoming obsolete, according to Fine. Companies built around converting fiat into crypto or moving assets between blockchains are solving an intermediary step that users never cared about in the first place, he argued.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Strategy Holds Preferred STRC Dividend at 12% as Price Still Below Par

Published

on

Strategy Holds Preferred STRC Dividend at 12% as Price Still Below Par

While Strategy’s preferred STRC shares ended July well below their $100 par value, investors were told that their August dividend will not increase, holding at 12%.

Executive chairman Michael Saylor delivered the news in a tweet on Saturday, continuing to pitch STRC as a way to “stretch your income.” August will be the second month that the dividend will be paid semi-monthly after shareholders approved that change in June.

STRC shares closed at $89.46 on Friday, clocking a 5.42% price increase for the month which began with a dividend hike — 50 basis points to 12% — after a poor stock performance in June. The volume on the Nasdaq-traded shares on Friday were about two-thirds of their daily average. 

STRC shares continued to trade significantly below their $100 par value in July.
Source: TradingView

On Friday, Strategy CEO Phong Le reiterated that management’s “corporate objective is for STRC to trade at $99-$100 over time,” without elaborating when investors might expect that to transpire. 

Advertisement

Related: Bitcoin ETFs end July in the green despite late-month selling

Building cash reserve to make preferred payouts

Saylor, however, did take to social media on Sunday to dangle the possibility that the company will be making an announcement of a change in its Bitcoin treasury holdings. “Bitcoin Drive engaged,” read his X post, following a familiar pattern of posting a chart of Strategy’s BTC buys from Saylortracker.com to start off the week.

Last week, Strategy reported an $8.22 billion second-quarter net loss, driven primarily by an $8.32 billion unrealized loss on its Bitcoin (BTC) holdings as the cryptocurrency’s price declined during the quarter.

The Bitcoin treasury company said it has built a $3.75 billion cash reserve to support preferred stock payouts following the launch of its BTC monetization program.

Advertisement

Strategy also said it has built a $3.75 billion U.S. dollar reserve, enough to cover more than two years of preferred dividend payments and interest obligations. The company recently repurchased $25 million of its STRC preferred shares at a discount to par and said it intends to continue buying the securities while they trade below $100.

Magazine: Here’s why the CLARITY Act’s ethics deal may be so hard to reach

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Minnesota loses first round against Kalshi, Polymarket

Published

on

Minnesota loses first round against Kalshi, Polymarket

Minnesota’s prediction market ban remained blocked on Aug. 2, one day after the law was scheduled to take effect. 

Summary

  • July 27 injunction keeps Kalshi and Polymarket operating while Minnesota’s preemption case continues in court.
  • Walz barred state employees from using confidential information to trade prediction markets for private benefit.
  • Fairshake reported $126.97 million cash on hand through June, amplifying crypto’s broader election influence nationwide.

U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez granted a preliminary injunction on July 27 to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Kalshi and Polymarket US. The order prevents Minnesota from enforcing its new statute against CFTC-registered designated contract markets while three related cases continue.

The Minnesota law would make it a felony for businesses to create, operate or intentionally support covered prediction markets. It also reaches certain data providers, payment services and advertisements. Menendez found that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on at least part of their federal preemption claim because many event contracts may qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act.

Advertisement

Court win protects federal markets, but only for now

The ruling does not settle the dispute. Menendez found that the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction probably covers a “considerable swath” of contracts offered by Kalshi and Polymarket. However, she also said the platforms had not shown that every listed event contract meets the federal definition of a swap. Any permanent injunction could therefore protect fewer products than the current order.

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said prediction markets are “gambling, plain and simple.” That remains the state’s legal position, not a final court finding. Kalshi responded that “States cannot ban things that they don’t have jurisdiction over.” The company’s statement likewise reflects its interpretation of federal law rather than the case’s final outcome.

The injunction only covers the new prediction market statute as applied to CFTC-registered markets. It does not decide whether Minnesota can apply older gambling laws to individual sports or entertainment contracts. The Department of Public Safety has not said whether it views the platforms as illegal under those existing provisions or whether another enforcement action is underway.

Advertisement

As previously reported, the current relief will remain in place until the district court reaches a final decision unless a later order or appeal changes it. The court could ultimately distinguish between contracts with financial or economic consequences and products that more closely resemble ordinary wagers.

Walz shifts Minnesota’s focus to insider trading

Governor Tim Walz responded one day after the ruling with Executive Order 26-09. It prohibits covered state employees, including the governor, lieutenant governor and agency commissioners, from using nonpublic or confidential government information to trade prediction-market contracts for private benefit.

The order does not cover the legislature, courts, independent elected officials or several boards and commissions. Walz encouraged those institutions to adopt similar policies. It becomes effective 15 days after publication in the State Register and filing with the secretary of state.

A new federal enforcement case also shows that CFTC oversight does not leave manipulation entirely unpoliced. On July 31, the agency ordered former U.S. Representative George Santos to disgorge $17,569.98, pay a $17,500 penalty and accept a three-year trading ban over manipulative activity in a State of the Union event contract.

Advertisement

The CFTC order said Santos traded on whether he would attend the speech while making misleading public statements about his plans. The agency said those statements moved contract prices in a direction that favored his positions.

Meanwhile, as crypto.news reported, Kalshi has introduced employer disclosures, risk scoring and expanded surveillance for higher-risk contracts. The company said it blocked more than 100 potential insider trades and made 20 law-enforcement referrals during the first quarter of 2026. Those remain company-reported figures.

U.S. politics could pull crypto lawmakers and PACs into the fight

The Minnesota ruling could give pro-crypto lawmakers another example for arguing that national financial markets need one federal framework. The CLARITY Act does not regulate prediction markets directly. However, its supporters are also seeking a larger CFTC role in U.S. digital asset oversight. Senate lawmakers released updated market-structure text on July 22 after the Banking Committee advanced the measure in May.

The court dispute also creates a counterargument for lawmakers wary of expanding the commission’s mandate. A July 21 Senate letter asked the Government Accountability Office to review a reported 25% reduction in CFTC staffing and weaker enforcement activity. Critics could argue that Congress should not widen the regulator’s duties without ensuring it has enough staff to oversee both digital assets and fast-growing event markets. This is a political inference based on the agency’s expanding workload and the staffing concerns raised in Congress.

Advertisement

The case does not involve Fairshake or another crypto PAC. Still, it could shape campaign arguments surrounding candidates supported by the industry. FEC records showed that Fairshake held approximately $126.97 million in cash at the end of June and had spent $74.25 million during the current two-year reporting period.

In related coverage, Protect Progress spent more than $2 million in Michigan’s 13th District race, where challenger Donavan McKinney tied crypto lobbying to President Donald Trump’s business interests. Similar campaign attacks could connect support for broader CFTC authority with the Trump family’s prediction-market relationships.

Kalshi named Donald Trump Jr. a strategic adviser in January 2025. Polymarket later added him to its advisory board when his investment firm, 1789 Capital, took a stake in the company. Those corporate relationships are confirmed, although they do not prove that the White House directed the CFTC’s Minnesota litigation.

Sports-law attorney Daniel Wallach described the change in federal policy as “classic regulatory capture.” That is his assessment, not a judicial or regulatory conclusion. However, the family relationships may give opponents of pro-crypto candidates a clearer campaign message about industry access, federal authority and possible conflicts.

Advertisement

Conflicting state cases keep national rules unsettled

Minnesota is one part of a wider federal-state contest. The CFTC has filed cases against several states to defend what it calls exclusive jurisdiction over registered prediction markets. Yet courts have not produced one nationwide answer. Minnesota’s injunction favored the platforms, while rulings involving Wisconsin and Washington allowed state gambling challenges to advance.

New York added another case on July 31 by suing Kalshi and alleging that its platform operates as unlicensed gambling. The state seeks an injunction, restitution, penalties and forfeiture of alleged gains. Those claims remain allegations that Kalshi can contest in court.

Advertisement

The CFTC’s proposed prediction-market rule is another key track. The public comment period closed on July 27. The proposal would define “gaming,” establish factors for public-interest reviews and create a process lasting as long as 90 days for certain event contracts. The commission has not issued a final rule.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Why Is Cardano (ADA) Up 9% Today While the Crypto Market Stalls?

Published

on

There’s rarely a big altcoin gainer during the current market conditions, in which every breakout attempt is halted in its tracks. This is particularly true for weekend moves, as the market tends to freeze on Saturday and Sunday.

The latest example came in the past 36-48 hours. Even though the situation in the Middle East continues to develop quickly, with Trump claiming a Hormuz Strait deal is in the making and Iran refuting his statement once again, BTC and most altcoins have remained sluggish.

However, Cardano’s ADA has emerged as the clear winner this weekend, gaining over 9% and jumping past $0.19 hours ago for the first time in almost a month. Here’s the most likely reason and what could follow next.

ADAUSD on TradingView
ADAUSD on TradingView

Whales Are Buying

Since we are excluding a rally from the broader market, perhaps the most obvious reason behind ADA’s impressive resurgence over the past day has been the recent behavior of whales. These large market participants, who can influence the underlying asset’s price moves with big purchases or sales, have gone on an accumulation spree.

Santiment Intelligence data shared by Ali Martinez shows that whales have scooped more than 240 million ADA in less than a week. Their total holdings went to 14.55 billion before retracing slightly.

Advertisement

The analyst concluded that this substantial acquisition has helped fuel the asset’s notable 22% surge in the past five days, while the rest of the market stagnates.

Major Breakout Knocking on the Door

Another analyst going under the X moniker, Gerla, noted that ADA is “knocking on the door of a major breakout.” Their chart shows that ADA is fighting for the $0.19-$0.20 resistance level now, which capped its previous breakout attempt last month.

Advertisement

However, the bullish RSI divergence and the completion of an inverse head-and-shoulders suggest that ADA finally has the strength to overcome that obstacle and aim at the next one, positioned at around $0.30.

ZAYK Charts was even more bullish, indicating that a successful surge past the first resistance level could pave the way for another leg up toward $0.50.

The post Why Is Cardano (ADA) Up 9% Today While the Crypto Market Stalls? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Ethereum Price Analysis: ETH’s Double Rejection at $2K Spells More Trouble Ahead

Published

on

After several failed attempts to extend its recovery, Ethereum is beginning to show signs of exhaustion beneath the major100-day MA. The latest rejection from this zone has weakened short-term momentum and increases the probability of a broader pullback if key support levels fail to hold.

Ethereum Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

On the daily timeframe, ETH’s outlook is gradually shifting toward a bearish bias after multiple failed attempts to reclaim the 100-day moving average. The repeated rejection from this dynamic resistance around $1.95K, combined with the emergence of bearish daily candles, suggests buyers are losing momentum.

Meanwhile, Ethereum continues to struggle with the descending channel, with the upper boundary represented by the white trendline serving as the most critical support.

If sellers manage to push the price back inside this channel, it would confirm a bearish continuation and likely trigger a deeper decline toward the $1.56K to $1.64K demand zone. On the upside, bulls must first reclaim the $1.88K to $1.91K resistance area before attempting another move toward the 100-day MA near $1.95K.

Advertisement

ETH/USDT 4-Hour Chart

The 4-hour chart has turned more bearish after Ethereum broke below its ascending trendline, signaling that buyers have lost short-term control. This breakdown shifts the focus toward lower support levels unless bulls can quickly reclaim the broken structure.

The first support now lies within the $1.85K to $1.87K demand zone, where price is currently attempting to stabilize. Losing this area would likely accelerate the decline toward the next major demand zone between $1.75K and $1.79K.

On the other hand, the $1.88K to $1.91K supply zone has become the primary threshold for buyers. A successful reclaim of this region would invalidate the immediate bearish scenario and could allow Ethereum to challenge the descending resistance and the 100-day moving average once again.

Sentiment Analysis

The Coinbase Premium Index remains in negative territory, indicating that Ethereum continues to trade at a discount on Coinbase relative to other major exchanges. This persistent negative premium suggests buying pressure from U.S.-based institutional participants remains relatively weak despite the recent recovery.

Advertisement

Historically, sustained positive readings have accompanied stronger bullish phases, whereas prolonged negative values often reflect cautious institutional sentiment. Until the premium returns to positive territory and remains there consistently, the current rebound may struggle to develop into a sustained uptrend, leaving Ethereum vulnerable to additional downside pressure if technical support levels begin to fail.

The post Ethereum Price Analysis: ETH’s Double Rejection at $2K Spells More Trouble Ahead appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

XRP Price Analysis: Is a Drop Below $1 Inevitable as Sellers Stay in Control?

Published

on

Ripple’s XRP remains under steady selling pressure as the latest rebound attempts continue to lose momentum. The recent price action suggests sellers are maintaining control, while buyers are once again being forced to defend a critical support area.

Ripple Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

The daily chart shows little improvement compared to the previous analysis. The asset continues to trade beneath the descending resistance trendline while remaining well below the major moving averages, preserving the broader bearish market structure.

The latest candles indicate that sellers remain in control after another failed recovery attempt, pushing the price back toward the key demand zone around $1.01 to $1.04. This support has repeatedly prevented a deeper decline over the past several weeks, making it the most important level to monitor.

As long as XRP remains below the descending trendline and the main resistance between $1.24 and $1.29, the broader outlook favors continued weakness. A decisive breakdown below the $1.01 to $1.04 support zone would likely accelerate the decline toward the next major support around $0.89.

Advertisement

XRP/USDT 4-Hour Chart

On the 4-hour timeframe, rather than recovering from support, XRP has continued to print lower highs and lower lows while remaining capped by the descending resistance trendline.

The recent rejection near $1.09 was followed by another decline toward the $1.01 to $1.04 demand zone, showing that buyers have yet to regain control. This area remains the last significant short-term defense for the bulls.

If this support fails, the bearish momentum is likely to intensify and extend the decline toward lower levels. Conversely, buyers would first need to reclaim the descending trendline before any meaningful recovery toward the $1.24 to $1.29 resistance zone could be considered. Until then, rallies are likely to face selling pressure and remain corrective in nature.

The post XRP Price Analysis: Is a Drop Below $1 Inevitable as Sellers Stay in Control? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Bitcoin Price Analysis: Will the Next Liquidity Sweep Push BTC Below $60K?

Published

on

Bitcoin continues to trade without a decisive directional bias as both buyers and sellers defend key technical levels. Until one side forces a confirmed breakout, the current environment is likely to remain dominated by range-bound price action and short-term liquidity grabs.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

The daily chart suggests Bitcoin is still locked in a prolonged consolidation phase between the major support around $57.8K to $60.2K and the primary resistance at $66.2K to $66.8K. Despite several attempts by both buyers and sellers, neither side has managed to establish a sustained trend beyond these boundaries.

This type of market structure typically favors liquidity sweeps and stop hunts around local highs and lows before a genuine directional move develops. As long as the asset remains trapped between these two zones, traders should expect continued choppy price action rather than a sustained trend.

A confirmed breakout above the $66.2K to $66.8K resistance could trigger another leg toward the higher resistance around $72K to $74K. Conversely, losing the $57.8K to $60.2K demand zone would invalidate the current consolidation and expose Bitcoin to a deeper correction.

Advertisement

BTC/USDT 4-Hour Chart

On the 4-hour timeframe, Bitcoin is trading inside an even tighter range within the broader daily consolidation. Buyers continue defending the support region at $61.8K to $62.2K, while sellers repeatedly cap rallies below the resistance around $64.9K to $65.6K.

Holding above the buyers’ defense could allow another recovery attempt toward the upper boundary of this range. However, the recent sequence of lower highs indicates that sellers still hold a slight advantage, making a breakdown below the $61.8K to $62.2K support zone the more likely scenario if buying momentum continues to weaken. Such a move could accelerate selling pressure toward the lower boundary of the broader daily range.

Sentiment Analysis

The two-week liquidation heatmap shows a notable concentration of liquidity just beneath Bitcoin’s recent lows. This suggests futures market participants have been actively defending that area, with buyers stepping in to absorb selling pressure whenever the price approaches the lower liquidity cluster.

At the same time, a substantial pool of liquidity remains above the market around the $66K to $67K region, indicating that both sides still have attractive liquidation targets. As long as Bitcoin remains inside its broader consolidation, the price is likely to continue oscillating between these liquidity zones before a decisive breakout determines the next major trend.

Advertisement

The post Bitcoin Price Analysis: Will the Next Liquidity Sweep Push BTC Below $60K? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

$1.6 Million Drained in a Blink: User Recounts His Dramatic Coldcard Wallet Hack

Published

on

$1.6 Million Drained in a Blink: User Recounts His Dramatic Coldcard Wallet Hack

A Canadian entrepreneur lost more than $1.6 million in Bitcoin (BTC) from a Coldcard hardware wallet in under seven minutes, part of a wave that may total 1,367.05 BTC.

The case exposes an uncomfortable truth about self-custody: doing everything right may not be enough.

How One Holder Lost 18 BTC in Seven Minutes

Cold storage means keeping private keys on a device that never touches the internet. Jonathan Goodman followed that principle carefully, storing his Coldcard in a safety deposit box.

His 18.25 BTC sat in wallets secured across multiple safes. He never shared his seed phrase and kept every device isolated from online exposure.

Advertisement

None of it mattered on July 29, 2026. Between 9:36 and 9:43 that evening, every wallet he controlled was emptied.

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens.

Goodman first heard about a broader problem while at his cottage.

Advertisement

Assuming it would not affect him, he checked the balances in the Wasabi wallet software and found a series of red withdrawal transactions.

The vulnerability traces back to 2021. A flaw in the code that generates seed phrases left certain devices exposed, and attackers allegedly used artificial intelligence to brute-force the affected seed phrases.

He is filing reports with the police and the Ontario Securities Commission. Recovery hopes remain slim, though he wrote that the hardest part was having done everything right.

The scale extends far beyond one victim. Galaxy Research identified three suspected attack waves targeting addresses generated by Coldcard devices.

Advertisement

Those waves involved 4,585 source addresses and drained 1,367.05 BTC, worth roughly $88.6 million at the time of reporting.

Galaxy Research estimated the observed size of the Coldcard hack is now 1,367.05 BTC across 4,585 addresses. Source: X/@glxyresearch

What Galaxy Research Found in the Attack Data

Galaxy Research head Alex Thorn indicates that the attacks appear to be ongoing. He urged users who have not moved funds from potentially vulnerable setups to act immediately.

The first two waves showed similar transaction patterns and may share a common operator, though that remains unconfirmed. The third differed significantly, suggesting either updated tools or a separate actor exploiting the same key space.

The stolen Bitcoin remains in attacker-controlled addresses, with no further movement. Drained holdings had sat dormant for an average of 3.18 years, suggesting most victims were long-term holders rather than institutions.

Galaxy stressed an important caveat. Its findings rely solely on on-chain data and have not definitively confirmed insufficient randomness in the generation of the affected addresses.

Advertisement

“…this is a blow to bitcoin self-custody and we need to do better as a community: with security, with education, and with being realistic about complexity, expectations, and recommendations we make to friends, family, and the public…,” Alex Thorn said.

Analyst Shanaka Anslem Perera highlighted a deeper irony in Coldcard’s own documentation. The manual describes its default seed-generation method as the one it trusts most, while labeling it as low risk to users.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights.

Alternatives exist within the same device. Users can combine hardware output with dice rolls, or rely on dice alone, which the manual says removes all trust in the hardware. Most users likely followed the default path. That is precisely the method Galaxy Research now links to the losses.

Advertisement

The conceptual tension runs deeper. Reproducibility, prized for verifying firmware, becomes a liability in secret generation, since both weak and strong seeds produce valid 24-word phrases that appear identical.

Devices marketed under a “Don’t Trust, Verify” ethos can still harbor entropy flaws, leaving no visible trace. Affected users should assess their setups and migrate funds where necessary.

The post $1.6 Million Drained in a Blink: User Recounts His Dramatic Coldcard Wallet Hack appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Iran Denies Trump’s Hormuz Deal, Oil Jumps but Bitcoin Watches

Published

on

WTI Crude Oil and Bitcoin Price Performance. Source: TradingView

Iran has denied President Donald Trump’s claim that a deal exists to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s busiest oil route. Oil jumped on the denial.

Bitcoin (BTC) barely moved. That gap says a lot about what crypto traders now choose to ignore.

WTI Crude Oil and Bitcoin Price Performance. Source: TradingView
WTI Crude Oil and Bitcoin Price Performance. Source: TradingView

Trump Says a Hormuz Deal Exists. Iran Says It Does Not

Trump posted on Truth Social early Sunday. He said he had canceled a planned strike on Iran.

He wrote that Iran and its neighbors asked him to hold off. The reason, he said, was that “the perimeters of a deal has been agreed to.”

That deal would open the Strait of Hormuz right away. It would also end Iran’s nuclear threat.

Iran answered within hours. Fars News Agency quoted a source close to the nuclear talks.

“There is no agreement regarding the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, and the news published about it is false,” Fars News Agency, via CGTN.

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

Iran’s acting defense minister, Seyyed Majid Ibn Al-Reza, called Trump’s words psychological warfare. Fars International called Trump’s terms a wish list.

Advertisement

None of this is new. An earlier pause in strikes in late July also went nowhere.

Talks did happen, though. Qatari mediators met Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, and US envoy Steve Witkoff on Saturday. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman urged Trump to cool things down.

Why Oil Jumped and Bitcoin Did Not

Start with the map. The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow sea lane between Iran and Oman.

Advertisement

About 20 million barrels of oil passed through it every day in 2024, EIA data shows. That is roughly a fifth of the oil the world uses.

Oil Traffic In the Strait of Hormuz. Source: EIA
Oil Traffic In the Strait of Hormuz. Source: EIA

Here is the problem. Only about 2.6 million barrels a day can go around it, through pipelines in Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

The rest has nowhere else to go. That is why one denial can move a market this big.

WTI crude, the US benchmark, closed at $84.67 on Friday. It then rose about 2.4% to trade near $86.79.

Oil Price Performance. Source: TradingView
Oil Price Performance. Source: TradingView

The denial also puts an official forecast in doubt. On July 7, the EIA cut its Brent crude forecast for this quarter by $27 a barrel, to $74. It cited the June US-Iran deal and busier traffic through the strait.

That June deal has since fallen apart. Analysts tracking Hormuz reopening timelines now expect the route to stay restricted into 2027.

Advertisement

Bitcoin did almost nothing. It added 0.08% in 24 hours and sat near $63,063.

Bitcoin Price Performance. Source: BeInCrypto
Bitcoin Price Performance. Source: BeInCrypto

It also trades about 50% below its record of $126,080, set on October 6, 2025. The muted Bitcoin price reaction suggests traders now ignore headlines that change nothing on the water.

What Happens Next

Oil matters to crypto for one reason. It feeds inflation.

June proved the link. US energy prices fell 5.7% that month, the steepest drop since April 2020.

The BLS said energy did most of the work. Headline prices fell 0.4% over the month. Annual inflation cooled to 3.5% from 4.2%.

Advertisement

Energy is still expensive over a full year, however. Gasoline is up 26.7%.

So a lasting jump in oil would undo that progress. That makes Federal Reserve rate cuts harder to justify. Rate cuts are what assets like Bitcoin want.

The next check comes August 12, when the BLS publishes July inflation.

Until ships can sail through Hormuz freely, oil keeps its war premium. Bitcoin keeps waiting.

Advertisement

The post Iran Denies Trump’s Hormuz Deal, Oil Jumps but Bitcoin Watches appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025