Crypto World
Brent at $94.57 as Hormuz Freezes
The crude oil price benchmark Brent reached $94.57 per barrel Monday morning, up more than 5% from Friday’s close, as CNBC reported that Kpler maritime data recorded essentially zero tanker crossings of the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday, with shipping advisory firm Ambrey telling all vessels to abort any planned transit immediately upon receiving an Iranian VHF warning.
Summary
- WTI crude rose 5.6% to $88.54 per barrel, fully reversing Friday’s 9% drop that had followed Iran’s brief announcement that the strait was completely open.
- Kpler showed no oil tankers crossing the strait Sunday, while Windward counted at least 13 vessels that turned back Saturday when Iran reimposed restrictions.
- ADNOC CEO Sultan Al Jaber put the cumulative supply loss at nearly 600 million barrels blocked over approximately 50 days, a figure that does not normalize quickly under any short-term ceasefire.
The crude oil price benchmark Brent is pricing a near worst-case scenario on Monday: a strait effectively closed for nearly 50 days, a ceasefire expiring Wednesday, no Iranian delegation confirmed for Pakistan talks, and a US seizure of an Iranian vessel the IRGC has promised to retaliate against. WTI crude at $88.54 reflects a global energy picture in which 10 to 11 million barrels per day of supply remains blocked.
“Markets are trading in a world where there is plenty of spin, statements, and speculation, but very little information of substance,” UBS Global Wealth Management chief economist Paul Donovan wrote in a Monday morning note. He described the reversal from Friday’s 9% fall to Monday’s 5% recovery as driven entirely by diplomatic signals rather than any change in physical supply conditions.
Shipping advisory firm Ambrey issued guidance Monday telling vessels to abort any planned Hormuz transit immediately on receiving VHF warnings from Iranian forces, effectively advising commercial operators to treat the strait as closed until further notice.
The Kpler figure of near-zero tanker crossings Sunday is the clearest indicator that the physical market remains severely disrupted regardless of diplomatic statements. Windward counted at least 13 vessels that turned back Saturday when Iran declared the strait closed again after the IRGC fired on two India-flagged vessels attempting to transit.
The brief Friday window of vessel movement reflected genuine commercial pent-up demand from weeks of closure and represents the entire operational achievement of the ceasefire: one day of elevated transit activity before the IRGC resumed firing. Oil market participants have made clear they require sustained certainty of safe passage before normalizing tanker operations. One day of traffic followed by renewed attacks does not meet that threshold.
ADNOC CEO Sultan Al Jaber called for Hormuz to be returned to the world “exactly as it was,” noting that almost 600 million barrels had been blocked over 50 days. That cumulative figure represents roughly six days of total global oil consumption and cannot be recovered by any single diplomatic announcement.
Why Brent Remains Below Its War Peak
Brent at $94.57 is well below the $114 to $166 range it reached at the height of the conflict in March. Several factors have moderated the price from those extremes. The IEA coordinated a release of 400 million barrels from emergency reserves in mid-March, representing approximately four days of global consumption. The US temporarily suspended its embargo on 30 Russia-linked petroleum tankers, adding supply from an alternative channel. China entered the conflict with substantial strategic reserves, providing a buffer for the world’s largest oil importer.
The result is a market priced for a sustained partial closure rather than a complete and permanent catastrophe. Every credible diplomatic signal drives Brent lower. Every escalation pushes crude toward the $100 level that analysts identify as the threshold above which global growth assumptions begin to shift materially. Monday’s $94.57 sits in the middle of that range, reflecting neither resolution nor full escalation.
What the Crude Oil Price Level Means for Crypto
For oil bitcoin market dynamics, Brent at $94.57 puts crude in the range where energy inflation expectations most directly suppress Federal Reserve rate cut prospects, removing the key macro tailwind that institutional Bitcoin demand has been pricing in through 2026. Every week oil holds above $90 extends the period in which that tailwind is absent.
The Hormuz tollbooth model Iran briefly operated during the ceasefire, charging tankers one dollar per barrel in Bitcoin, created a structural demand narrative for BTC that partially offset the macro risk-off pressure: if oil transactions could be denominated in crypto, the asset gained a functional role in global energy settlement. That narrative disappears entirely when the strait is fully closed with no toll system in operation, which is where Monday’s market finds itself.
Singapore’s OCBC has rolled out GOLDX, a tokenized on-chain fund that provides exposure to the LionGlobal Singapore Physical Gold Fund. The token, issued on Ethereum and Solana, targets institutional investors, hedge funds and asset managers, and can be bought with stablecoins or fiat. After subscription, the fund’s shares are delivered directly to investors’ blockchain wallets. OCBC describes the move as a milestone in its blockchain-focused strategy and a step toward bridging traditional finance with decentralized finance.
Industry data tracked by rwa.xyz shows tokenized real-world assets on public blockchains reaching a value of more than $29 billion, having risen more than 10% in the past 30 days. The broader trend underscores growing interest in on-chain access to traditional assets such as gold, real estate, and commodities.
Key takeaways
- The GOLDX token provides on-chain exposure to the LionGlobal Singapore Physical Gold Fund and is issued on Ethereum and Solana, signaling a multi-chain approach to tokenized assets for institutions.
- Investors can acquire GOLDX using stablecoins or fiat, with on-chain delivery of the tokenized fund’s exposure to their wallets after subscription.
- OCBC notes the underlying fund had about US$525 million (S$669 million) in assets under management as of April 16, according to the bank’s disclosures, highlighting the scale of the tokenized fund itself.
- OCBC’s broader footprint includes total assets estimated at about US$526 billion as of December 2025, reflecting the bank’s ongoing experimentation with blockchain-enabled financial products since its 2023 tokenized equity-linked note for accredited investors.
- Tokenized real-world assets on public blockchains are valued at over US$29 billion, up more than 10% in the last month, according to rwa.xyz, signaling sustained demand for on-chain access to traditional assets.
GOLDX: On-chain exposure to a physical gold fund
The GOLDX token is tied to the LionGlobal Singapore Physical Gold Fund, which OCBC says launched in December and has attracted institutional interest as a way to gain on-chain exposure to physical gold without the friction of traditional custody arrangements. The underlying fund’s on-chain representation is designed to appeal to Web3 ecosystem participants and high-net-worth individuals who operate within blockchain and crypto markets, according to OCBC.
OCBC’s asset management arm collaborated with Lion Global Investors and digital-asset exchange DigiFT to bring GOLDX to market. The token’s utility lies in enabling institutions to access a tangible gold reserve via a blockchain-native instrument, while settlement and ownership records run on-chain. Kenneth Lai, head of global markets at OCBC, framed the move as part of a broader corporate strategy to integrate digital assets into mainstream financial services. He said, “We believe digital assets will play an increasingly important role in financial services and our focus is on bridging traditional finance with the emerging world of decentralized finance.”
As a sign of the fund’s scale, the LionGlobal Singapore Physical Gold Fund reportedly held around US$525 million in assets as of April 16, with OCBC citing an asset base of roughly US$526 billion for the bank group as a whole in its December 2025 disclosures. The GOLDX rollout follows OCBC’s earlier experiments with tokenized investment products, including a 2023 tokenized equity-linked note issued to accredited investors, showcasing a continuing push into tokenized finance.
A broader trend: tokenized assets expanding on public blockchains
The emergence of GOLDX sits within a wider market dynamic where tokenized real-world assets are increasingly being represented on public networks. rwa.xyz tracks the sector and notes the total value of tokenized assets on public blockchains has surpassed $29 billion, with gains of more than 10% over a 30-day window. For traditional banks and asset managers, this trend offers a pathway to new liquidity channels and broader investor access, albeit with ongoing questions about custody, settlement reliability, and regulatory alignment.
OCBC’s approach with GOLDX reflects a deliberate strategy to blend regulated, traditional assets with blockchain-enabled delivery and settlement. By tying a token to a regulated gold fund and enabling on-chain trading and settlement, OCBC signals a willingness to experiment with tokenized structures that could scale if liquidity and custody arrangements meet institutional standards. The bank’s leadership has repeatedly emphasized the potential for digital assets to complement conventional finance, rather than replace it, as part of a gradual, standards-driven evolution of the sector.
For investors and builders, the GOLDX launch highlights a practical pathway for on-chain access to regulated, physical assets. It also underscores the importance of cross-chain compatibility, given the token’s presence on both Ethereum and Solana, two ecosystems with distinct liquidity profiles and security models. If GOLDX and similar instruments can demonstrate robust on-chain settlement, low friction, and clear regulatory guardrails, they could become a template for broader institutional adoption of tokenized funds in Southeast Asia and beyond.
As the market monitors this development, questions remain about scale, long-term liquidity, and how regulatory regimes will shape tokenized product design. Observers will be watching for updates on the GOLDX program, potential expansions to other asset classes, and how OCBC continues to balance its traditional banking operations with a growing portfolio of blockchain-based offerings.
Looking ahead, the pace of adoption will hinge on how well tokenized funds deliver transparent on-chain custody, reliable settlement, and standardized disclosures that satisfy institutional due diligence. Regulatory clarity—particularly around tokenized securities and on-chain fund structures—will play a decisive role in shaping the trajectory of OCBC’s blockchain initiatives and the broader market for tokenized real-world assets.
Key Highlights
- Ripple has introduced a comprehensive four-stage strategy to fortify the XRP Ledger against quantum computing risks by 2028
- The initial stage features a contingency “Q-Day” protocol designed to mandate immediate transition to quantum-secure accounts
- The second stage is currently active, with comprehensive security evaluation scheduled for completion by mid-2026
- Strategic collaboration with quantum defense specialist Project Eleven is enhancing development speed
- XRP Ledger benefits from built-in capabilities like key rotation and deterministic key generation
Ripple has released a comprehensive blueprint designed to shield the XRP Ledger from emerging quantum computing vulnerabilities. The strategic initiative encompasses four distinct stages with a completion target of 2028.
This strategic disclosure follows Google’s recent alert that quantum systems might compromise Bitcoin security with considerably less computational capacity than earlier projections suggested. Industry experts are now identifying 2029 as the potential “Q-Day” — the critical moment when quantum technology could successfully break existing cryptographic safeguards.
XRP presently holds the position as the fourth-largest cryptocurrency based on total market capitalization. According to Ripple, while the quantum risk to XRPL is genuine, it remains addressable through proper advance planning.
Whenever an XRPL account executes a transaction, the corresponding public key gets recorded on the distributed ledger. A sufficiently powerful quantum system could potentially exploit this exposed information to derive the associated private key and compromise account holdings.
Long-established accounts with extensive transaction histories face the greatest vulnerability. The extended period a public key remains visible on-chain creates additional opportunities for future quantum-based exploitation.
Stage One: Crisis Response Protocol
The opening phase functions as a contingency mechanism. Should quantum computing capabilities emerge ahead of projections, Ripple would implement a mandatory network-wide transition — traditional public-key cryptographic signatures would cease to be validated.
Account holders would need to transfer their assets to quantum-protected accounts. Ripple is investigating zero-knowledge proof technologies that would enable users to authenticate ownership of current keys without revealing sensitive information.
This approach ensures that holders maintain access to their holdings even under emergency circumstances, preventing permanent account lockouts.
Development and System Integration
Stage two is presently underway with anticipated completion during early 2026. Ripple’s cryptographic engineering division is executing a thorough security audit throughout the entire network while evaluating protective measures endorsed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Ripple has established a collaborative partnership with quantum security research organization Project Eleven for validator-level evaluations and preliminary custody wallet development.
Post-quantum cryptographic systems introduce certain challenges. Expanded key sizes and signature dimensions can create additional demands on ledger resources, requiring the team to evaluate necessary architectural modifications.
Stage three is scheduled for late 2026. Ripple will start deploying quantum-resistant cryptographic signatures in parallel with current implementations on its development testing environment, enabling developers to validate new cryptographic approaches without impacting the production network.
Stage four represents the complete ecosystem transformation, planned for 2028. Ripple will submit a formal amendment proposal to the XRP Ledger community for native post-quantum cryptographic integration and initiate comprehensive network migration to quantum-resistant signature protocols.
Ripple emphasizes that XRPL possesses certain inherent strategic advantages. The platform supports native key rotation functionality, allowing users to replace compromised private keys while preserving their account identity. Its seed-based key generation mechanism also facilitates deterministic creation of new cryptographic keys.
Ripple engineer Ayo Akinyele clarified that while these capabilities don’t constitute complete post-quantum solutions, they establish a robust framework for future development. Project Eleven is presently developing a proof-of-concept hybrid post-quantum signature system specifically designed for the XRP Ledger infrastructure.
OCBC has rolled out a tokenized physical gold fund, bringing real-world asset exposure on-chain for institutional investors.
Summary
- OCBC launched the GOLDX token on Ethereum and Solana, offering institutional investors access to a tokenized physical gold fund.
- The token provides exposure to the LionGlobal Singapore Physical Gold Fund, which held about $525 million in assets as of mid-April.
- The move comes as tokenized real-world assets on public blockchains cross $29 billion, with major banks expanding into blockchain-based financial products.
OCBC said the product was launched in partnership with Lion Global Investors and digital asset exchange DigiFT, with the GOLDX token issued on both the Ethereum and Solana blockchains. The bank stated that the token can be subscribed to using either fiat or stablecoins, with allocations delivered directly to investors’ blockchain wallets after purchase.
Institutional participation remains the core focus, with the offering designed for hedge funds, asset managers, and other large investors seeking exposure to gold through blockchain-based infrastructure. The move places OCBC among a growing list of global banks that are moving regulated financial products on-chain.
“We believe digital assets will play an increasingly important role in financial services and our focus is on bridging traditional finance with the emerging world of decentralized finance,” Kenneth Lai, head of global markets at OCBC, said in an accompanying statement.
GOLDX provides on-chain exposure to the LionGlobal Singapore Physical Gold Fund, a vehicle launched in December that held around $525 million in assets under management as of April 16. The structure allows investors to access physically backed gold without relying on traditional settlement systems, while still maintaining a link to real-world reserves.
Interest in tokenized real-world assets has accelerated through 2026, with total value on public blockchains rising above $29 billion, marking a gain of more than 10% over the past month, according to rwa.xyz data. Gold-linked products have emerged as one of the segments drawing institutional attention, particularly as geopolitical tensions and currency concerns sustain demand for safe-haven assets.
OCBC’s latest move builds on earlier blockchain experiments, including a tokenized equity-linked note introduced for accredited investors in 2023. The bank reported total assets of about $526 billion as of December 2025, positioning it among Southeast Asia’s largest financial institutions adopting tokenization.
Large banks have been moving in a similar direction. In December 2025, JPMorgan launched a $100 million tokenized money market fund on the Ethereum mainnet via its Kinexys platform, targeting institutional cash management with near-real-time settlement. The initiative marked a step away from permissioned systems toward public blockchain infrastructure for regulated products.
Tokenized gold has also taken different forms across the market. As covered on crypto.news before, Standard Chartered-backed Libeara introduced the MG 999 fund in Singapore, offering synthetic exposure to gold rather than holding physical bullion, while combining the structure with lending to jewelry retailers.
OCBC’s approach leans on physical backing, aligning more closely with traditional fund structures while using blockchain rails for distribution and settlement. The bank said that the product is intended to attract participants from both conventional finance and crypto-native environments, particularly high-net-worth individuals and firms already operating within digital asset ecosystems.
A US senator has reportedly urged Senate Banking Chair Tim Scott to delay the markup for the crypto market structure bill until May, as banking and crypto representatives need more time to resolve disagreements over stablecoin yield provisions.
US Republican Thom Tillis of North Carolina told reporters Monday that he does not expect the Senate Banking Committee to mark up the legislation, also known as the CLARITY Act, in April and has recommended that Scott schedule it for next month, according to Punchbowl News.
Tillis, who has been leading discussions between crypto and banking members, reportedly told Scott: “It’s very important to me not to accelerate things, to hear everybody, and give them a rational basis for what we do accept.”
Continued delays have sparked concern that the CLARITY Act may not pass before the US midterms in November, an event that US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said could reverse momentum of the bill.
“I think if the Democrats were to take the House, which is far from my best case, then the prospects of getting a deal done will just fall apart,” Bessent said in March.
CLARITY Act cannot wait any longer, crypto group says
It comes the same day crypto advocacy group The Digital Chamber sent a letter to the Senate Banking Committee asking it to move the crypto market structure legislation forward to a Senate markup “as soon as the calendar allows.”
Related: Bessent ramps up pressure on Congress to pass CLARITY Act
The banking industry has raised concerns that allowing stablecoin yield could trigger significant deposit outflows from the traditional banking system, particularly at community banks.
It argues that those banks may not have enough balance-sheet flexibility to absorb such outflows without relying on higher-cost wholesale funding.
Meanwhile, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong and others have pushed for more favorable stablecoin provisions.
Last month, members of the banking and crypto industries were reportedly close to agreeing on enabling stablecoin rewards tied to crypto activity on third-party crypto platforms, but not for passive balances.
The Digital Chamber noted that it has now been more than 270 days since the House passed the CLARITY Act with bipartisan support.
“Clarity cannot wait,” The Digital Chamber’s government affairs director, Taylor Barr, said, adding: “More than 70 million Americans who have embraced digital assets deserve the regulatory clarity they have waited far too long for.”
Other members of the crypto industry have argued that moving the bill forward is more important than holding out for perfect terms.
Coin Center has stepped up its defence of crypto developers, arguing that publishing software code should be treated as protected speech under the U.S. Constitution.
Summary
- Coin Center says publishing crypto software code should be treated as protected speech under the U.S. Constitution.
- The report draws a clear line between writing code and actions like handling user funds or executing transactions on behalf of users.
According to a report released Monday by Coin Center, Executive Director Peter Van Valkenburgh and Director of Research Lizandro Pieper said writing and sharing crypto code is no different from publishing a book or a recipe, placing it squarely within First Amendment protections.
Their paper arrives at a time when developers are facing growing legal pressure over how their tools are used, including high-profile criminal cases tied to privacy software and decentralized applications.
Coin Center’s report sets out to draw a clear line between protected speech and actions that regulators can oversee, arguing that not all developer activity should be treated the same.
“Lower court confusion over the distinction between conduct and speech naturally found in software publishing has fueled the development of what might be called a functional code theory of diminished First Amendment protection,” the authors wrote.
Courts have at times taken the view that software behaves like conduct because it can produce real-world outcomes. Coin Center pushed back on that idea.
“Some courts have suggested that because software can be executed to produce real-world effects, it resembles conduct rather than speech.”
“We argue that such activities are pure speech and that the Supreme Court’s existing jurisprudence insists on this interpretation even if some lower courts have gone astray.”
The group said a developer moves into regulatable territory only when taking direct control over user funds, executing transactions on behalf of users, or making decisions for them. Publishing and maintaining code alone, it argued, should not trigger licensing or compliance obligations.
“They are speakers and inventors, not agents, custodians, or fiduciaries. Extending pre-registration or licensing requirements to this speech activity drops the historical logic of financial oversight and imposes a classic prior restraint on activities that are primarily speech and expression—which is almost always unconstitutional.”
Legal pressure builds around crypto developers
Coin Center pointed to recent prosecutions as a sign that courts and regulators are still grappling with how to apply existing law to decentralized technology.
Roman Storm, a developer linked to the Tornado Cash protocol, was convicted last year on charges tied to operating an unlicensed money-transmitting business. His legal team has since sought dismissal, citing Supreme Court precedent, including Cox Communications Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment, to argue he lacked intent to participate in criminal activity.
Developers behind Samourai Wallet, a privacy-focused Bitcoin wallet, were also convicted on similar charges and received prison sentences ranging from four to five years.
Those cases have raised concerns across the industry that writing open-source code could expose developers to liability based on how third parties use it.
First Amendment framework takes center stage
Coin Center grounded its argument in long-standing legal precedent, including the 1985 Supreme Court decision in Lowe v. SEC, which held that publishing information without managing client assets or acting on their behalf falls under protected speech rather than regulated financial activity.
Traditional financial rules were built around intermediaries that hold or move funds for users. Crypto systems often remove those roles, allowing peer-to-peer transfers and self-custody without centralized control.
Van Valkenburgh and Pieper argued that applying intermediary-style regulation to developers for “administrative convenience” risks stretching the law beyond its intended scope.
“Crypto software does not necessitate the invention of new legal doctrines or novel carveouts. It requires the faithful application of settled First Amendment principles to a new technological context.”
“In the age of computers, where software is the primary means for expressing ideas and organizing economic life, those principles matter more, not less. Writing and publishing code is speech. And in a free society, speech cannot be licensed into silence.”
In a policy briefing published this week, the crypto policy group Coin Center argues that software code used to design, publish, and maintain crypto systems constitutes protected speech under the First Amendment, and should not be readily conscripted into regulatory oversight as if it were a traditional financial intermediary. The authors—Executive Director Peter Van Valkenburgh and Director of Research Lizandro Pieper—frame code publication as an act of expression, akin to publishing a book or a culinary recipe, rather than as the actions of a financial services provider.
According to Coin Center, extending pre-registration or licensing requirements to speech activity would undermine constitutional protections and distort the historical rationale for financial oversight. They emphasize that developers are speakers and inventors, not fiduciaries or middlemen, and that treating code as regulated conduct risks a prior restraint that is almost always unconstitutional. The briefing seeks to provide a framework for courts and regulators to distinguish between protected software publication and a developer’s professional conduct in the ecosystem.
They also note that there have been high-profile convictions of crypto developers based on how software is used, including cases tied to Tornado Cash, which underscore the legal tensions around liability for code and its uses. The discussion situates these prosecutions within a broader quest to separate speech from regulated activity in a rapidly evolving technology space.
Key takeaways
- Publication and maintenance of crypto software is argued to be First Amendment–protected speech, not inherently a regulated financial service.
- Regulatory oversight should target conduct only when developers actively control user assets, execute transactions for users, or make decisions on users’ behalf.
- There is ongoing doctrinal tension among courts regarding whether software constitutes speech or conduct; a clear framework is needed to preserve free-speech protections in software publication.
- Precedents such as Lowe v. SEC are cited to support the notion that publishers who do not hold assets or act on behalf of clients may be shielded from regulation as speech, highlighting risks of overreach in enforcement against developers.
- Policy implications span enforcement tactics, licensing regimes, cross-border divergences, and the balance between innovation and consumer protection in crypto markets.
Legal framing: software as speech and the conduct boundary
The authors contend that the First Amendment shields those who publish and maintain code, framing software as a medium of expression rather than a support service that facilitates financial transactions. They argue that treating software publication as regulated conduct would undermine a long-standing constitutional logic that protects speech, regardless of the potential real-world effects of the code when used by others. The briefing emphasizes that the “speakers and inventors” behind crypto software are distinct from intermediaries who custody assets or execute user-directed actions, and that extending licensing requirements to routine publication would amount to an unwarranted prior restraint on speech.
Central to the paper is a call to resist a “functional code theory” that some courts have used to blur the line between speech and conduct. By referencing established jurisprudence, the authors seek to remind courts that the mere execution of code—particularly when published with no asset custody or user-directed action—should not automatically be treated as regulated activity. The framework aims to clarify when regulatory oversight is appropriate and when constitutional protections apply, thereby reducing legal ambiguity for developers and their ecosystems.
Enforcement considerations for developers and institutions
From a regulatory perspective, the briefing highlights a practical concern: if regulators compel pre-registration or licensing for all software publications, the gatekeeping effect could chill innovation and hamper developer collaboration. For institutions such as exchanges, banks, and other market participants, the delineation between speech and conduct has direct compliance implications. The authors argue that the correct approach is to focus on concrete, user-facing conduct—such as asset custody, automated asset transfers, or decisions made or controlled by developers on behalf of users—rather than on the act of writing, publishing, and maintaining software itself.
The discussion also touches on enforcement realities in the United States, where some prosecutions have leveraged traditional money-services or money-transmitter statutes to address crypto software usage. In this context, the paper argues that liability should hinge on connections to asset custody and transactional control, not on the mere availability of code. This distinction matters for developers seeking to avoid mischaracterization as financial intermediaries and for compliance teams that must assess risk without stifling legitimate software innovation.
Coin Center points to the broader regulatory environment as a backdrop for these arguments. The push for tailored frameworks that reflect constitutional protections, rather than broad, asset-centric licensing, has implications for how agencies coordinate cross-border oversight and how industry participants structure KYC and AML programs. The aim is to preserve the ability to publish and steward open-source software while maintaining accountable pathways for consumer and market protection where appropriate.
Case landscape and precedent shaping risk
The briefing places its analysis within a real-world backdrop of recent prosecutions that have involved developers whose work enabled or facilitated certain financial activities. Notably, high-profile cases connected to Tornado Cash have spurred ongoing legal debates about intent, liability, and the role of developers in the use of their code. In related developments, authorities have pursued cases against individuals associated with other privacy-focused or non-custodial projects on charges related to unregistered money transmission and related offenses. In several instances, defendants and their counsel have argued that their actions constituted speech or publication rather than regulated service provision, invoking established constitutional principles in defense of their work.
In this context, the Coin Center briefing draws an explicit line: while developers should not be immunized from accountability for illegal activity they knowingly facilitate, liability should not be expanded to cover publication of software itself. The 1985 Lowe v. SEC decision is cited as a benchmark, in which the Supreme Court suggested that a publisher who does not hold assets on behalf of a client and does not act in the client’s stead is protected by free speech. The implication for current enforcement is clear: doctrines that would treat code publication as professional or administrative conduct warrant careful scrutiny to avoid overreach into speech protection.
The broader policy takeaway is that software developers cannot reasonably be treated as scapegoats for illicit activity, nor should their work be criminalized for outcomes driven by user behavior. The briefing argues that the legal framework should reflect the reality that crypto software often operates as an expression of ideas and as a tool for decentralized coordination, rather than as a regulated service in itself. This stance has meaningful implications for licensing debates, regulatory oversight, and the development of compliance programs across the industry.
Regulatory precedent and notable cases shaping risk
Looking ahead, observers should watch how courts apply the conduct-vs-speech distinction in crypto-related litigation, particularly where developers publish code that enables asset transfers or transaction scripting. The current discourse emphasizes that the constitutional protections surrounding speech should guide how regulators approach code publication, while ensuring that enforcement targets genuine custodial or transactional intermediaries. The evolving case law and regulatory discourse will influence policy design across jurisdictions, including any interactions with comprehensive regulatory regimes like MiCA in the European Union and analogous frameworks in the United States and beyond.
As enforcement and policy evolve, the central question remains: how can regulators protect consumers and markets without diminishing the freedoms that underpin open, collaborative software development? The Coin Center analysis suggests that a principled application of First Amendment doctrine—grounded in the distinction between speech and conduct—offers a path to reconcile innovation with public-interest safeguards.
What to watch next: ongoing court decisions, forthcoming regulatory guidance, and cross-border policy developments that define the permissible contours of crypto software publication versus regulated financial activity. The balance struck in these debates will shape both the legal risk environment for developers and the compliance posture of institutions engaging with decentralized technologies.
Ethereum layer-2 blockchain Arbitrum on Monday froze more than 30,000 Ether worth about $71.2 million held in a wallet connected to the recent exploit of the Kelp protocol.
Arbitrum said on Monday that its security council, a 12-member body elected by the Arbitrum community, took “emergency action” to freeze 30,766 Ether (ETH) that was held in a wallet connected to the Kelp exploit.
It added that the ETH had been moved to “an intermediary frozen wallet” and was “no longer accessible to the address that originally held the funds, and can only be moved by further action by Arbitrum governance.”
Kelp, a liquid restaking protocol, was hacked for at least $293 million on Saturday through its LayerZero-powered bridge, with LayerZero accusing North Korea of carrying out the attack.
The exploit has caused millions of dollars’ worth of “bad debt” in the highly interconnected crypto lending market, as the attackers used stolen Kelp tokens to borrow cryptocurrencies on the lending platform Aave.
A blockchain freezing crypto is a divisive measure in the crypto sector, with opponents of freezes arguing that such action is antithetical to the purpose of the technology, while supporters argue it enhances security and maintains a network’s integrity.
Multiple users on X criticized Arbitrum over the freeze and questioned its decentralization in light of funds being frozen by decree of a council.
Related: Hackers impersonated eth.limo team to hijack its domain: Post-mortem
Griff Green, a member of the Arbitrum Security Council, posted to X that the group “did not make this decision lightly, there were countless hours of debates, technical, practical, ethical and political.”
Green added that nine members of the 12-member council voted to freeze the funds, but did not share further details.
Arbitrum said its council acted with input from law enforcement and “weighed its commitment to the security and integrity of the Arbitrum community without impacting any Arbitrum users or applications.”
Magazine: South Korea gets rich from crypto… North Korea gets weapons
The value of tokenized real-world assets on public blockchains is estimated at more than $29 billion, up more than 10% in the last 30 days.
OCBC, one of Singapore’s largest banking and financial services corporations, has launched a tokenized physical gold fund, with the underlying token, GOLDX, issued on both Ethereum and Solana.
The launch was made together with its asset management arm, Lion Global Investors and digital asset exchange DigiFT. The token is aimed at institutional investors, hedge funds and asset managers and can be bought and sold using both stablecoins and fiat currencies. After subscription, the token is delivered directly to investors’ blockchain wallets, OCBC said on Monday.
Kenneth Lai, head of global markets at OCBC, said the move is part of a new corporate strategy and a milestone in the corporation’s blockchain-focused approach.
“We believe digital assets will play an increasingly important role in financial services and our focus is on bridging traditional finance with the emerging world of decentralized finance,” he said.
The value of tokenized real-world assets on public blockchains has been on the rise in 2026, and is sitting at over $29 billion, up over 10% in the last 30 days, according to data from rwa.xyz.
GOLDX token tied to a physical gold fund
OCBC’s GOLDX token offers on-chain exposure to the LionGlobal Singapore Physical Gold Fund, which launched in December and had about $525 million (669 million Singapore dollars) in assets under management as of April 16, according to OCBC.
Related: Singapore Gulf Bank adds stablecoin mint and redeem for 24/7 settlement
The goal of the tokenized fund is to attract Web3 ecosystem participants and high-net-worth individuals who operate in blockchain and cryptocurrency ecosystems, according to OCBC.
OCBC has used blockchain technology before, starting with its first tokenized equity-linked note for accredited investors in 2023. Its total assets were estimated at about $526 billion as of December 2025.
Crypto World
Is SUI Network Positioned for the Next Bull Cycle? CME Futures, Spot ETFs, and 219% Dev Growth Suggest It
TLDR:
- SUI Network holds $583M in TVL and processes over $100 billion in monthly stablecoin volume on-chain.
- Monthly active developers grew 219% year-over-year, with more than 500 active projects in the ecosystem.
- USDsui, backed by Stripe, reached $36 million in supply within one month of its public launch.
- SUI is one of fewer than 10 altcoins with a live U.S. spot ETF, with CME futures launching in May.
SUI Network continues to attract market attention as on-chain data shows consistent, measurable activity. The Layer-1 blockchain holds total value locked of approximately $583 million, with daily DEX volume at $60 million.
Monthly active developers grew 219% year-over-year to roughly 1,400. With over 500 active projects and close to 300,000 daily active users, the ecosystem reflects data-backed growth. These numbers have drawn attention from both retail and institutional market participants.
On-Chain Metrics Point to a Maturing Blockchain
The network’s stablecoin supply stands at $519 million, with USDC making up about 72% of that figure. Monthly stablecoin volume exceeds $100 billion, and the chain crossed $1 trillion in cumulative stablecoin transfers by March.
These figures reflect genuine network usage, not just speculative activity. That distinction matters when evaluating whether a Layer-1 blockchain has real traction.
The MystenLabs/sui GitHub repository holds over 7,600 stars and more than 11,700 forks. Active projects across the ecosystem have surpassed 500, showing expansion well beyond early-stage development.
As analyst @Kaffchad noted on X, bear market conditions have helped separate genuine progress from noise. The network kept shipping and funding projects through the broader market cooldown.
Daily active users range from 150,000 to 300,000, showing demand that extends beyond speculative trading cycles. That consistency becomes a key comparison point against earlier-generation blockchains.
Moreover, MystenLabs has maintained active incubation efforts throughout the market downturn. Few Layer-1 networks carry the financial capacity to support builders at that level.
Developer growth of 219% year-over-year stands out across the broader L1 landscape. Each new project added to the ecosystem creates additional utility and pulls in more users over time.
This compounding effect has been building steadily through 2024 and into 2025. It represents the kind of structural growth that price momentum alone cannot manufacture.
Institutional Products and a Payments Roadmap Drive Broader Adoption
SUI launched USDsui, a Stripe-backed stablecoin that reached $36 million in supply within its first month. Treasury bond yields tied to this product flow back into buybacks and DeFi incentives.
Gasless stablecoin transfers are also planned for the 2026 roadmap. These moves place the chain in direct competition with Solana and Tron in the payments space.
Canary’s SUIS launched on NASDAQ and Grayscale’s GSUI listed on NYSE Arca in February. That makes SUI one of fewer than 10 altcoins with a live U.S. spot ETF.
Bitwise and 21Shares have additional ETF applications pending regulatory approval. T. Rowe Price also included the asset in a multi-asset crypto ETF filing in March.
CME Group is set to launch SUI futures in May, widening institutional market access further. @Kaffchad noted that the chain’s $15 billion market cap run came without the controversies tied to Solana’s rise.
No FTX or Alameda equivalent was connected to its early growth. That cleaner track record carries weight when institutional buyers assess counterparty risk.
Solana and Tron built payment dominance through low fees and fast transaction speeds. SUI brings comparable performance on more modern technical infrastructure.
With live institutional products and an active payments roadmap in motion, the network is building operational infrastructure that matches its on-chain data. Execution over the coming quarters will determine whether this trajectory holds.
While quantum computing remains a largely theoretical threat to blockchain for now, some projects are already preparing for that eventuality.
Fintech company Ripple has released a detailed four-phase roadmap to make the XRP Ledger, a decentralized, layer-1 blockchain, quantum-resistant, aiming to reach full readiness by 2028. XRP, the world’s fourth-largest digital asset by market capitalization, is the native token of the XRP Ledger. Ripple’s solutions use XRP Ledger, XRP, and other digital assets. Ripple is also one of many developers building on and contributing to the XRP Ledger (XRPL).
Ripple’s announcement comes weeks after Google warned that a quantum computer could potentially attack Bitcoin, the world’s largest blockchain, with less computational power than previously estimated—prompting some analysts to suggest 2029 as the Q-day, the so-called deadline to build defenses against such a machine. Bitcoin developers are also already working on measures to mitigate the risk.
Let’s first understand the threat to XRPL and then discuss the four-phase plan.
Quantum risks to XRPL
A quantum computer has three implications for the XRP Ledger, and these apply equally to most other blockchains.
First, every time an XRPL account signs a transaction, its public key becomes visible on the blockchain. It’s like writing your mailing addresses on the outside of an envelope, allowing anyone to see where it came from, but they still can’t see what’s written inside without the private key.
However, a quantum computer can reverse-engineer the private key from the exposed public key, draining your coin holdings.
Second, accounts that have held coins for long periods of time are the highest risk. The longer the public key sits on-chain, the more time a future quantum attacker has to target it.
Lastly, the team added that building quantum-resistant systems is not just a technical challenge but an operational one, as it’s tied to every XRP holder and every application built on the XRP Ledger.
Collectively, these things warrant a structured response.
The four-phase plan
Phase 1, called Q-Day readiness, is an emergency measure designed to protect exposed public keys and long-held accounts if quantum computers arrive faster than expected.
In that case, Ripple will implement what it calls a hard shift: Classical public-key signatures will no longer be accepted by the network, requiring all funds to migrate to quantum-safe accounts.
This phase also looks into enabling safe recovery for all account owners via zero-knowledge proofs, a way of mathematically proving you own a key without revealing the key itself. This would allow holders to migrate funds even in a compromised scenario, ensuring no one is locked out.
Phase 2 is already underway and is targeted for completion in the first half of 2026. It involves Ripple’s applied cryptography team conducting a full assessment of quantum vulnerability across the XRPL network and testing defenses suggested by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the U.S. government’s global standards body for cybersecurity.
But those defenses aren’t without cost. For instance, post-quantum cryptography uses larger keys and signatures, which can strain the ledger. So the team is also working through the tradeoffs and what system changes might be needed.
To accelerate this phase, Ripple has teamed up with quantum security research firm Project Eleven for validator-level testing, developer networking benchmarking and early custody wallet prototypes.
Phase 3, targeted for completion in the second half of 2026, involves controlled integration of post quantum measures. In this phase, Ripple will begin integrating quantum-resistant signatures alongside existing ones on its developer test network. It will allow developers to test and build against the new cryptography without disrupting the live network and existing users.
This phase, therefore, directly addresses the third implication that migration, though a giant operational effort, must not break what already works.
At the same time, the work goes beyond just replacing today’s signing methods. The team is rethinking the broader cryptography underpinning XRPL and exploring quantum-resistant approaches to privacy and secure data processing, which are important for compliant tokenization and features such as confidential transfers.
“This phase is where experimentation meets system design. We’re not just asking “what works cryptographically?” We’re asking “what works for XRPL at scale?,” the team said.
Phase 4 marks the full transition from experiment to full deployment, targeting completion by 2028. “We’ll design, build and propose a new amendment to the XRPL ecosystem for native post-quantum cryptography and begin transitioning the network to PQC-based signatures at scale,” Ripple’s team said.
The four phases mean the migration path could be seamless and significantly less painful, which could be a material advantage as the clock ticks down to Q-day.
Lorry strikes railway bridge near Cambridgeshire city causing road to be closed
China’s Changan aims to be among world’s top-10 carmakers by 2030
Singapore’s OCBC Debuts Tokenized Gold Fund on Ethereum and Solana
Manchester United reach agreement with Casemiro over contract clause amid transfer speculation
Steven Gerrard disagrees with Gary Neville over ‘shock’ Chelsea and Arsenal claim | Football
US brings back mandatory military draft registration
-
NewsBeat7 days agoTrump and Pope Leo: Behind their disagreement over Iran war
-
News Videos6 days agoSecure crypto trading starts with an FIU-registered
-
Fashion4 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Theodora Dress
-
Sports4 days agoNWFL Suspends Two Players Over Post-Match Clash in Ado-Ekiti
-
Business2 days agoPowerball Result April 18, 2026: No Jackpot Winner in Powerball Draw: $75 Million Rolls Over
-
Politics3 days agoPalestine barred from entering Canada for FIFA Congress
-
Crypto World3 days agoRussia Pushes Bill to Criminalize Unregistered Crypto Services
-
Politics11 hours agoGary Stevenson delivers timely reminder to register to vote as deadline TODAY
-
Business4 days agoCreo Medical agree sale of its manufacturing operation
-
Politics2 days agoZack Polanski demands ‘council homes not luxury flats for foreign investors’
-
Tech2 days agoAuto Enthusiast Scores Running Tesla Model 3 for Two Grand and Turns It Into Bare-Bones Go-Kart
-
Tech5 days ago‘Avatar: Aang, The Last Airbender’ Leaked Online. Some Fans Say Paramount Deserves the Fallout
-
Crypto World3 days agoRussia Introduces Bill To Criminalize Unregistered Crypto Services
-
Tech6 days agoMicrosoft adds Windows protections for malicious Remote Desktop files
-
Crypto World6 days agoX Launches New Cashtag Feature for Stocks and Crypto: X
-
Entertainment6 days agoDave Portnoy Slams Dianna Russini: ‘Makes Zero Sense’
-
Sports7 days agoYounger Than Sachin Tendulkar: Vaibhav Sooryavanshi Set To Make Historic India Debut
-
Entertainment6 days agoPrince Carter Brings Fans Front Row and Backstage at Boys 4 Life Tour
-
Sports5 days agoBritish climbers complete new route in Swiss Alps
-
Crypto World6 days agoGlobal recession inevitable if Strait of Hormuz stays shut
You must be logged in to post a comment Login