Connect with us

Crypto World

What are Telegram trading bots? How they work

Published

on

What are Telegram trading bots? How they work

Telegram trading bots let users buy and sell tokens directly from a chat interface. This guide explains how they work, which bots dominate the market, and what risks come with handing a bot your private key.

Summary

  • Telegram trading bots are automated tools that connect to decentralized exchanges through the Telegram messaging app, letting users swap tokens, snipe new listings, and set limit orders without using a traditional wallet interface
  • The leading bots by volume include Banana Gun, Maestro, Unibot, BONKbot, and Trojan, each handling hundreds of millions of dollars in weekly trading volume across Ethereum, Solana, and Base
  • These bots generate revenue through transaction fees, typically charging 0.5% to 1% per trade on top of the standard DEX swap fees and network gas costs
  • The primary convenience is speed: a trader can paste a contract address into a Telegram chat and execute a buy in under two seconds, compared to the 15 to 30 seconds required to navigate a DEX interface manually
  • The primary risk is custody: most Telegram bots generate a wallet for the user and hold the private key on their servers, meaning a bot compromise could result in total loss of funds

Telegram trading bots emerged in 2023 as a response to a specific problem in decentralized finance: the gap between the speed at which opportunities appear and the speed at which a human can execute a trade through a conventional DEX interface. When a new token launches on Uniswap or Raydium, the first buyers often capture the largest gains. By the time a trader opens their browser, connects their wallet, approves the token contract, sets slippage, and confirms the transaction, the price may have already moved 50% or more.

Telegram bots compressed that entire workflow into a single message. Paste a contract address, tap a button, and the bot submits the transaction on your behalf. The interface is a chat window. The execution happens on-chain. The speed advantage turned what started as a niche tool for memecoin traders into an infrastructure layer that now processes billions of dollars in monthly volume.

Advertisement

This guide explains how these bots work under the hood, which ones dominate the market, what they cost, and where the risks hide.

How Telegram trading bots work

A Telegram trading bot is a program that runs on a server, connects to one or more blockchain networks, and accepts commands through the Telegram Bot API. When a user starts a bot for the first time, the bot generates a new crypto wallet (a public-private key pair) and associates it with the user’s Telegram account. The user funds this wallet by sending tokens to the generated address.

Once funded, the user can trade by sending commands to the bot. The most basic command is a buy: the user pastes a token contract address, selects an amount, and the bot constructs a swap transaction on the relevant decentralized exchange, signs it with the user’s private key, and broadcasts it to the network. The entire process typically completes in one to three seconds on Solana and three to ten seconds on Ethereum, depending on network congestion.

The bot handles several technical steps that would otherwise require manual interaction. It automatically detects which DEX has liquidity for the token. It calculates the optimal route through liquidity pools, sometimes splitting the trade across multiple pools to reduce price impact. It sets gas parameters to prioritize transaction inclusion. On Ethereum, many bots integrate with block builders and private mempools to avoid sandwich attacks, a form of MEV (maximal extractable value) that front-runs and back-runs a user’s trade to extract profit.

Advertisement

The user interface is entirely within Telegram. Buttons replace the connect-wallet and approve-token steps of a traditional DEX. Portfolio tracking, profit and loss calculations, and token watchlists are all presented as inline messages or callback buttons within the chat.

The major Telegram trading bots

The Telegram bot landscape has consolidated around a handful of dominant platforms, each with different strengths.

Banana Gun is the highest-volume Telegram trading bot as of mid 2026. It operates on Ethereum, Solana, Base, and Blast. Banana Gun is known for its sniping capabilities: the ability to detect a new token listing and execute a buy transaction in the same block as the liquidity addition. The bot charges a 0.5% fee on manual buys and a 1% fee on snipes. Banana Gun processed more than $8 billion in cumulative trading volume in its first year of operation and has generated hundreds of millions in fee revenue, a portion of which is distributed to holders of the BANANA token.

Maestro was one of the earliest Telegram trading bots, launching on Ethereum before expanding to Solana and other chains. Maestro offers sniping, limit orders, copy trading (automatically mirroring the trades of a specified wallet), and anti-rug protection that attempts to detect and front-run liquidity removals. Its fee structure is 1% per transaction.

Advertisement

Unibot launched in mid 2023 and was among the first bots to gain significant traction. It pioneered the revenue-sharing model where a percentage of trading fees is distributed to token holders. Unibot operates primarily on Ethereum and introduced features like private transactions routed through Flashbots to protect against MEV. Trading fees are 1% for non-token-holders and 0.5% for UNIBOT holders.

BONKbot is the dominant Telegram trading bot on the Solana network. Named after the BONK memecoin community, BONKbot specializes in Solana token trading and benefits from Solana’s low transaction fees and fast confirmation times. A trade on BONKbot costs a fraction of a cent in network fees compared to several dollars on Ethereum, making it the preferred tool for high-frequency memecoin trading where traders execute dozens of small trades per day.

Trojan emerged as a competitor to BONKbot on Solana, differentiating itself through a cleaner interface and additional features such as DCA (dollar-cost averaging) orders and multi-wallet management. Trojan has grown rapidly and regularly competes with BONKbot for the top position in Solana trading volume.

Advertisement

What Telegram bots actually cost

The total cost of a Telegram bot trade includes three components: the bot fee, the DEX swap fee, and the network gas fee.

The bot fee is the primary revenue source for the bot operator. It typically ranges from 0.5% to 1% of the trade value. On a $1,000 trade, this means $5 to $10 goes to the bot.

The DEX swap fee is paid to liquidity providers on the underlying decentralized exchange. On Uniswap V3, this is typically 0.3% for established tokens and 1% for newer, lower-liquidity tokens. On Raydium (Solana), the standard fee is 0.25%.

The network gas fee varies dramatically by chain. On Ethereum, a swap transaction costs $3 to $15 depending on network congestion. On Solana, the same transaction costs less than $0.01. On Base, gas fees typically fall between $0.01 and $0.10.

Advertisement

Adding these together, a $1,000 trade on Ethereum through a Telegram bot with a 1% fee costs roughly $10 (bot fee) + $3 (DEX fee at 0.3%) + $5 to $10 (gas) = $18 to $23. The same trade on Solana costs roughly $10 (bot fee) + $2.50 (DEX fee) + $0.01 (gas) = $12.51. These costs are meaningful for small trades. A $100 trade on Ethereum through a Telegram bot loses 18% to 23% of its value to fees before any price movement occurs.

The fee economics explain why Telegram bot trading has concentrated on Solana, where the low gas costs make small, frequent trades economically viable. On Ethereum, Telegram bot trading is more practical for larger position sizes where the fixed gas cost represents a smaller percentage of the trade.

Sniping and launch trading

Sniping is the feature that originally drove adoption of Telegram trading bots. When a new token launches on a DEX, the token creator adds liquidity to a pool. The first trades against that liquidity get the lowest prices. Sniping bots monitor the blockchain for liquidity addition transactions and attempt to place a buy order in the same block.

The technical mechanics differ by chain. On Ethereum, snipers use private transaction channels such as Flashbots or MEV Blocker to submit transactions directly to block builders, bypassing the public mempool where they could be front-run. The bot must predict the exact block in which liquidity will be added and submit a transaction with sufficient gas priority to be included immediately after the liquidity transaction.

Advertisement

On Solana, sniping works differently because the network uses a leader-based block production model rather than a mempool auction. Bots connect to multiple RPC nodes and submit transactions with optimized compute budgets to maximize the probability of early inclusion. The speed competition on Solana is measured in milliseconds, and the leading bots invest heavily in infrastructure co-located with Solana validators. Some bots maintain dedicated connections to multiple validator operators, paying for priority access that shaves tens of milliseconds off submission times. The infrastructure arms race mirrors the high-frequency trading competition in traditional finance, where firms spend millions on co-location and network optimization to gain microsecond advantages.

Sniping carries substantial risk. Many new token launches are scams, rug pulls, or honeypot contracts that allow buying but prevent selling. A successful snipe on a fraudulent token results in a total loss. The anti-rug features offered by bots like Maestro attempt to simulate a sell transaction before executing the buy, checking whether the token contract allows selling. However, sophisticated scam contracts can pass these checks and then enable restrictions after a set number of blocks or a specific volume threshold.

The custody problem

The most significant risk of Telegram trading bots is the custody model. When a user creates a wallet through a Telegram bot, the bot generates the private key and stores it on its servers. The user receives the public address and sometimes can export the private key, but the bot retains a copy.

This means the bot operator has full access to every wallet created through the platform. If the bot’s servers are compromised, every user’s funds are at risk. If the bot operator decides to act maliciously, they can drain every wallet simultaneously. This is the exact opposite of the self-custody principle that decentralized finance was built to enable.

Advertisement

Several Telegram bots have experienced security incidents. In September 2023, Maestro experienced an exploit through a vulnerability in its token approval router contract, resulting in approximately $280,000 in user losses. The bot reimbursed affected users, but the incident highlighted the concentrated risk. In late 2023, Unibot experienced a contract exploit that affected users who had granted token approvals through the bot.

The practical advice for managing this risk is straightforward: treat the Telegram bot wallet as a hot wallet with limited funds. Transfer only the amount needed for immediate trading. Move profits to a hardware wallet or self-custody solution regularly. Never store a significant portion of your portfolio in a Telegram bot wallet. Some traders set a hard rule: never keep more than they can afford to lose entirely in the bot wallet.

Some newer bots have introduced partial mitigations. A few support connecting external wallets through WalletConnect, so the user retains custody of the private key and approves each transaction through their own wallet app. This approach sacrifices speed (each trade requires a manual approval step) but eliminates the custody risk. The tradeoff reflects the fundamental tension in Telegram bot trading: speed and convenience on one side, security and self-custody on the other.

The custodial risk is compounded by the lack of regulatory oversight. Traditional exchanges that hold customer funds are subject to licensing requirements, capital reserves, and regular audits. Telegram trading bots operate outside these frameworks entirely. There is no deposit insurance, no regulatory body to file complaints with, and no legal obligation for the bot operator to maintain solvency or segregate user funds. Users are trusting anonymous or pseudonymous teams with their private keys, and the only recourse in the event of a loss is whatever goodwill or reputational incentive the bot operator feels.

Advertisement

Revenue, tokens, and the bot economy

Telegram trading bots have created a new category of crypto revenue-generating businesses. The fee revenue is substantial: Banana Gun alone has generated more than $100 million in cumulative fees. Several bots have issued tokens that entitle holders to a share of the fee revenue, creating a form of equity-like exposure to the bot’s trading volume.

The token economics vary by project. Banana Gun distributes a percentage of trading fees to BANANA token holders who stake their tokens. Unibot distributes a share of fees to UNIBOT holders. The yield depends on trading volume, which is highly correlated with market sentiment. During bull markets and memecoin frenzies, daily fee revenue can spike by ten times or more. During quiet markets, revenue can drop to a fraction of peak levels.

This volume sensitivity makes Telegram bot tokens among the most volatile assets in crypto. UNIBOT rose from $3 to $200 during its initial hype cycle in 2023, then declined more than 90% before finding a lower range. BANANA experienced similar volatility. Traders who buy bot tokens are effectively making a leveraged bet on future DEX trading volume, particularly memecoin trading volume, which has historically been the most cyclical segment of the crypto market.

The competitive dynamics are intense. Bots compete on speed (fastest execution wins the sniping market), fees (lower fees attract volume-sensitive traders), features (copy trading, limit orders, DCA), and chain coverage (supporting more chains captures more trading activity). The low barriers to entry mean new bots can launch quickly, but the network effects of user adoption and the infrastructure investment required for competitive sniping speeds create meaningful advantages for established players.

Advertisement

The relationship between Telegram bots and decentralized exchange volume is symbiotic. Bots route a significant share of total DEX volume, particularly on Solana where BONKbot and Trojan together have accounted for more than 30% of all Raydium swap volume during peak memecoin periods. This makes bots a critical distribution layer for DEXs, and some DEX protocols have begun offering fee rebates or priority routing to the highest-volume bots. The arrangement benefits both sides: bots get better execution for their users, and DEXs get more volume and fees.

What this does not cover

This guide does not cover the legal and regulatory status of Telegram trading bots, which remains unclear in most jurisdictions and may evolve as regulators examine unregistered trading platforms. It does not cover the specific token contract risks of memecoin trading, including honeypot contracts, hidden mint functions, and transfer tax manipulation, which are the most common causes of loss for Telegram bot users. It does not cover the broader MEV landscape beyond its relevance to Telegram bot users, nor the technical details of Solana validator operation or Ethereum block building that underpin the sniping infrastructure.

Practical checks before using a Telegram trading bot

Check the bot’s track record. Search for past security incidents, contract exploits, or reports of fund losses. A bot that has been operating for more than 12 months without a major incident has passed a meaningful stress test, though past safety does not guarantee future safety.

Advertisement

Check the fee structure. Calculate the total cost of a round-trip trade (buy and sell) including bot fees, DEX fees, and gas on the specific chain you plan to trade. If the total cost exceeds 3% to 5% of your trade size, the fee drag will make it very difficult to trade profitably.

Check the custody model. Determine whether the bot generates and holds your private key, or whether it supports external wallet connections. If the bot holds your key, plan your fund management accordingly and never keep more in the bot wallet than you are prepared to lose.

Check the withdrawal process. Before trading, test a small withdrawal to confirm that you can move funds out of the bot wallet to an external address without delays or restrictions.

Check the bot’s social channels. Active developer communication, regular updates, and transparent incident response are positive signals. A bot with no public developer presence or communication channel is a higher risk.

Advertisement

Are Telegram trading bots legal?

The legality depends on jurisdiction. In most countries, using a bot to trade on decentralized exchanges is not explicitly prohibited, but the bots themselves may be operating as unregistered broker-dealers or money transmitters. Users should research their local regulations before using these tools.

Can I lose all my money using a Telegram trading bot?

Yes. The two most common ways to lose everything are trading a scam token (honeypot or rug pull) and a bot security breach where the private key is compromised. Limiting the funds stored in the bot wallet reduces the maximum loss from a security breach.

Which Telegram trading bot is best for beginners?

BONKbot on Solana is often recommended for beginners because Solana’s low gas fees make experimentation cheap. A failed trade on Solana costs less than a cent in gas, compared to several dollars on Ethereum. The lower cost of mistakes allows beginners to learn without significant fee-related losses.

How do Telegram trading bots make money?

Through transaction fees, typically 0.5% to 1% per trade. Some bots also earn revenue through priority transaction routing, where they charge additional fees for guaranteed fast execution during high-demand periods such as token launches.

Advertisement

Can Telegram bots protect me from rug pulls?

Some bots offer anti-rug features that simulate sell transactions before executing buys, check for blacklisting functions in the token contract, or monitor for liquidity removal events. These protections catch basic scams but cannot detect sophisticated exploits or delayed rug mechanisms. No bot can guarantee protection against all forms of token fraud.

Do I need to pay taxes on Telegram bot trades?

In most jurisdictions, yes. Each swap is a taxable event, and the high-frequency nature of Telegram bot trading can create dozens or hundreds of taxable transactions per day. Most bots do not provide tax reports, so users need to export their wallet transaction history and use third-party tax software to calculate their obligations.

What is the difference between sniping and copy trading?

Sniping targets new token launches, attempting to buy in the same block as the initial liquidity. Copy trading replicates the trades of a specified wallet address in real time. Sniping is a speed competition against other bots. Copy trading is a strategy that relies on the skill of the wallet being copied.

Can I use multiple Telegram trading bots at the same time?

Yes. Many traders use different bots for different chains or strategies. A common setup is BONKbot or Trojan for Solana memecoin trading and Banana Gun for Ethereum sniping. Each bot generates its own wallet, so funds must be distributed across multiple wallets accordingly.

Advertisement

Disclaimer

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Cryptocurrency investments carry significant risk, and you should conduct your own research before making any investment decisions. Information is accurate as of August 6, 2026.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Bezos’s $4 Billion Amazon Sale Was Scheduled Before the Earnings Beat

Published

on

Amazon rose on earnings and has fallen as Bezos announced the sale.

Jeff Bezos filed to sell 15 million Amazon shares worth $4.07 billion this week, in a sale that traces back to a trading plan he adopted eight and a half months earlier.

The filing landed a day after Amazon’s stock crossed a $3 trillion market cap on strong earnings, raising a few eyebrows as to its timing. However, the sale mechanism itself was locked in long before either milestone happened.

A Plan Set Eight Months in Advance

Bezos executed the sale through a Rule 10b5-1 trading plan. This is a pre-arranged schedule that lets corporate insiders set future stock sales in advance. The structure removes any discretion over timing once it takes effect.

He adopted this particular plan on Nov. 14, 2025, according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). That is roughly eight and a half months before the shares actually changed hands. The filing noted the shares themselves were acquired as founder stock back in 1994, three years before Amazon’s 1997 initial public offering (IPO).

Advertisement

Bezos remains one of Amazon’s largest shareholders despite the sale. He also donated 220,200 shares to nonprofit organizations in May, separate from this week’s transaction.

Bezos has sold Amazon stock through similar prearranged plans in recent years, according to the filing.

The Earnings Beat Came After the Plan Was Already Set

Amazon reported second-quarter earnings on July 31, beating expectations on cloud computing growth. That report was part of a Big Tech earnings preview published days earlier. It pushed the stock toward a record close on Monday.

Advertisement

Amazon’s market value crossed $3 trillion that same day. Bezos’s shares sold through Morgan Stanley on Monday as well, at an average price tied to that record close.

The stock then fell more than 2% on Tuesday once the filing became public. The plan itself predated that rally by months.

Amazon rose on earnings and has fallen as Bezos announced the sale.
Amazon rose on earnings and has fallen as Bezos announced the sale. Image Source: Trading View

Why the Gap Matters

Rule 10b5-1 plans exist specifically to separate an insider’s trading decisions from live market-moving news. Bezos could not have adjusted this sale’s size or date based on Amazon’s July earnings. The schedule was already fixed months in advance.

The coincidence of timing made the sale look reactive. The filing date says otherwise.

Investors watching Form 144, the SEC document insiders use to disclose planned stock sales, should weigh the adoption date first. The sale date alone can mislead.

Advertisement

The post Bezos’s $4 Billion Amazon Sale Was Scheduled Before the Earnings Beat appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Black Lake Launches Harbor Verify to Bring Verifiable Credit to Onchain Markets

Published

on

Black Lake Launches Harbor Verify to Bring Verifiable Credit to Onchain Markets


Browser-based tool lets investors and lenders cryptographically confirm that every loan in a tokenized pool belongs there and has passed eligibility rules, without seeing private borrower data Wayzata, MN — August 6, 2026 — Black Lake Digital Markets, the institutional rails for mortgage capital… Read the full story at The Defiant

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

ChatGPT AI Predicts XRP Could Be Quietly Setting Up a Big Move

Published

on

ChatGPT AI Predicts XRP Could Be Quietly Setting Up a Big Move

Whether XRP reaches $5 depends on one distinction. ChatGPT AI predicts institutions will start treating it as financial infrastructure rather than a speculative token, and that shift underpins a price prediction of $5 to $8 by the end of 2026 from $1.06.

Regulatory clarity opens the list of catalysts. Growing institutional adoption follows, with spot XRP ETF inflows pulling liquid supply off the market.

Ripple Payments usage keeps expanding. XRP Ledger activity accelerates alongside it, spanning tokenized real-world assets, AMMs, and stablecoin settlement.

RLUSD strengthens the surrounding ecosystem. Broader crypto tailwinds add lift if the majors stay strong.

Advertisement
Source: ChatGPT AI XRP Price Prediction

ChatGPT frames a conservative base case of $2 to $4. The full $5 to $8 needs ETF assets and real-world utility scaling together.

The bear argument is sharper than usual. Ripple’s enterprise growth could increasingly benefit RLUSD and fiat rails rather than XRP itself.

ETF demand is underwhelming, the second concern. On-chain utility failing to generate sustained token demand is the third.

Any of that leaves XRP range-bound around $1.50 to $3. Positive headlines would keep coming while XRP price goes nowhere.

Xrp (XRP)
24h7d30d1yAll time

Discover: Get Paid to Be Right, $25 to Start on Kalshi

Advertisement

XRP Price Prediction: Infrastructure Or Speculation, The Distinction That Decides XRP

The daily chart has offered little comfort. XRP topped above $3.20 in September and has declined almost without pause since.

October brought a violent wick down toward $1.60 before recovery. February then broke the $1.80 shelf and dropped price to roughly $1.15. Spring produced a long consolidation between $1.30 and $1.55. That floor gave way in June.

July marked the low near $1.03. Price has since chopped sideways in a tight band without reclaiming meaningful ground. The close reads $1.07050, down 0.23% and $0.00251 on the day. The session traveled from $1.05377 to $1.07584.

Advertisement

Support sits at $1.05 and then $1.03 at the July bottom. Resistance begins at $1.20, then $1.30 and $1.40. RSI reads 44.56 with the signal line just above at 44.91. The lines are nearly touching, separated by less than half a point.

That reading sits below the midline in mildly bearish territory. Momentum has flattened rather than turned.

ChatGPT is describing a market that does not exist on this chart yet. Reclaiming $1.20 would be the first sign institutions are buying the infrastructure argument.

Discover: Your Market Calls Are Worth Something. Start With Free $25 on Kalshi

Advertisement

Trade The Outcome, Not The Chart & Claim $25 For Free

Most traders express their view the only way they know how: by buying the coin. But when your opinion is about a rate decision, an inflation print, or where the market lands by year-end, spot exposure prices dozens of other things alongside it, liquidity, sentiment, unrelated flows, whatever happens overnight in a market you weren’t watching.

You can be right about the thing you actually studied and still lose money on everything else attached to the position.

Kalshi removes the attachments. It’s a CFTC-regulated exchange where you take a position on the event itself: the Fed’s next move, inflation prints, and where a coin closes the year. One question, one outcome, one settlement, resolved against a defined source.

Advertisement

Because every contract is backed by real capital, the prices work as a live read on what the market genuinely expects, which is why the odds tend to move before the headlines catch up. It’s a forecast that costs something to be wrong about.

And it does cost something. A contract that resolves against you goes to zero, and a correct call on the wrong timeline still expires worthless. Event trading rewards precision about when, not just what. Size accordingly.

The analysis above was free. What you do with it doesn’t have to be.

→ Get up to $25 to trade your first market on Kalshi

Advertisement

Don’t Miss Out on Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop on ByBit

The post ChatGPT AI Predicts XRP Could Be Quietly Setting Up a Big Move appeared first on Cryptonews.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Following Primary Loss, Crypto PACs Invest $1.5M in 3 US State Races

Published

on

Following Primary Loss, Crypto PACs Invest $1.5M in 3 US State Races

Two groups affiliated with the cryptocurrency company-backed political action committee (PAC) Fairshake disclosed spending more than $1.5 million on media to support House of Representatives and Senate candidates in Florida, Alaska and Wyoming after suffering a primary loss in Michigan on Tuesday. 

According to Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings as of Thursday, Fairshake PAC affiliates Defend American Jobs and Protect Progress spent a combined $1.5 million on ads for Republican and Democratic candidates, many of whom voted in favor of the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act while serving in Congress. 

In Alaska’s at-large congressional district, scheduled to hold a primary on Aug. 18, Defend American Jobs spent more than $500,000 on media supporting the re-election of Representative Nick Begich. The Super PAC spent about the same amount on Republican candidate Sydney Gruters in Florida’s 16th district, and Representative Harriet Hageman, running for the soon-to-be-vacant Wyoming Senate seat now occupied by Cynthia Lummis. Both US states will also hold primaries on Aug. 18.

The reported expenditures follow a primary loss for a Protect Progress-supported candidate in Michigan’s 13th Congressional District. On Tuesday, Democratic incumbent Shri Thanedar lost a primary to State Representative Donavan McKinney after the Super PAC poured more than $2 million into media supporting the former. The final day of Thanedar’s current term in Congress will be in January 2027.

Advertisement

Related: US Senate will vote on CLARITY crypto bill ‘without any question’ this week: Tim Scott

On the Democratic side, Protect Progress reported spending more than $50,000 for the re-election of Lois Frankel in Florida’s 23rd district. Frankel, Begich and Hageman all voted in favor of the GENIUS Act and CLARITY Act while serving in Congress, while Gruters did not appear to have made any public statements on crypto or blockchain, with the exception of saying she supported the crypto market structure bill in a questionnaire conducted by the advocacy organization Stand With Crypto.

The expenditures were the latest examples of Fairshake and cryptocurrency industry-aligned groups attempting to influence US elections through media. The Super PAC reported spending more than $170 million in the 2024 US election cycle on House and Senate races, potentially changing the makeup of the current Congress.

CLARITY votes to influence 2026 midterms?

While it was still uncertain as of Thursday whether the US Senate would hold a vote on the CLARITY Act before the chamber broke for a month-long recess, how lawmakers cast their ballots could affect whether the crypto industry actively supports or opposes their re-election bids. All 435 House seats are up for grabs in 2026, as are 33 seats in the US Senate.

Advertisement

In January, Stand With Crypto said that its “primary goal” in 2026 was getting crypto market structure legislation through Congress. The organization’s community director, Mason Lynaugh, told Cointelegraph in November that how lawmakers vote on the bill could impact their re-election chances. Stand With Crypto rates political candidates on a scale of “strongly supports crypto” to “strongly against crypto” depending on their voting records and public statements, which may be used by PACs and organizations deciding where to allocate funds.

Magazine: 10 weirdest things ever tokenized… including farts

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

A Senate Panel Has Voted to Hold Fauci in Contempt of Congress. What Happens Next?

Published

on

A Senate Panel Has Voted to Hold Fauci in Contempt of Congress. What Happens Next?

On Thursday, the Republican-led committee voted 8-7 along party lines to advance the contempt resolution.

Here’s what to know about what that vote means, and what might come next for Fauci. 

What does it mean to be held in contempt of Congress?

Contempt of Congress is a federal misdemeanor in which an individual willfully disobeys or impedes a congressional investigation. 

Advertisement

A contempt of Congress charge may be levied against someone if they fail to appear before a committee after being subpoenaed, refuse to produce required documents, or refuse to answer questions related to an investigation. 

Congress does not hold the power to prosecute or convict someone of the crime; instead, the House or Senate can vote to approve a resolution finding a person in contempt and refer the matter to the executive branch for prosecution.  

What comes next after the Senate committee vote?

Under Senate procedure, following a panel vote to approve a contempt resolution like the one on Thursday, the measure then heads to the full chamber for a vote. If it passes there, the case is certified and sent to the Department of Justice (DOJ). 

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Southeast Asia’s Next Growth Engine Runs on AI Infrastructure, United Overseas Bank Says

Published

on

AI infrastructure activity across Southeast Asia. Source: AI Data Center Index

Artificial intelligence (AI) has stopped being a technology story in Southeast Asia and has become an economic growth engine, according to United Overseas Bank (UOB) executives speaking at the ASEAN Conference 2026.

The opportunity lies less in adopting AI tools than in building the physical infrastructure that makes them possible.

Where the Data Center Capacity Is Going

A hyperscaler is a company that operates data centers at a massive scale, typically a cloud provider serving global computing demand. Those firms are now accelerating capacity across the region.

Malaysia has captured much of the recent growth. Thailand, Indonesia, and Vietnam are also expanding aggressively as investment spreads across the region.

Advertisement

Singapore faces different constraints entirely. Long the premium hub, it now faces land and energy constraints that have prompted spillover effects on neighboring markets.

The numbers illustrate the scale. Industry trackers show Southeast Asia already hosts dozens of AI-focused facilities with several gigawatts of operational and planned capacity.

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

AI infrastructure activity across Southeast Asia. Source: AI Data Center Index
AI infrastructure activity across Southeast Asia. Source: AI Data Center Index

Projections point sharply higher. Wood Mackenzie estimates data-center power demand could quadruple from 2.6 gigawatts in 2025 to 10.7 gigawatts by 2035.

A separate report reinforces that trajectory. The e-Conomy SEA 2025 study by Google, Temasek, and Bain estimates over 4,600 megawatts of new capacity in the pipeline. That expansion implies roughly 180% capacity growth, faster than the rest of Asia-Pacific.

Advertisement

The build-out demands more than servers and chips. Reliable power, advanced cooling, land, and robust grid connections all form essential components.

Capital requirements are correspondingly large. UOB’s Edmund Leong estimated that roughly $150 billion could flow into regional energy infrastructure over the next five years.

Adoption of AI across regions. Source: Standard Chartered

The Bottlenecks That Could Slow It Down

That figure spans multiple categories. Renewables and broader energy-transition projects both feature prominently in the projected investment. The dependency runs both ways. Without adequate energy and grid upgrades, the entire AI opportunity risks being constrained regardless of demand.

Financial institutions occupy a pivotal position. Banks with regional footprints mobilize loans, bonds, and equity while facilitating cross-border capital flows. Their role extends beyond financing. Those institutions connect developers with regulators, utilities, and telecom providers across multiple jurisdictions.

Selectivity matters considerably. Not every project proves bankable, and success depends on operators with technical expertise, committed shareholders, and long-term vision. Bottlenecks remain genuine obstacles. Power availability and semiconductor supply both constrain how quickly capacity can materialize.

Advertisement

Market dynamics offer some relief. Demand should eventually spur supply-side responses, gradually lowering costs and improving efficiency. Execution determines outcomes. Translating infrastructure investment into measurable results requires clear strategies, governance, and workforce readiness.

The potential prize justifies the attention. Southeast Asia’s digital economy should exceed $300 billion in gross merchandise value, with AI potentially adding up to $1 trillion to regional GDP by 2030.

Funding patterns reveal an interesting split. Equity concentrates in Singapore, while physical construction is dispersed, with Malaysia alone attracting tens of billions in commitments.

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

Advertisement

The post Southeast Asia’s Next Growth Engine Runs on AI Infrastructure, United Overseas Bank Says appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Ondo Finance hit by corporate control fight as founder’s mother seeks to oust CEO

Published

on

Ondo Finance hit by corporate control fight as founder’s mother seeks to oust CEO

According to the complaint, Allman appointed herself to the board, adopted an interim policy allowing ordinary business operations to continue, reaffirmed De Bode as president and requested basic corporate information, including a shareholder list, while expressing a desire to work collaboratively.

The estate said those efforts failed after De Bode and the company’s outside counsel refused to recognize her actions or provide the requested corporate records. Kathleen Allman subsequently expanded the board, appointed new directors and, at a July 24 board meeting, voted to remove De Bode from all company positions while appointing herself chair and interim CEO.

The filings characterize Kathleen Allman’s leadership as transitional rather than permanent, arguing that her objective is to stabilize governance while the board searches for Nathan Allman’s long-term successor and ensure the business continues operating without interruption.

The estate is seeking an expedited ruling because uncertainty over who controls the company could affect contracts, expenditures, equity issuances and other corporate decisions, the filings said.

Advertisement

The court has not ruled on the allegations, and the filings reflect only the estate’s version of events.

The Ondo Board of Directors said in a separate emailed statement that it “remains committed to our founder Nate Allman’s belief that onchain markets are the future of finance. We are focused on serving our community without interruption, and empowering our people to maintain our momentum, as we search for his successor.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

After Major Loss, Crypto PACs Put $1.5M Into 3 US State Races

Published

on

Crypto Breaking News

Fairshake-affiliated political action committee groups have reported fresh ad spending aimed at congressional races in several states after a loss in Michigan earlier this week, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings.

As of Thursday, Defend American Jobs and Protect Progress—two Fairshake-connected entities—disclosed more than $1.5 million combined on media advertising supporting candidates in Florida, Alaska, and Wyoming. The spending comes shortly after Protect Progress suffered a primary setback in Michigan’s 13th district, following more than $2 million in earlier advertising for the candidate who ultimately lost.

Key takeaways

  • Fairshake PAC affiliates Defend American Jobs and Protect Progress reported spending over $1.5 million on election ads in Florida, Alaska, and Wyoming, per FEC filings.
  • Alaska’s at-large district: Defend American Jobs spent more than $500,000 supporting Rep. Nick Begich ahead of a primary scheduled for Aug. 18.
  • Florida and Wyoming races were also targeted, including spending for Republican candidates running in primaries set for Aug. 18.
  • The new ad activity follows a Michigan primary loss for a Protect Progress-supported candidate, after the group spent more than $2 million earlier.
  • The spending underscores ongoing efforts by Fairshake and crypto-aligned groups to influence U.S. politics around proposed market-structure legislation.

Fairshake affiliates pivot to other primaries

Federal Election Commission disclosures show that Fairshake-linked entities Defend American Jobs and Protect Progress—cited in the FEC records as PAC affiliates—spent a combined $1.5 million on ads backing both Republican and Democratic candidates.

In Alaska’s at-large congressional district, Defend American Jobs spent more than $500,000 on media supporting the re-election of Representative Nick Begich. The filings also show roughly similar levels of advertising for GOP candidate Sydney Gruters in Florida’s 16th district and for Representative Harriet Hageman, who is running for a Wyoming Senate seat expected to be vacated by Cynthia Lummis.

Florida’s 16th district, Alaska’s at-large contest, and the Wyoming Senate race all face primaries scheduled for Aug. 18, according to the reporting described in the article.

Advertisement

Michigan loss highlights the stakes for crypto-backed advocacy

The new expenditures follow a primary loss in Michigan’s 13th Congressional District. Earlier this week, Democratic incumbent Shri Thanedar lost a primary to State Representative Donavan McKinney after Protect Progress had spent more than $2 million on media supporting Thanedar, the earlier coverage cited in the article notes. Thanedar’s current term ends in January 2027.

For crypto-aligned PAC operations, the contrast between large ad buys and outcomes in primaries is a reminder that political advertising is not a guaranteed lever—even for well-funded groups. The Michigan result also illustrates how quickly spending strategies can shift once a race turns unexpectedly.

Who received support—and how voting records factor in

On the Democratic side, Protect Progress reported spending more than $50,000 on media supporting Lois Frankel’s re-election in Florida’s 23rd district. The article states that Frankel, Begich, and Hageman all voted in favor of the GENIUS Act and CLARITY Act while serving in Congress.

By contrast, the filings discussed for Sydney Gruters did not indicate public crypto-related positions beyond participation in a questionnaire process overseen by the advocacy organization Stand With Crypto. According to the article, Gruters stated in that questionnaire that she supports the crypto market structure bill.

Advertisement

That distinction—between candidates with clear legislative voting records on one hand and candidates whose support is supported primarily by advocacy questionnaires on the other—helps explain why crypto-aligned groups may tailor messaging and funding even when the broader policy objective is the same.

Campaign spending ramps up around market-structure bills

The reported expenditures fit into a broader pattern of election-focused activity by Fairshake and groups aligned with the cryptocurrency industry. The article notes that in the 2024 election cycle, Fairshake-related spending reached more than $170 million across House and Senate races, potentially influencing the composition of the current Congress.

Just as importantly, the article frames these ad buys in the context of crypto market-structure legislation—particularly the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act—whose future congressional action could shape how industry groups approach the 2026 midterms.

While it was unclear as of Thursday whether the U.S. Senate would vote on the CLARITY Act before a month-long recess, the way lawmakers cast votes on the bill could determine whether crypto-aligned organizations actively back or oppose particular candidates ahead of re-election contests.

Advertisement

The article also points to earlier outreach from Stand With Crypto in which it described a “primary goal” for 2026: advancing crypto market structure legislation. It further notes that Stand With Crypto rates political candidates based on their record of support or opposition, using public statements and voting history—information that PACs and allied groups may rely on when deciding where to allocate resources.

What to watch next in U.S. crypto politics

With primaries on Aug. 18 and the CLARITY Act’s potential Senate vote still uncertain, investors and builders in the crypto space may want to track not only which candidates are winning races, but also how congressional voting records and public commitments evolve—since those signals may influence how aggressively Fairshake-linked groups and crypto-aligned organizations deploy funding into the 2026 election cycle.

Risk & affiliate notice: Crypto assets are volatile and capital is at risk. This article may contain affiliate links. Read full disclosure

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Robinhood Chain's DEX Volume Fell 72% While Transactions And Deposits Set Records

Published

on

Robinhood Chain's DEX Volume Fell 72% While Transactions And Deposits Set Records


Robinhood Chain's decentralized exchange volume fell 72.5% between its Jul. 11 peak and Aug. 1, but every other headline metric on the chain kept climbing through the drop. While transactions, total value locked and stablecoin supply are all at record highs, the size of the average trade collapsed…. Read the full story at The Defiant

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Bitcoin Network Warning: Developers Find Nearly 5,000 Vulnerabilities

Published

on

Severity Yield in Bitcoin Red Team Investigation

Volunteer developers filed 4,962 security findings across 390 Bitcoin projects in about 30 hours. Of the 391 codebases they reviewed, exactly one came back clean.

The group calls itself the Bitcoin Red Team. It rated 720 of those findings high or critical. Only 147 have reached the maintainers who have to fix them.

Every 1 in 7 Findings is Serious

The severity split is narrower than the raw total suggests. Reviewers logged 85 critical issues and 635 high ones.

That works out to 14.5% of everything filed. The rest sit in medium, low, or informational buckets. Another 246 findings carry no severity label at all.

Advertisement
Severity Yield in Bitcoin Red Team Investigation
Severity Yield in Bitcoin Red Team Investigation. Source: Open-Source Developer Calle on X

Evidence quality varies too. About 21.4% came with working proof-of-concept code. Roughly 91% arrived through automated scanning. Reviewers retired just eight as false positives.

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

One Hour Produced 83% of the Findings

The 30-hour framing needs a caveat. A single hour absorbed 4,101 findings. That spike was a backfill, not live scanning. Rob Hamilton, chief executive of Bitcoin insurer AnchorWatch, ran his own review before the campaign formally began.

He said he spent over $10,000 scanning more than 100 libraries.

Advertisement

Strip the dump out, and the pace changes sharply. Roughly 840 findings were received over the other 29 hours. That is closer to 29 an hour than the 166.3 the report advertises.

The Data Points Away From Hardware Wallets

The category breakdown carries a surprise. Hardware wallets and firmware, the group Coldcard belongs to, ranked second lowest for serious flaws at 9.6%.

Other corners fared worse. Mining pools hit 21.7%, infrastructure and tooling 21.5%, and swaps and exchanges 20.9%. Privacy tools topped the table at 24%, though reviewers covered only three of them.

Advertisement

Crypto libraries carried the volume instead. They produced 1,385 findings across 128 projects, more than a quarter of the corpus.

Calle, the pseudonymous physicist who created the Cashu ecash protocol, said maintainers are confirming the worst reports.

Most of the critical reports we’ve made so far were quickly verified by project owners. We know we’re hitting real targets,” they wrote.

Why the Red Team Formed After Coldcard

The sweep began because of one broken chip. Coinkite disclosed on July 30 that seed generation on affected Coldcard devices fell back to a predictable software routine.

The shortfall was severe. Only 32 bits came from the secure element, capping an attacker’s search at about 4.3 billion guesses.

Advertisement

Galaxy Research pegged confirmed thefts at 1,596 Bitcoin (BTC) from roughly 7,300 addresses on Aug. 4. A suspected fourth attack wave would bring the total to nearly $130 million. Galaxy stresses its address list is not definitive.

The panic showed up on-chain, where active addresses spiked to a 20-month high. Korean holders largely escaped because dice-based seeds are common there.

Weak randomness keeps returning in Bitcoin, however. The 2023 Milk Sad bug seeded Libbitcoin Explorer keys from 32 bits of clock time. In May, the Ill Bloom vulnerability drained $5.7 million from wallets built on a weak JavaScript generator.

Advertisement

Funding Follows the Findings

OpenSats, a nonprofit that funds Bitcoin development, launched a Code RED grant track on Thursday. It pays researchers who disclose flaws. It also refunds the artificial intelligence (AI) bills the work runs up.

Meanwhile, Bitcoin traded near $64,396 on Thursday, up 0.5% over 24 hours. The audit has not moved the market.

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

Context still matters for the raw number. These are findings, not confirmed exploits, and most will never be weaponized.

On the evidence so far, though, Coldcard was not an isolated failure. The data also suggests the next one will not be a hardware wallet.

The post Bitcoin Network Warning: Developers Find Nearly 5,000 Vulnerabilities appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025