Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Bybit Crosses a Line in Rwanda That Binance Has Walked for Years Without Consequence

Published

on

The National Bank of Rwanda (BNR) publicly warned citizens against using the Rwandan Franc (FRW) for crypto transactions, two days after global exchange Bybit listed FRW on its peer-to-peer (P2P) platform without regulatory clearance.

The BNR highlighted Bybit’s promotional announcement, stating that crypto-assets remain unauthorized for payments, FRW conversion, or P2P trading under current law.

Why Bybit’s Timing Could Not Have Been Worse

Rwanda has maintained a restrictive stance on private crypto since 2018, when the BNR first declared cryptocurrencies illegal for domestic use.

That position has shifted gradually. In March 2025, the BNR and the Capital Markets Authority (CMA) released a draft framework to regulate Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs).

Advertisement

The bill explicitly prohibits crypto as legal tender, bans crypto mining and mixers, and bars tokens pegged to the FRW.

On March 4, 2026, Rwanda’s Cabinet approved a comprehensive version of that bill. The Chamber of Deputies passed its general principles on March 31. Committee review continues.

Bybit launched its FRW P2P feature on April 2, just two days later, offering new-user rewards and bi-weekly merchant commissions.

Its announcement made no mention of local regulatory approval. Community members also flagged that promotional materials featured an outdated Rwandan national emblem.

A Direct Challenge to Rwanda’s CBDC Plans

The BNR is piloting its own Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), the e-FRW, following a proof-of-concept completed in February 2026. A 12-month domestic pilot is underway before international cross-border testing begins.

Unregulated foreign platforms attaching the FRW to crypto markets risk undermining that effort and eroding public trust in the currency.

The CMA has also cited pressure from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) over crypto-linked money laundering as a core reason for formal regulation.

Advertisement

What Comes Next

Under the draft law, unlicensed VASP operators in Rwanda face fines up to 30 million FRW, roughly $21,000, and up to five years in prison.

Bybit has not publicly responded to the BNR’s warning. Binance and Remitano have offered FRW P2P pairs for years without triggering comparable pushback, suggesting Bybit’s loud promotional approach crossed a regulatory threshold.

Whether Bybit removes FRW voluntarily or waits for formal enforcement may set a precedent for every foreign exchange eyeing East Africa.

Advertisement

The post Bybit Crosses a Line in Rwanda That Binance Has Walked for Years Without Consequence appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Attorney Says Drift Protocol May Be Liable for Damages After Attack

Published

on

Cybercrime, North Korea, Cybersecurity, Hacks, Lazarus Group

The hack of the Solana-based decentralized finance (DeFi) platform Drift Protocol could have been prevented if standard operational security procedures were followed by the Drift team, and may constitute “civil negligence,” according to attorney Ariel Givner.

“In plain terms, civil negligence means they failed their basic duty to protect the money they were managing,” Givner said in response to the post-mortem update provided by the Drift team and how it handled Wednesday’s $280 million exploit.

The Drift team failed to follow “basic” security procedures, including keeping signing keys on separate, “air-gapped” systems that are never used for developer work, and conducting due diligence on blockchain developers met through industry conferences.

Cybercrime, North Korea, Cybersecurity, Hacks, Lazarus Group
Source: Ariel Givner

“Every serious project knows this. Drift didn’t follow it,” she said, adding, “They knew crypto is full of hackers, especially North Korean state teams.” Givner continued: 

“Yet their team spent months chatting on Telegram, meeting strangers at conferences, opening sketchy code repos, and downloading fake apps on devices tied to multisignature controls.”

Advertisements for class action lawsuits against Drift Protocol are already circulating, she said. Cointelegraph reached out to the Drift Team but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

Advertisement
Cybercrime, North Korea, Cybersecurity, Hacks, Lazarus Group
Source: Ariel Givner

The incident is a reminder that social engineering and project infiltration by malicious actors are major attack vectors for cryptocurrency developers that could drain user funds and permanently erode customer trust in compromised platforms.

Related: Drift explains $280M exploit as critics question Circle over USDC freeze

Drift Protocol says attack took “months” of planning

The Drift Protocol team published an update on Saturday outlining how the exploit occurred and claimed that the attackers planned the attack for six months before execution.

Threat actors first approached the Drift team at a “major” crypto industry conference in October 2025, expressing interest in protocol integrations and collaboration.

The malicious actors continued to build rapport with the Drift development team in the ensuing six months, and once enough trust was built, they began sending the Drift team malicious links and embedding malware that compromised developer machines.

Advertisement

These individuals, who are suspected of working for North Korea state-affiliated hackers and physically approached the Drift developers, were not North Korean nationals, according to the Drift team.

Drift said, with “medium-high confidence,” that the exploit was carried out by the same actors behind the October 2024 Radiant Capital hack.

In December 2024, Radiant Capital said the exploit was carried out through malware sent via Telegram from a North Korea-aligned hacker posing as an ex-contractor. 

Magazine: Meet the hackers who can help get your crypto life savings back

Advertisement