Connect with us

Crypto World

JPMorgan faces test on bank liability in $328M Goliath Ponzi case

Published

on

JPMorgan faces test on bank liability in $328M Goliath Ponzi case

JPMorgan faces a U.S. class action for allegedly enabling Goliath Ventures’ $328M crypto Ponzi via Chase accounts and exchange transfers.

Summary

  • Investors claim Goliath raised $328M from 2,000+ victims through JPMorgan business accounts, routing $123M to Coinbase while paying out only $50M in “profits.”
  • The suit alleges JPMorgan ignored AML red flags on high‑velocity, circular transfers, effectively extending the scheme’s life and investor losses.
  • The case could set precedent on when banks become liable as “enablers” of crypto fraud, tightening KYC/AML expectations on fiat rails into exchanges.

JPMorgan is facing a new class-action lawsuit in the U.S. over its alleged role in banking a $328 million crypto Ponzi scheme that funneled investor funds through Chase accounts and onto major exchanges, according to recent court filings and monitoring data.

JPMorgan sued over alleged $328M crypto Ponzi exposure

A group of investors has filed a class-action complaint in federal court in Northern California, accusing JPMorgan Chase of knowingly or negligently providing banking services to a large-scale crypto Ponzi scheme operated by Goliath Ventures. The lawsuit alleges that roughly $253 million in investor funds were first deposited into Chase accounts controlled by the scheme’s operators, before approximately $123 million was routed to Coinbase and other exchanges, while only about $50 million was returned to investors as purported “profits.”

Advertisement

According to the complaint, plaintiffs claim JPMorgan failed to act on multiple anti–money laundering red flags, including rapid, large-value transfers inconsistent with declared business activities and repeated inflows from retail investors. They argue that the bank’s alleged failure to file or escalate suspicious activity reports allowed the scheme to continue far longer than it otherwise would have, dramatically increasing total losses. The case seeks damages for investors and aims to hold one of the world’s largest banks liable for what plaintiffs frame as willful blindness to obvious fraud patterns.

Potential precedent for banking rails in crypto fraud

If the case proceeds, it could become a test of how far U.S. courts are willing to extend liability to traditional financial institutions that provide fiat on- and off-ramps to crypto-related investments. Plaintiffs are effectively arguing that banks cannot treat crypto fraud as an external problem while continuing to profit from deposit flows and payment processing tied to suspicious schemes.

For the broader digital asset sector, the lawsuit underscores a growing regulatory and legal focus on “enablers” of fraud, not just token issuers or platform operators. Exchanges and custodians already sit under heavy scrutiny; extending that lens to global banks that process billions in flows for crypto investment products could reshape compliance expectations around KYC/AML, transaction monitoring, and de-banking of high-risk promoters. The outcome is likely to be closely watched by both Wall Street and major crypto venues, given the central role of banking rails in market structure and liquidity.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Crypto World

What True Self-Custody Actually Requires

Published

on

What True Self-Custody Actually Requires

New research examines how investor behavior, wallet architectures, and operational security practices determine what genuine self-custody requires in 2026.

The foundational promise of cryptocurrency is decentralized, sovereign ownership. But this promise has run into a far more sobering reality, as a lot of funds held on centralized exchanges have been lost over the years. Users have learned the same lesson in different forms: Not your keys, not your coins.

Cointelegraph Research’s latest report, produced in collaboration with Trezor, the original hardware wallet, and titled “The Future of Self-Custody: Turning Ownership Into Security,” examines how this realization has reshaped investor behavior. Drawing on survey responses, post-mortem analyses of exchange failures, and a breakdown of modern wallet architectures, the report explains why self-custody should be a defining topic for crypto security in 2026.

Read the full research report to see how Cointelegraph Research translates what genuine self-custody security requires in 2026

Advertisement

Survey data shows a decisive erosion of trust in centralized exchanges. A majority of respondents now trust exchanges less than they did a year earlier, with the memory of the FTX collapse remaining a key psychological driver. Even regulatory frameworks such as MiCA, which improve custodial oversight, do not alter the underlying dynamic. Users increasingly recognize that custodial access can be restricted or withdrawn by decisions outside of their control. Migration into self-custody has therefore become a form of risk management.

Once assets move into self-custody, security no longer depends on institutional controls but on the user’s operational discipline. The survey shows that most users converge on a simple architecture, yet many still misunderstand that while hardware wallets meaningfully reduce the risk of remote compromise, they do not eliminate losses caused by the user.  

Security, Trezor, Hardware Wallet, Cryptocurrency Exchange, Cointelegraph Research Reports

As a result, the report shifts the focus from device choice to behavior: how transactions are verified, how recovery material is stored, and how users model real-world threats.

Security, Trezor, Hardware Wallet, Cryptocurrency Exchange, Cointelegraph Research Reports

The central conclusion is that turning ownership into security is not achieved through regulation, branding, or devices alone. It is a behavioral practice that depends on disciplined use of devices and an accurate understanding of what custody does and does not protect against.

Read the full report to understand why self-custody is important

This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as, legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph. Cointelegraph does not endorse the content of this article nor any product mentioned herein. Readers should do their own research before taking any action related to any product or company mentioned and carry full responsibility for their decisions. While we strive to provide accurate and timely information, Cointelegraph does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information in this article. This article may contain forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties. Cointelegraph will not be liable for any loss or damage arising from your reliance on this information.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Playnance Announces G Coin Launch Ahead of March 18 Token Generation Event

Published

on

Playnance Announces G Coin Launch Ahead of March 18 Token Generation Event

[PRESS RELEASE – Tel Aviv, Israel, March 12th, 2026]

Playnance, a Web3 infrastructure company focused on blockchain-based digital entertainment platforms, is set to launch G Coin on March 18th, the utility token powering activity across its ecosystem of on-chain gaming, prediction markets, and interactive financial platforms.

Unlike many token launches that precede product adoption, G Coin enters the market as part of a live ecosystem already processing significant daily activity. According to Playnance’s public tracker, the token currently has more than 200,000 holders, with approximately 13 billion G Coin distributed during the presale phase and an estimated market capitalization of around $38 million ahead of its Token Generation Event.

G Coin functions as the unified economic layer of the Playnance ecosystem, facilitating gameplay activity, predictions, settlements, rewards, and other forms of participation across the network’s platforms. The token operates on PlayBlock, Playnance’s blockchain infrastructure, which enables fast, gasless interactions while maintaining non-custodial ownership and on-chain transparency.

Advertisement

The broader Playnance ecosystem operates at scale across a network of digital entertainment platforms. The infrastructure supports more than 300,000 registered accounts, integrates with over 30 game studios, and runs more than 10,000 on-chain games. Across the network, platforms process approximately 2 million on-chain transactions per day and support interaction with more than 2.5 million sports events annually. Together, these platforms form a high-volume on-chain environment where millions of daily interactions are powered by G Coin across gaming, sports events, and financial prediction markets.

“On March 18, G Coin will enter the market with real adoption already in place,” said Pini Peter, CEO of Playnance. “With more than 200,000 holders and millions of daily on-chain interactions, G Coin introduces a usage-driven token economy designed to grow alongside its expanding global community. There are many other surprises on the way to take the entertainment world to the next level, stay tuned”

Recent ecosystem developments have reflected continued activity growth ahead of the token launch. Earlier this year, Playnance reported that its “Be The Boss” program surpassed $2 million in real cash payouts to participants, while the broader ecosystem generated more than $5.3 million in total revenue.

G Coin operates within a fixed supply model capped at 77 billion tokens, with no future minting. Supply management is handled through a structured lock and release mechanism designed to moderate circulating supply. Tokens lost through gameplay are locked for 12 months before returning to circulation according to their original loss date, while unsold tokens at the Token Generation Event are subject to a 12-month cliff followed by a 24-month linear vesting schedule.

With the launch of G Coin, Playnance formalizes the economic layer supporting its digital entertainment infrastructure, connecting gameplay, sports events, prediction markets, and partner platforms within a single on-chain ecosystem.

Advertisement

About Playnance

Founded in 2020, Playnance is a Web3 infrastructure company developing live, non-custodial, on-chain products designed to onboard mainstream Web2 users into blockchain environments. The company develops consumer-facing platforms built on shared wallet systems and high-volume on-chain execution, currently processing approximately 2 million transactions per day. Playnance focuses on reducing friction between user experience and blockchain infrastructure by abstracting complexity while maintaining full on-chain transparency and non-custodial architecture.

SPECIAL OFFER (Exclusive)

Binance Free $600 (CryptoPotato Exclusive): Use this link to register a new account and receive $600 exclusive welcome offer on Binance (full details).

LIMITED OFFER for CryptoPotato readers at Bybit: Use this link to register and open a $500 FREE position on any coin!

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

65% of Bitcoin Supply Not Vulnerable to Quantum Threat: Ark Invest

Published

on

65% of Bitcoin Supply Not Vulnerable to Quantum Threat: Ark Invest

US investment manager Ark Invest claims that the lion’s share of the Bitcoin supply is already safe from the quantum computing breakthrough, leaving ample warning signals for builders to quantum-proof the rest of the supply.

Around 65.4% of the Bitcoin (BTC) supply is not vulnerable to the threat of a quantum computing breakthrough, but about 34.6% of the BTC supply remains at risk, according to a Wednesday white paper published by Ark Invest and Bitcoin-focused financial services company Unchained.

This includes around 5 million BTC, or 25% of the total supply, assumed migratable due to address re-use, and 1.7 million BTC, or 8.6% of the supply, assumed lost in P2PK (Pay-to- Public-Key) addresses, the earliest form of transaction script on the Bitcoin blockchain, which locked funds directly to public keys. Another 200,000 BTC (around 1%) is assumed to be migratable due to the address type P2TR (Pay-to-Taproot).

This supply would be vulnerable to quantum theft if quantum computers can break Bitcoin’s elliptic curve cryptography (ECC), which would require about 2,330 logical qubits and tens of millions to billions of quantum gates, the report argued.

Advertisement

“Even so, their practical feasibility would require quantum systems to reach performance levels that our research suggests will take much time to achieve.”

Source: Ark Invest, David Puell

The paper’s estimates are far broader than those in a February CoinShares analysis, which said the realistically market-relevant portion of quantum-vulnerable Bitcoin was about 10,200 BTC, or roughly 0.05% of supply, even though legacy P2PK addresses account for a much larger theoretical exposure.

Separately, the first quantum computer facility with one million physical qubits (the equivalent of tens of billions of typical computers) is expected to be finished in 2027 by Chicago-based PsiQuantum, which raised $1 billion from BlackRock-linked funds.

Quantum breakthrough remains “long-term risk” for Bitcoin

Ark’s white paper argues that quantum risks will evolve over an extended period with “many intermediate warning signals” rather than an abrupt single point of failure. 

Related: Cathie Wood says ARK’s $1.5M Bitcoin bull price hasn’t changed as markets eye rally

Quantum breakthrough remains a “long-term risk,” rather than an imminent threat to the Bitcoin network, which gives the community time to “research and make plans for protecting the network” against the protracted development of quantum capabilities, the paper states.

Advertisement

Ark Invest foresees five stages for quantum computing advancements, but said that only the final stage of advancements will break ECC quicker than Bitcoin’s 10-minute block time.

Bitcoin held in quantum-vulnerable addresses should not be at risk until stage 3, when a quantum computer can break the 256-bit ECC key.

The white paper said that the first public key may be broken in the mid-2030s, citing a consensus target by companies including Google, IBM and Microsoft.

Stages of quantum computing development. Source: Ark Invest

Bitcoin must implement quantum-safe address formats despite governance challenge

Quantum computers will inevitably reach stage 4 and become a threat to the Bitcoin network, which means that Bitcoin must implement a quantum-safe address format, the paper argues.

The measure will require the integration of post-quantum cryptography (PQC) into Bitcoin, such as the ML-DSA lattice-based signature scheme and the SLH-DSA hash-based signature. 

Advertisement

“Those standards give us confidence in the capabilities of post-quantum cryptography,” wrote Ark Invest, cautioning that upgrading to PQC on the consensus level will be more difficult due to Bitcoin’s decentralized governance structure, which requires the majority of network participants to agree to a soft fork.

The paper said Bitcoin will eventually need quantum-safe address formats and, over time, post-quantum cryptography. One draft path under discussion, BIP-360, proposes a Pay-to-Merkle-Root output type designed to reduce long-exposure quantum risk by removing Taproot’s key-path vulnerability, though it does not itself add post-quantum digital signatures.

Related: Whale’s $9B Bitcoin sale was not due to quantum concerns: Galaxy Digital

However, BIP-360 is not the final solution to Bitcoin’s quantum threat, according to Chris Tam, president and head of quantum innovation at BTQ Technologies.

Advertisement

“The proposal introduces a new address format but critically does not include post-quantum digital signatures, which are essential for any meaningful long-term defense against quantum attacks,” he told Cointelegraph.

Magazine: Bitcoin may take 7 years to upgrade to post-quantum: BIP-360 co-author