Spot bitcoin ETFs are yet to see outflows this month, bringing in $754 million in the first week of August. Yet, bitcoin remains steady at $64,700, while options flow favors protection at $62,000 and $63,000.

The opposing signals point to a market with a spot bid but limited conviction. ETF demand has seemingly returned, but derivatives traders are guarding against a retreat ahead of today’s U.S. jobs report.

The options market adds another layer. Put options, giving holders the right but not the obligation to sell, accounted for 53.8% of bitcoin options volume over the past 24 hours, and three of the four most-traded contracts were puts at $62,000 or $63,000 expiring Aug. 10, Aug. 14 and Aug. 28, CoinGlass data shows.

Calls still represent 60.7% of total open interest, showing that the broader options market remains tilted toward calls even as recent trading focuses on downside puts.

Protection is also cheap. Deribit’s DVOL index, which tracks bitcoin’s expected 30-day volatility, is near 35, down from a high of 90 earlier this year. That implied volatility tracks the market’s pricing of future movements, implying not much is expected to happen in the near future.

German Bitcoin developer René Pickhardt said on Aug. 6 that fears about self-custody security and key management kept him from accumulating more Bitcoin, despite believing the asset had upside. 

In a post, Pickhardt wrote that “security & key management always freaked me out,” framing his decision as a risk-management choice rather than a criticism of Bitcoin.

His remarks landed after the Coldcard hardware-wallet incident renewed scrutiny of how self-custody tools generate private keys. Security research linked vulnerable Coldcard firmware to predictable seed generation, while on-chain analysis cited by Galaxy Research estimated roughly 1,755 BTC had been stolen across several attack waves. The loss total remains under investigation.

Coldcard failure puts Bitcoin key generation under scrutiny

The Coldcard issue involved randomness used when generating wallet seeds, not a failure of the Bitcoin protocol. Block’s Bitcoin security researchers found that certain firmware configurations could bypass hardware randomness and fall back to weaker software-generated entropy. That reduced the unpredictability of some seed phrases and potentially allowed attackers to reconstruct private keys without physically possessing the device.

Coinkite acknowledged the firmware problem and released patched software. However, the company warned that installing new firmware does not repair a seed created under vulnerable conditions. Users with affected seeds must generate a new one securely and move funds on-chain. Reports citing Galaxy Research put one July 30 theft wave above 1,000 BTC, with subsequent attacks lifting estimated losses.

The episode illustrates the distinction explained in our self-custody guide: controlling private keys removes exchange counterparty risk, but transfers responsibility for key generation, backup and recovery to the owner. Hardware wallets reduce online attack surfaces, yet depend on firmware, hardware design and secure randomness.

Pickhardt says security concerns outweighed Bitcoin upside

Pickhardt has worked extensively on Lightning Network routing and payment reliability, and Bitcoin Optech identifies him as a Lightning developer and researcher with OpenSats. His 2026 paper includes a mathematical framework for payment-channel networks focused on liquidity and off-chain throughput.

Against that background, his admission drew attention because technical familiarity did not eliminate his custody concerns. Pickhardt said even correctly generated private keys face risks involving storage, implementation mistakes and future advances in computing. Those concerns do not mean properly implemented self-custody is inherently unsafe; they describe the operational burden individual holders accept.

Blockstream CEO Adam Back responded that “with great bearer cash power comes great responsibility to not lose your keys.” The response captures the trade-off: Bitcoin allows holders to control assets without a bank, but no central institution can reset a lost private key or reverse an unauthorized valid transaction.

Coldcard losses sharpen the self-custody debate

Recent wallet security incidents give that debate context. Cinco Días, citing Galaxy Research, reported that roughly 1,755 BTC had been stolen from about 5,000 wallets across several waves. Earlier Galaxy estimates were lower, and Coinkite has said the full attribution and scope remain unresolved, so the figure should be treated as an evolving on-chain estimate rather than a final confirmed loss.

The failure also does not show that every hardware wallet faces the same flaw. Block said its products were unaffected, while other manufacturers have separately explained their entropy-generation designs. The vulnerability followed affected seed phrases even if users imported them into another wallet, meaning changing hardware without creating new keys would not remove the underlying exposure.

Our seed phrase security guide explains why the recovery phrase is effectively the master key to a wallet. If generation is weak, offline storage cannot restore the missing entropy afterward. The Coldcard case therefore shifts attention from simply hiding a seed toward verifying how securely it was created.

What Bitcoin holders should watch next

Coinkite’s investigation, blockchain tracing and any law-enforcement findings will determine the final scale of the Coldcard losses. Users who created seeds on affected firmware should follow the manufacturer’s remediation guidance rather than assume a firmware update alone fixes an existing wallet.

For the broader Bitcoin market, Pickhardt’s comments are anecdotal and do not establish that self-custody fears are suppressing adoption. Still, the episode shows why usability and security remain linked. As hardware wallets become easier to buy, manufacturers face pressure to make key management both verifiable and understandable.

Pickhardt’s decision shows that conviction in Bitcoin’s monetary thesis does not automatically translate into comfort with bearer-asset security. Self-custody removes one class of intermediary risk while creating another set of responsibilities. The Coldcard failure has made that trade-off harder to dismiss, especially for holders deciding whether direct ownership outweighs the operational burden of securing keys themselves.

Rodolfo Novak (NVK), co-founder of Coldcard maker Coinkite, is deleting posts from his social media. Some people think Coinkite has also deleted recently content from its website.

The apparent elimination of these historical artifacts is concerning amid the ongoing theft of BTC from Coldcard customers. 

For over five years, Coldcard hardware wallets generated private keys for customers with insufficient entropy. Since hackers discovered and began exploiting that vulnerability last week, they’ve drained over $130 million from victims.

The thefts continue as they crack insecure private keys using brute force computation.

For whatever reason, NVK has decided to remove certain pieces of content that he published over those five years.

Take, for example, in November 2024, when NVK wrote that a knockoff of his company’s Blockclock might be “a back door into peoples home network.” That post now resolves to an X error page. It went dark this week.

Bitcoin developer Peter Todd caught that deletion. On August 5, Todd posted the screenshot of the original post. “Deleted recently enough it seems it was still in my phone’s cache,” Todd explained.

The U.S. labor market showed weakness for the second consecutive month in July, possibly giving the Federal Reserve room to hold rates in place despite high inflation.

According to the government’s Nonfarm Payrolls Report released Friday morning, the U.S. lost 23,000 jobs last month. That was far below the consensus expectation of a gain of 80,000 jobs, and down from June’s add of 20,000 (revised down from an originally reported 57,000).

The last negative jobs print was in February, when the U.S. lost 156,000 jobs.

The unemployment rate dipped to 4.1%, compared with the expected 4.2% and June’s 4.2%.

Market reaction is swift, with U.S. stock index futures gaining and interest rates dipping. There’s little action in crypto, with bitcoin remaining modestly higher on the session at $65,000.

Ahead of this morning’s data, markets were split on whether the Fed would hike rates at its next policy meeting in September. According to CME FedWatch, interest rate traders were pricing in a 55% chance the U.S. central bank would tighten next month. In the immediate aftermath of the print, that number has slipped back to 46%.

Cointelegraph is committed to providing independent, high-quality journalism across the crypto, blockchain, AI, and fintech industries.

All news, reviews, and analyses are produced with full journalistic independence and integrity. For more details on our standards and processes, please read our Editorial Policy.

US lawmakers have pushed back a vote on major crypto market-structure legislation, extending a period of regulatory uncertainty for institutions that need clearer rules on trading, custody, and oversight. The delay, confirmed by U.S. Senator John Thune’s office to Cointelegraph, means the bill will not be considered before the August recess, with Thune’s team describing it as a priority for September.

Industry leaders say the postponement could reshape competitive dynamics outside the United States. First Digital founder and CEO Vincent Chok, whose firm issues the FDUSD stablecoin, argued that jurisdictions with clearer frameworks—particularly in Asia—could use the additional time to attract capital and talent as US uncertainty weighs on institutional adoption.

Key takeaways

• Senator John Thune’s office confirmed the US Senate will not vote on the crypto market-structure legislation before the August recess, pointing to September as the next window.
• First Digital CEO Vincent Chok said prolonged regulatory uncertainty is harder for markets to adapt to than slower timelines.
• 1inch’s deputy general counsel warned that a failure to enact the legislation could lead back to “regulation by enforcement,” leaving firms reliant on agency interpretations and case-by-case action.
• The EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) is already in force, creating a contrasting regulatory timeline compared with the US.
• Some commentators interpret the delay as a political outcome that may further incentivize development “offshore” while US rules remain unsettled.

Senate delay extends uncertainty for institutional crypto

According to confirmation from Thune’s office to Cointelegraph, the Senate will not bring the bill to a vote before the August recess. Thune reportedly cited Democratic opposition, and said the legislation would be a priority when senators return in September.

While a delayed vote can be normal in legislative calendars, Chok’s concern was specific: for market participants, the most damaging factor is not simply a slower process but extended ambiguity. In a statement shared with Cointelegraph, he said that “markets can adapt to slower timelines,” but “what they struggle with is prolonged uncertainty.”

Chok tied the issue directly to institutional readiness. Without clear market-structure rules, he argued, institutions are left without dependable guidance on topics that are central to mainstream adoption—especially market design, custody practices, and regulatory oversight.

“Regulation by enforcement” risk and fragmented rules in the US

Maylea Ma, deputy general counsel at decentralized exchange aggregator 1inch, emphasized what changes if Congress does not pass the legislation. In her view, the industry could move toward a familiar pattern: “regulation by enforcement.”

Ma said that in such a scenario, firms would remain dependent on how regulators interpret rules and enforce them on a case-by-case basis. She also pointed to a fragmented US landscape, where companies may have to navigate overlapping state-level money transmitter requirements alongside securities-law interpretations that can vary by jurisdiction and enforcement posture.

That uncertainty is particularly consequential for institutional participants, which generally require more predictable compliance expectations before scaling operations, offering services, or integrating crypto infrastructure into broader financial workflows.

Asia’s window to demonstrate “clear regulation and innovation” together

Chok suggested the delay could strengthen the relative attractiveness of global hubs that have already pursued clearer regulatory positioning. He said that for Asia, postponement provides additional time for hubs such as Hong Kong and Singapore to show that regulatory clarity can coexist with continued innovation.

His underlying thesis is that capital allocation and talent decisions often respond quickly to regulatory risk. When US timelines are uncertain, institutions looking for stability may favor venues where rulemaking appears more settled—even if US legislation eventually arrives.

In that sense, the Senate’s procedural shift may have strategic consequences beyond the US market itself. The longer the pause continues, the more companies may build or expand operations in jurisdictions perceived to offer a smoother compliance path.

EU MiCA already in force, highlighting a widening timeline gap

Ma contrasted the US situation with Europe, pointing out that the European Union’s MiCA framework is already operational. She noted that MiCA is “already in force,” referencing Cointelegraph’s earlier coverage on the end of a grace period and the issuance of relevant licenses.

Under that backdrop, Ma said 1inch would continue operating with a conservative, non-custodial approach that focuses on self-custody. The key point is not that MiCA removes all complexity, but that it provides a structured regulatory timeline that companies can plan around—while the US remains tied to legislative and enforcement uncertainty.

For readers, the practical implication is that compliance planning may increasingly look “regional.” Businesses could find that their roadmaps are governed less by global principles and more by where regulatory frameworks are already active.

Political framing: ambiguity as a driver of offshore innovation

Not all reactions were confined to legal mechanics. Wellington-Altus chief market strategist James E. Thorne offered a more politically pointed interpretation, posting on X that he viewed the postponement as a “fold” by Thune and a victory for Senator Elizabeth Warren and the regulatory status quo. His argument was that continued ambiguity encourages innovation to move offshore while other jurisdictions develop clearer regimes.

While Thorne’s remarks are political rather than technical, they align with a broader market reality: regulatory uncertainty can influence where teams incorporate, where products launch, and which markets institutions consider first—especially when compliance staff need more than verbal assurances to manage risk.

As the Senate returns in September, the key question for the crypto sector is whether the legislation can clear remaining procedural hurdles—or whether the industry is pushed further into a cycle of enforcement-driven precedent. Either outcome will likely determine how quickly institutions feel comfortable moving from experimentation to scaled adoption, and it may continue shaping where global crypto activity concentrates.