Crypto World
Is It Luck, Skill, or a Leak? BBC Probes Trades Before Trump’s Announcements
A BBC investigation has identified a consistent pattern of spikes in trading activity across several financial markets in the hours or minutes before US President Donald Trump’s most significant market-moving statements during his second term.
Some analysts argue the activity carries the telltale signs of illegal insider trading. Meanwhile, others contend the situation is less clear-cut, suggesting certain traders have simply grown more skilled at predicting the president’s interventions.
Is Someone Trading on Trump’s Next Move Before the World Hears It?
The report presented five notable examples. On March 9, 2026, a large volume of bets on falling oil prices was reportedly placed 47 minutes before a CBS reporter’s post about Trump’s interview on X.
During the interview with CBS, Trump signaled that the US-Israel war with Iran was “very complete, pretty much.” Oil prices subsequently dropped around 25%.
On March 23, 2026, traders placed “unusually high number bets” on US oil prices 14 minutes before Trump’s Truth Social post about a resolution with Iran. One oil analyst told the BBC the activity appeared abnormal.
Ahead of Trump’s 90-day “Liberation Day” tariff pause on April 9, 2025, over $2 million was wagered on the S&P 500 rising despite seven consecutive days of losses.
“Again, a pattern of unusual trading preceded these events with an unusually high number of bets ahead of the announcement on one fund that tracks the S&P 500. The number of contracts traded jumped to over 10,000 per minute just after 18:00 BST. Earlier in the day, the number had been in the hundreds,” the report read.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
The BBC also flagged that a Polymarket account called “Burdensome-Mix,” which turned $32,500 in wagers into $436,000. The account placed bets on Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro leaving office just days before US special forces seized him on January 3, 2026.
The report added that shortly after, the account changed its username and has not placed any wagers since.
Finally, the BBC, citing data from blockchain analytics firm Bubblemaps, noted that six Polymarket accounts were created in February 2026. All wagered on a US strike against Iran by February 28. The accounts collectively earned roughly $1.2 million after the attack.
“Five of those six users have placed no more bets since, but one of the account’s recent activity shows it has subsequently made $163,000 by correctly betting on a US-Iran ceasefire by 7 April, which was announced by Washington and Tehran on that day,” the outlet added.
BeInCrypto has reached out to the White House, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) for comment.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights
The post Is It Luck, Skill, or a Leak? BBC Probes Trades Before Trump’s Announcements appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Crypto World
The AI Agent Economy Has an Identity Bottleneck: Blockchain Rails Could Solve It
Artificial intelligence agents are becoming economic actors at a pace that outstrips the infrastructure around them, according to a16z crypto. In a recent post, the firm argued that the real bottleneck in the agent economy is no longer intelligence, but identity.
Today’s agents can execute tasks and move money, yet they still lack standardized ways to prove their identity, demonstrate what they’re authorized to do, and more. That missing layer, the firm suggests, is where blockchains can come in.
From KYC to KYA: a16z Makes the Case for Onchain Identity for AI Agents
In a recent blog post, a16z noted that non-human agents already outnumber human employees by roughly 100 to 1 in financial services. Yet the agents remain “effectively unbanked.”
“They can interact with financial systems, but not in ways that are portable, verifiable, or trusted by default. They lack standardized ways to prove their permissions, operate independently across platforms, or bear liability for the actions they take,” the authors wrote.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights
The missing piece, according to the post, is a shared identity layer for agents. This could essentially be an SSL equivalent that would standardize how they coordinate across platforms.
Today’s approaches, it noted, remain fragmented. According to a16z crypto,
“While there are prominent attempts to solve this today, those approaches are fragmented: vertically integrated, fiat-first stacks on one side; crypto-native, open standards (like x402 and emerging agent identity proposals) on the other; and extensions of developer frameworks like MCP (model context protocol) that attempt to bridge application-layer identity. There is still no broadly adopted, interoperable way for one agent to prove to another who it represents, what it’s allowed to do, and how it gets paid.”
The post outlined a key fix called “Know Your Agent” (KYA). The concept borrows from Know Your Customer (KYC). It calls for cryptographically signed credentials that link each agent to its principal, permissions, constraints, and reputation.
The firm added that blockchains can serve as a neutral coordination layer for agents. They offer portable identities, programmable wallets, and verifiable attestations that resolve across chat apps, APIs, and marketplaces. Without a common standard, a16z warns, merchants will keep blocking agents at the firewall.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
a16z also identified four additional gaps beyond identity: centralized control over AI governance, payment rails ill-suited to agent-to-agent commerce, the rising cost of verifying machine decisions at scale, and diminished user oversight as agents take on more autonomous workflows.
It argued that blockchain-based tools, onchain governance, programmable stablecoin payments, cryptographic audit trails, and smart-contract-enforced permissions, can close these gaps and support a more trustworthy agent economy.
The post The AI Agent Economy Has an Identity Bottleneck: Blockchain Rails Could Solve It appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Crypto World
JPMorgan expands $1.5 trillion economic security splurge into Europe
JPMorgan Chase will extend a $1.5 trillion investment program designed to bolster U.S. economic resilience across Europe, the Wall Street giant said on Tuesday.
The 10-year Security and Resiliency Initiative (SRI) was launched in the U.S. last October with the aim of facilitating, financing and investing in industries deemed critical to American economic security and resilience.
It was announced in November that the U.K. would be brought into the plan, which is focused on several key areas, including supply chains and manufacturing, defense and aerospace, energy independence, healthcare, and strategic technologies like AI.
Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, said in a statement Tuesday that the U.S. and Europe have for too long relied on “unpredictable sources for things like critical minerals that are essential to collective security and prosperity.”
“Now, it is in our best interest to address these challenges together — because our security, freedom and economic growth depend on it,” he said.
The SRI’s key pillars are divided into around 30 subsectors, ranging from shipbuilding to spacecraft, nuclear energy, cybersecurity and the production of high-speed projectiles.
European aerospace and defense has seen an investment boom in recent years, with regional leaders and the NATO military alliance committing to ramping up spending on security.
The pledges are widely expected to boost European firms’ bottom lines, with regionally headquartered companies already reporting record order backlogs and huge upswings in income over the past year.
In 2025, the Stoxx Europe Aerospace and Defense index — home to the continent’s biggest defense companies, including Airbus, Rolls-Royce and Rheinmetall — surged 56.5%, with some regional defense players more than doubling in value.
So far this year, the index has gained 4.3%.
Chuka Umunna, a former British member of parliament who will be leading JPMorgan’s SRI initiative in the U.K., told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe” on Tuesday that the bank’s strength is “built on the strength of the U.S.”
“The strength of the U.S. has three pillars to it: military might, economic prowess and the strength of its alliances,” he said. “And one thing that has become very clear is that the U.S. and the West have become too reliant on unreliable and unpredictable supply chains and sources for those things that are critical to its national economic security and resilience.”
Umunna said in Europe, there will be five key countries that the SRI will focus on — the U.K., France, Germany, Poland and Italy. But, he added, all EU and NATO member states will be included in the strategy.
In his 2026 letter to JPMorgan Chase shareholders, sent earlier this month, Dimon said the U.S. had allowed itself to become too dependent on unreliable sources for materials essential to national security, such as critical minerals, semiconductors and advanced manufacturing output.
“This is us putting our money where our mouth is, so to speak,” Umunna said of the bank’s SRI plan. “Unless you start to invest and seek to develop our capabilities here in the West in these particular markets, we’re going to continue to have the exposure we have.”
He pointed to energy, where the U.K. imports more than 40% of its energy needs, and semiconductors, where Umunna said the West was too reliant on East Asian economies for procurement.
“These are all things we are going to need to scale up and build capacity in,” he told CNBC. “We’re delivering this through the usual global banking products that we would use, but where you’ve got an SRI-aligned company, we will seek to lean in more. For example, from a credit point of view, you will potentially see JPMorgan doing smaller size deals, if they are in this space, than you would otherwise expect.”
Crypto World
A dozen banks want a euro stablecoin. Fireblocks is making it happen
EMBARGO: APRIL 21, 2026 @ 9:00 AM BST (UK)
Cryptocurrency custody firm Fireblocks is handling the issuance and distribution of a euro-denominated stablecoin, backed by a group of twelve European banks, known as the Qivalis consortium.
The euro-backed token, scheduled for release in the second half of 2026, is regulated by the Dutch Central Bank through Amsterdam-based Qivalis and is compliant with the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCAR).
The Qivalis consortium is made up of: Banca Sella, BBVA, BNP Paribas, CaixaBank, Danske Bank, DekaBank, DZ BANK, ING, KBC, Raiffeisen Bank International, SEB, and UniCredit.
Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies with values pegged to an external reference such as the dollar, euro and other fiat currencies. The stablecoin market hit $305 billion in January 2026, but 99% of that volume remains dollar-denominated, with euro-pegged assets representing just $650 million.
The Qivalis consortium aims to challenge this dollar dominance with a regulated, MiCAR-compliant offering, according to a press release on Tuesday. The euro is the second-most traded currency in the world, accounting for a daily average volume of nearly $1.1 trillion.
“Qivalis demonstrates how major financial institutions can work together to plan a compliant euro-backed stablecoins at scale – with production-ready infrastructure that will meet MiCAR requirements, handle institutional volumes, and integrate seamlessly with existing banking systems,” said Michael Shaulov, Co-Founder and CEO of Fireblocks.
Crypto World
Fake Police Raid Scam Forces Victim to Send $1M in Bitcoin
Key takeaways
-
Crypto security is expanding beyond digital threats, with criminals increasingly targeting individuals directly through physical coercion rather than trying to exploit blockchain vulnerabilities or hack wallets.
-
The French case illustrates how attackers used a fake police raid and violence to force a Bitcoin transfer worth $1 million, bypassing encryption entirely by compelling the victim to authorize the transaction.
-
Wrench attacks are rising, with criminals using threats or force instead of technical exploits. This highlights how human vulnerability can override even the most secure cryptographic systems.
-
Impersonating authority figures such as police is highly effective because it combines fear, urgency and social conditioning, making victims more likely to comply without questioning the situation.
Digital defenses are no longer the only front line in crypto security. While phishing and exchange hacks have long been major threats, a growing number of thefts now bypass code entirely and target crypto holders directly.
A recent case in France highlights this shift. Attackers posing as police staged a “raid” and physically coerced a couple into transferring nearly $1 million in Bitcoin (BTC). This was not a failure of software, but a high-stakes robbery carried out through physical force.
When the victim, not the wallet, becomes the target
The incident occurred in Le Chesnay-Rocquencourt, a town near Paris, where a couple in their late 50s was allegedly assaulted inside their residence.
Here is the chronology of the incident:
-
Three individuals disguised as police officers gained entry to the home.
-
The couple was threatened at knifepoint.
-
The husband was forced to send Bitcoin to the attackers.
-
Both victims sustained injuries, and the husband was physically restrained and tied up.
-
The assailants fled the scene in a vehicle.
French authorities are currently investigating the matter, with charges including armed robbery and organized criminal conspiracy.
What distinguishes this case is not only the use of violence, but the specific strategy employed.
Rather than attempting to crack encryption, the perpetrators bypassed it entirely by coercing the owner into authorizing the transfer.
Why impersonating police officers is so effective
Posing as law enforcement officials is often effective because it taps into several psychological triggers:
-
Authority: People are socially conditioned to obey police directives.
-
Urgency: The appearance of an official raid creates the impression that immediate compliance is necessary.
-
Fear: Any resistance can seem as though it may lead to criminal consequences.
When criminals present themselves as police, victims often fail to question:
-
The reason for their presence.
-
The legitimacy of their demands.
-
The authenticity of the entire situation.
Under stress, the impulse to obey tends to overpower the instinct to verify or question what is happening.
In crypto, this risk is even greater because a single approved transaction can move significant funds in seconds.
Did you know? The term “wrench attack” became popular in the crypto space after an online comic joked that threatening someone physically is easier than breaking encryption. It reflects a real-world shift in which attackers bypass complex systems by targeting people rather than technology.
From simulated police raid to coerced Bitcoin transfer
Unlike conventional robberies that target cash, jewelry or other tangible items, this assault specifically targeted digital cryptocurrency holdings.
The attackers’ objective was straightforward: force the victim to carry out an immediate crypto transfer.
This form of theft can be difficult to contain for several reasons:
-
Stolen funds can be transferred anywhere in the world within minutes.
-
Blockchain transactions are generally irreversible.
-
Once transferred, funds can be moved quickly, which can make tracing and recovery more difficult.
When the victim retains direct control over their wallet, criminals do not need to steal hardware or break through security. They only need to force the victim to approve and send the transaction personally.
Understanding wrench attacks in the cryptocurrency space
It is often far easier to threaten a person with a wrench than to try to crack their encryption.
Rather than attempting to hack a wallet, perpetrators may use:
-
Threats
-
Physical violence
-
Other forms of coercion
These methods are used to force victims to reveal private keys or authorize the transfer of funds. Such attacks bypass even the strongest technical protections.
No matter how strong the encryption is, human vulnerability can make that security irrelevant.
Did you know? Some high-net-worth crypto holders now use “decoy wallets” with small balances. In a coercive situation, they can reveal these wallets instead of their main holdings, adding an extra layer of psychological and financial protection.
Why these attacks are becoming more frequent
Several underlying factors are driving this increase:
-
Growth in self-custody: A rising number of users now hold their own private keys and manage their assets directly, making them more immediate and accessible targets.
-
Visibility of high-value targets: Many cryptocurrency investors, company founders and executives maintain public profiles that make their wealth and identity relatively easy to identify.
-
Advances in cybersecurity: As digital wallet security improves and remote hacking becomes more difficult, criminals are increasingly turning to the softer target, the human user.
-
Instant global liquidity: Cryptocurrency enables near-instant transfers of value anywhere in the world without banks or intermediaries acting as gatekeepers.
In 2025 alone, documented cases of verified wrench attacks reportedly rose sharply, increasing 75% from 2024. Europe, and France in particular, stood out as a growing hotspot for such incidents. Financial losses reached $40.9 million in 2025, marking a 44% annual increase. While kidnapping remained the primary threat vector, physical assaults surged by 250%.
Why France has experienced a surge
France has recently recorded multiple high-profile violent crimes linked to cryptocurrency:
-
Kidnappings carried out to extort cryptocurrency ransoms.
-
Home invasions specifically targeting high-profile figures in the crypto industry.
-
Coordinated operations by organized criminal groups aimed at stealing digital assets.
These recurring incidents point to a shift in criminal behavior:
-
More deliberate efforts to identify individuals who hold cryptocurrency.
-
Increased surveillance of their physical locations and daily routines.
-
A growing preference for direct physical targeting over purely digital methods.
As cryptocurrency adoption continues to expand, public awareness of who owns it is also growing. Unfortunately, the physical risks associated with that visibility are rising as well.

Why criminals increasingly choose coercion over hacking
Crypto security has become increasingly strong. Hardware wallets, multisignature setups and cold storage solutions make remote hacking far more difficult.
Coercion, however, changes the equation.
Even the strongest technical protections may fail if a victim is coerced into unlocking their hardware device, revealing their credentials or authorizing a transaction.
Coercive attacks bypass cryptographic defenses entirely, target points of human access and exploit natural human reactions.
For perpetrators, this approach is often faster and more reliable than trying to break through technical defenses.
Why Bitcoin remains particularly exposed in duress situations
Bitcoin’s core architecture gives it considerable strength, but it also creates significant vulnerability when the owner is under coercion.
Its key features include:
-
The ability to transfer value immediately
-
The absence of any central entity capable of reversing transactions
-
Permissionless, worldwide accessibility
In a situation where the holder is forced to transfer funds, these traits can result in:
-
Assets being moved almost instantly
-
Virtually no realistic chance of recovery
-
Attackers rapidly moving funds across multiple addresses
The same qualities that give Bitcoin its independence and value also make stolen funds extremely difficult to recover once they are transferred under duress.
Did you know? Private security firms have started offering specialized protection services for crypto investors, including travel risk assessments, home security audits and digital footprint reduction strategies aimed at preventing targeted attacks.
How French authorities are responding
French law enforcement agencies are actively investigating the incident, with specialized organized crime units leading the effort.
Potential criminal charges under review include:
Although authorities are increasing enforcement in response to such incidents, these cases continue to present serious challenges because of:
-
The rapid cross-border movement of stolen assets
-
The pseudonymous and irreversible nature of cryptocurrency transactions
-
The involvement of organized and professional criminal groups
Key security takeaways for cryptocurrency owners
This incident underscores a major shift in the nature of cryptocurrency security threats.
Protecting technical systems alone is no longer enough. Safeguarding wallets, private keys and physical devices must now be paired with strong personal security measures.
Essential protective steps include:
-
Never publicly reveal or discuss the extent of your cryptocurrency holdings.
-
Keep your real-world identity separate from your wallet addresses and ownership.
-
Use multisignature wallets so that no single individual or compromised key can authorize transfers.
-
Distribute signing authority and key control across different geographic locations or trusted parties.
Cointelegraph maintains full editorial independence. Guides are produced without influence from advertisers, partners or commercial relationships. Content published in Guides does not constitute financial, legal or investment advice. Readers should conduct their own research and consult qualified professionals where appropriate.
Crypto World
Singapore’s OCBC Debuts Tokenized Gold Fund on Ethereum and Solana
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.
Crypto World
XRP Ledger Set for Quantum-Proof Upgrade as Ripple Unveils 2028 Timeline
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.
Crypto World
Singapore’s largest bank OCBC launches tokenized gold fund on Ethereum and Solana
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.
Crypto World
US Senator Urges CLARITY Act Senate Markup Moved to May: Report
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.
Crypto World
Crypto code is speech, not conduct, Coin Center tells U.S. courts
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.”
Crypto World
Code is functional First Amendment free speech, regulation
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.
-
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
-
Politics3 days agoPalestine barred from entering Canada for FIFA Congress
-
Business2 days agoPowerball Result April 18, 2026: No Jackpot Winner in Powerball Draw: $75 Million Rolls Over
-
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