Connect with us

Crypto World

Las Vegas businessman faces 280 years over $24 million crypto Ponzi scheme

Published

on

Las Vegas businessman faces 280 years over $24 million crypto Ponzi scheme

A federal jury has convicted Las Vegas businessman Brent Kovar of fraud and money laundering after prosecutors said his Profit Connect operation collected $24 million from at least 400 investors through false claims about cryptocurrency mining, investment returns and company reserves.

Summary

  • Brent Kovar was convicted of fraud and money laundering over a $24 million crypto Ponzi scheme.
  • Profit Connect collected funds from at least 400 investors with promises of 15% to 30% annual returns.
  • Prosecutors said investor money funded the business, personal purchases and repayments to earlier investors.
  • Kovar faces a statutory maximum of 280 years in prison and is scheduled for sentencing on Nov. 30.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Nevada said on Aug. 24 that Kovar was found guilty after a nine-day trial on 11 counts of wire fraud, two counts of mail fraud and two counts of money laundering. He is scheduled to be sentenced on Nov. 30 and faces a statutory maximum penalty of 280 years in prison.

Kovar owned Profit Connect from late 2017 through July 2021, presenting the Las Vegas company as a profitable operation that used artificial intelligence software running on a supercomputer to mine cryptocurrency and verify crypto transactions, according to prosecutors.

Advertisement

Investors were promised fixed annual returns of between 15% and 30%, along with a 100% money-back guarantee. Prosecutors said Kovar also claimed Profit Connect was supported by hundreds of millions of dollars in cryptocurrency reserves, despite knowing the company had no such reserves and could not generate the returns being offered.

Brent Kovar used new investor funds for repayments

Federal prosecutors said Profit Connect was not profitable and had no legitimate source of income capable of supporting its promised returns or guarantee.

Instead, Kovar used money received from investors to keep the business operating, purchase gifts for employees and buy a house for himself, the U.S. Attorney’s Office said. Part of the money was also sent back to existing investors while being presented as proceeds generated through cryptocurrency mining and transaction verification.

The structure allowed Profit Connect to continue making payments despite lacking the investment activity and reserves Kovar had described to customers, according to prosecutors. By the time the operation ended, authorities said at least 400 people had invested a combined $24 million.

Advertisement

During the earlier criminal case, federal prosecutors said Kovar used a website, YouTube video and PowerPoint presentation to market Profit Connect and persuade customers to invest. The business also leased space for a sales office and a warehouse that was presented as a data center. Investments were sold through an entity called Profit Connect Wealth Services.

The original February 2025 indictment charged Kovar with 12 wire fraud counts, three mail fraud counts and three money laundering counts and carried a maximum statutory exposure of 330 years if he were convicted on every charge. Following the trial, the jury returned guilty verdicts on 15 counts, leaving him with a maximum statutory exposure of 280 years.

Prosecutors say Profit Connect sold false guarantees

Investigators focused on several claims used to market the business, including Profit Connect’s stated investment returns and the assertion that investors could recover all of their money.

Advertisement

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Office of Inspector General Special Agent in Charge Ryan Korner said Kovar also lured victims with false claims that the investment was insured by the FDIC.

“Mr. Kovar defrauded investors to enrich himself,” Korner said, adding that investigators would continue working with other agencies to pursue financial fraud cases.

David Lowe, acting special agent in charge of IRS Criminal Investigation’s San Francisco Field Office, said the operation relied on “false guarantees, fabricated profits and nonexistent reserves,” which left investors facing financial losses.

FBI Las Vegas Special Agent in Charge Christopher S. Delzotto said victims believed they were investing in new technology, while prosecutors determined that the investment operation had been built on false representations.

Advertisement

First Assistant U.S. Attorney Sigal Chattah said the verdict demonstrated prosecutors’ commitment to pursuing financial fraud involving manipulated records and millions of dollars in investor funds.

IRS Criminal Investigation, the FBI and the FDIC OIG investigated the case. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Joshua Brister and James Gaeta are prosecuting it, according to the Nevada U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Crypto Ponzi prosecutions have produced mixed outcomes

Kovar’s conviction follows several other U.S. criminal cases involving investment businesses that prosecutors said used cryptocurrency claims to attract investors while directing incoming money toward earlier customers or personal expenses.

A July crypto.news report on the BitClub Network case detailed the Justice Department’s reported move to dismiss charges against founder Matthew Goettsche despite allegations that the crypto mining operation defrauded investors of $722 million. The reported decision would end the prosecution with prejudice if approved by the court.

Advertisement

BitClub had been accused of selling shares in cryptocurrency mining pools while overstating mining returns and using investor money to pay existing participants. The reported move to dismiss the case followed a 2025 Justice Department policy directing prosecutors not to use criminal enforcement as a substitute for digital-asset regulation.

Federal authorities have continued filing fraud cases where prosecutors allege conventional financial crimes involving digital assets.

In February, a report on the Goliath Ventures case covered the arrest of founder and CEO Christopher Alexander Delgado over an alleged $328 million Ponzi scheme. Prosecutors accused Delgado of promoting cryptocurrency liquidity pools that promised consistent monthly returns while directing investor funds toward earlier investors and personal spending.

The Justice Department alleged that Goliath Ventures collected more than $300 million even though only about $1 million was placed into legitimate cryptocurrency assets. Prosecutors said other funds were spent on expenses that included luxury travel, corporate events and multimillion-dollar homes.

Advertisement

Other cases have centered on promised crypto returns

Federal prosecutors brought another case in June against Tennessee resident Misam Abidi over an alleged $1.9 million scheme operated through Star Credit Holdings.

Court documents cited in coverage of the Star Credit Holdings case accused Abidi of making false statements about investment returns, company reserves and assets under management between 2020 and 2024. The charges included wire fraud, money laundering, operating an unlicensed money-transmitting business and filing false tax returns.

Separate federal actions have also moved from prosecution toward victim recovery. In April, the Justice Department opened a compensation process backed by more than $40 million in forfeited assets for people who lost money in OneCoin, according to coverage of the OneCoin victim fund.

Federal prosecutors have estimated that OneCoin took more than $4 billion from roughly 3.5 million people between 2014 and 2019. Co-founder Karl Sebastian Greenwood received a 20-year federal prison sentence in 2023, while fellow founder Ruja Ignatova remains a fugitive and is listed among the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted.

Advertisement

Kovar’s sentence will be determined by a federal district court judge after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors, with the sentencing hearing currently set for Nov. 30, 2026.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Meta Targets Early September for Hatch, Its Consumer AI Agent

Published

on

Meta Platforms (META) Stock Performance Year-To-Date

Meta Platforms is reportedly planning to launch a consumer AI agent, known internally as Hatch, within the coming weeks. Documents reviewed by The Information also show an October target for a new model, Watermelon.

The release anchors Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg’s ambition to monetize Meta’s AI investments and diversify revenue. The AI spending has weighed substantially on the company’s cash flow.

Meta Plans Subscription AI Agent Hatch as It Seeks To Diversify Revenue

Meta has weighed a tiered subscription for Hatch, according to the documents. Premium access could cost up to $199.99 per month and include higher usage limits. The documents put the release in late August or early September.

The stakes show up in Meta’s own numbers. The firm reported $60.8 billion in second-quarter revenue. Advertising delivered $59.4 billion of that, more than 97% of the total. 

Advertisement

Everything else is quite small. Reality Labs brought in $431 million, while other revenue reached $1.01 billion.

Meanwhile, the AI buildout continues to grow. Meta raised the floor of its 2026 capital expenditure range to $130 billion from $125 billion. The ceiling stayed at $145 billion.

Capital expenditures reached $31.08 billion in the quarter. Operating cash flow of $31.86 billion left just $784 million in free cash flow. The figure was $8.55 billion a year earlier.

Investors have not rewarded the buildout so far. META closed Monday at $559.02, valuing the company at nearly $1.42 trillion, and the shares have fallen by over 15% this year.

Advertisement
Meta Platforms (META) Stock Performance Year-To-Date
Meta Platforms (META) Stock Performance Year-To-Date. Source: Google Finance

A youth-safety trial in Oakland has also added pressure. Bank of America keeps a Buy rating and an $810 target. Mizuho is wary, comparing the case to the tobacco litigation of the 1990s.

Hatch would give Meta a consumer revenue line that does not depend on advertisers. Whether subscribers pay enough to matter against a $145 billion spending year is the open question.

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

What Meta’s AI Agent Will Do

Hatch has been trained to work across DoorDash, Etsy, Reddit, Yelp, and Outlook. Early prototypes show a customizable dashboard featuring tools and skills created by AI agents.

Meta is also preparing a WhatsApp platform that lets users integrate and interact with third-party AI agents. The company could begin testing the platform with a limited group of users as soon as this week.

Advertisement

The company has shipped several models this year. Muse Spark arrived in April, version 1.1 in July, and version 1.2 alongside the Muse Code agent in August. 

Whether Watermelon will join the Muse family remains unclear. Meta is estimated to report its third-quarter earnings on October 28, the same month Watermelon is due. Neither product will have had long to prove its economics by then.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights

The post Meta Targets Early September for Hatch, Its Consumer AI Agent appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Stablecoin card spending could reach $50B annually by 2028: RedotPay

Published

on

Binance holds nearly 87% of USD1 stablecoin supply: Forbes 

Stablecoin card spending has crossed $10.9 billion in cumulative volume as RedotPay projected that annual spending through the products could quadruple to $50 billion by 2028.

Summary

  • Stablecoin cards have processed more than $10.9 billion in cumulative spending.
  • July card spending topped $1 billion for the first time, according to Paymentscan.
  • RedotPay expects annual stablecoin card spending to reach $50 billion by 2028.
  • The company cited adoption, clearer regulation and cross border payment use as growth drivers.

RedotPay said in an Aug. 25 blog post that the industry recorded more than $1 billion in card spending during July for the first time, citing independent payments data provider Paymentscan, as usage continued to rise across markets in Latin America, Africa and Asia-Pacific.

The stablecoin payments company expects the industry to process its next $10 billion in eight months after taking roughly three years to reach the first $10 billion. By 2028, RedotPay expects stablecoin-powered cards to be handling $50 billion in annualized spending.

Advertisement

“When you consider that over $20 trillion will be spent this year on traditional cards, $50 billion per year no longer seems unattainable,” the company said.

Paymentscan data showed July 2026 as the largest month recorded for the sector. Its headline dataset put stablecoin card spending at about $1.04 billion during the month, compared with roughly $339 million in July 2025.

RedotPay attributed its forecast to its own operating data, adoption patterns in several developing markets, clearer rules for stablecoin businesses and increasing use of digital dollars for payments, remittances and foreign exchange services.

Stablecoin card spending has accelerated in 2026

Stablecoin cards connect cryptocurrency balances to existing card networks, allowing users to pay merchants while stablecoins or other digital assets are converted or settled through the infrastructure behind the transaction.

RedotPay said the products have moved from an experimental payment method toward regular consumer use. When the company launched its first card about three years ago, it estimated that the entire industry was processing around $60,000 each month. Current volumes can reach the same amount in roughly four minutes, according to its blog.

Advertisement

Jonathan Chan, RedotPay’s head of partnerships and co-founder, said the company was seeing demand from customers who use stablecoins to handle ordinary financial needs instead of cryptocurrency trading.

“Stablecoin-powered cards have reached their mainstream moment, hitting all-time highs in spending volume on the strength of their utility in daily life,” Chan said.

“Our users are not necessarily crypto traders. They are people who found a better way to manage their finances because the previous options they had weren’t good enough. This is where the growth will come from.”

The company pointed to customers using the cards for expenses such as groceries, subscriptions, travel and rent across more than 100 countries. RedotPay also cited examples of users who need access to international digital services, mobile wallets or dollar-denominated balances where local banking products do not provide the same options.

Advertisement

Consumer card products have also become a larger part of RedotPay’s own business. In July, crypto.news previously reported that the company had launched an XRP Ledger-powered product allowing customers to pledge XRP as collateral and access a credit line settled in Ripple USD.

The product uses a 50% loan-to-value ratio and allows the borrowed value to be spent through Visa merchants while customers retain exposure to their pledged XRP. At the time, RedotPay reported more than 8 million users in over 100 countries and roughly $12 billion in annualized payment volume.

RedotPay now puts its annualized payment volume at approximately $14 billion and annualized revenue at more than $180 million. The company said it has built a profitable business while expanding its stablecoin payment services.

Clearer rules and better products are supporting card use

Explaining the increase in card activity, RedotPay identified regulatory developments as one of the factors that have made consumers and payment companies more willing to use stablecoin-based services.

Advertisement

The company said clearer requirements in important markets have given established operators a more defined framework for licensing and compliance while giving potential customers more confidence in stablecoin products.

Product improvements have played a role as well, according to RedotPay. Interfaces have become easier to use, fiat-to-crypto and crypto-to-fiat services have expanded their coverage, conversion pricing has improved and customer support has become more developed.

RedotPay expects fast-growing payment companies to spend more on licenses and compliance as transaction volumes rise. It also expects traditional financial companies to make more use of stablecoin settlement infrastructure, while additional providers connect blockchain networks with existing banking rails.

The company has begun building its own U.S. regulatory footprint. RedotPay said it recently obtained its first U.S. money transmitter license and has applications pending in more than 20 additional states.

Advertisement

Card networks have been adding stablecoin settlement services at the same time. In June, Mastercard added support for settlement using six regulated dollar-backed stablecoins, including USDC, PayPal USD, Ripple USD, Global Dollar, Pax Dollar and SoFiUSD.

Mastercard said the system can settle transactions outside normal banking hours, including weekends and holidays, while retaining existing card payment processes. Supported blockchain networks included Ethereum, Solana and the XRP Ledger.

Stripe has also been building stablecoin card infrastructure through Bridge. A July report detailed how the program expanded into more than 100 markets after Stripe acquired the stablecoin infrastructure company.

Former Stripe stablecoin partnerships head Connor Fitzgerald said the team established sponsor bank and card network relationships, built stablecoin settlement infrastructure in the United States and took annualized payment volume from zero into the tens of millions of dollars.

Advertisement

Stablecoin payments extend beyond consumer checkout

Card spending represents one part of the stablecoin payments market, with cross-border settlement, remittances and business payments accounting for other use cases that RedotPay expects to support future adoption.

In May, BridgerPay co-founder and CEO Ran Cohen said stablecoin payment demand remained concentrated in cross-border settlement, business-to-business payouts and treasury operations. Cohen expected stablecoins to expand through business payment flows without displacing conventional cards at merchant checkouts.

RedotPay’s model connects the two systems by allowing users to fund spending from digital assets while relying on existing card networks for merchant acceptance.

The company identified Latin America, Africa and Asia-Pacific as important markets in its forecast. RedotPay said customers in such regions can use stablecoins for dollar savings, international purchases, travel spending and access to payment products that may not be available through their local banks.

Advertisement

Cross-border use also gives stablecoin cards a role in remittances and foreign exchange, according to the company, particularly where customers already hold digital dollars and need to convert or spend them without moving funds through several financial services.

RedotPay said competition among companies connecting traditional banking systems with stablecoins could reduce costs as more providers enter the sector. The company expects established financial institutions to increase their use of stablecoin rails as payment infrastructure develops.

Its 2028 projection would put annual stablecoin card spending at $50 billion, roughly four times the current annualized level cited by the company, while remaining a small fraction of the more than $20 trillion RedotPay expects consumers to spend using traditional cards this year.

The company currently serves more than 8 million users globally, with pending money transmitter license applications in more than 20 U.S. states alongside the first state license it has already received.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Live updates: Bitcoin ETFs draw a sixth straight day of inflows as the rally holds above $80,000

Published

on

Live updates: Bitcoin ETFs draw a sixth straight day of inflows as the rally holds above $80,000


Spot bitcoin funds took in $337.56 million on Aug. 24, extending an unbroken run of inflows that has now put real money behind a rally that started with a short squeeze.

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Business Owner Faces 280-Year Max in $24M Crypto Ponzi Case

Published

on

Business Owner Faces 280-Year Max in $24M Crypto Ponzi Case

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

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

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

WTI Analysis: Attempted Uptrend Breakout Without Momentum Confirmation

Published

on

WTI Analysis: Attempted Uptrend Breakout Without Momentum Confirmation

WTI crude fell more than 2% on Monday, 24 August, as market participants took profits amid expectations that the US could announce a new round of sanctions against Iran. Additional pressure came from a warning by the Iranian authority responsible for the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz, which said vessels violating transit rules could face fines or detention.

At the same time, the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), in its 11 August forecast, expects the average Brent price to remain around $85 per barrel in the third quarter. Persistently low commercial crude inventories in the US could also help limit the downside and prevent a deeper decline.

Technical Analysis of WTI

On the four-hour XTI/USD chart, prices had been moving within a short-term uptrend since the beginning of August. The trendline repeatedly acted as support during previous pullbacks, but the price is now attempting to break below it while also moving beneath the lower boundary of the current market profile at $86.05.

If the downside move gains traction, the next potential support area is around $84.40.

A false breakout followed by a renewed advance would bring several technical levels into focus. The first is the Point of Control (POC) at $87.20, followed by the upper profile boundary at $87.95. The overall depth of the market profile is also worth monitoring: the narrower the profile, the less buying pressure may be required to overcome it.

Advertisement

Above the main concentration of trading activity lies the red resistance zone at $91.30.

The RSI + MAs indicator currently shows readings of 48, 57 and 57. RSI has returned to the neutral area following the pullback, but notably remained below the overbought zone throughout virtually the entire uptrend. At the same time, both moving averages remain positive and are holding above the neutral threshold.

Key Takeaways

The break below the ascending trendline has yet to receive confirmation from the momentum indicators. The moving averages remaining above the neutral zone cast some doubt on the sustainability of the current decline.

The next move could depend heavily on the scale and severity of any new US sanctions against Iran. A stronger-than-expected sanctions package could increase pressure on oil prices, while more limited measures may allow the market to refocus on tight US inventories and provide support for WTI.

Advertisement

Start trading commodity CFDs with tight spreads (additional fees may apply). Open your trading account now or learn more about trading commodity CFDs with FXOpen.

This article represents the opinion of the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand only. It is not to be construed as an offer, solicitation, or recommendation with respect to products and services provided by the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand, nor is it to be considered financial advice.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

CLARITY Act 60-Vote Hurdle Puts Crypto Rules in Focus Days After White House Meeting

Published

on

The CLARITY Act faces a 60-vote Senate hurdle as Trump presses lawmakers, with the outcome shaping crypto regulation and token markets.

The CLARITY Act cleared a Senate Banking Committee vote and now sits on the chamber’s legislative calendar after a cloture motion was filed on August 8, according to congressional records. That procedural motion is the next real test as the bill needs 60 votes just to proceed to floor debate, a bar it has not yet cleared.

The bill, formally H.R. 3633 or the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, passed the House 294-134 in July 2025 with meaningful Democratic support. It would split oversight of digital assets between the SEC and CFTC, a jurisdictional question that has shaped enforcement uncertainty across the industry for years.

The CLARITY Act faces a 60-vote Senate hurdle as Trump presses lawmakers, with the outcome shaping crypto regulation and token markets.

President Donald Trump hosted crypto executives at the White House on August 19, calling on Congress to pass what he termed a “fair version” of the CLARITY Act. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev, and Kraken co-CEO Arjun Sethi were among the attendees, alongside CFTC Chair Michael Selig and SEC Chair Paul Atkins.

That optics push doesn’t change the math on the Senate floor. Democrats and some Republicans have withheld support over conflict-of-interest language tied to Trump’s own crypto holdings. Reuters reported he has earned more than $1.4 billion from family crypto ventures since taking office. Not just that, a Reuters/Ipsos poll this week found a majority of Americans believe those holdings have inappropriately shaped policy.

Discover: The Best Token Presales

Advertisement

Why Should We Care

CLARITY’s core function is resolving the securities-versus-commodity question that has driven years of SEC enforcement actions and left token issuers guessing at their own legal status.

CFTC Chairman Selig has signaled the agency could use existing statutory authority to build out a market-structure regime even without new legislation. SEC itself has separately proposed rules exempting certain token offerings from securities treatment.

That matters for positioning: a stalled bill pushes the regulatory center of gravity toward agency rulemaking rather than statute, which is inherently more reversible with the next administration or the next commissioner. Market structure clarity via legislation is durable; clarity via agency discretion is not.

Trade Crypto Before The Clarity ACT on Bybit and Get a Chance to Win Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop

What Happens Next for The CLARITY Act?

Reporting has pointed to mid-September, with September 15 discussed as a tentative target for the cloture vote. Though that date is not confirmed in the congressional record and should be treated as a planning window rather than a lock.

Advertisement

If cloture fails, the bill’s path forward within the current Congress narrows sharply, given a limited legislative calendar and competing priorities.

If it clears 60 votes, the substitute text reported out of Senate Banking in June, a roughly 600-page revision merging Banking and Agriculture committee work, would move to floor debate. Either outcome resolves a multi-year overhang on token classification, which is why the vote count.

Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio

Advertisement

The post CLARITY Act 60-Vote Hurdle Puts Crypto Rules in Focus Days After White House Meeting appeared first on Cryptonews.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Franklin Templeton and Hashkey roll out U.S. tokenized money fund in Asia

Published

on

Franklin Templeton and Hashkey roll out U.S. tokenized money fund in Asia


Tokenized U.S. treasury and money market funds are one of the fastest-growing segments in the digital asset markets, growing fifteenfold in two years.

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

BlackRock Adds Over 60% of Bitcoin's $338 Million ETF Inflow While ETH Also Jumps

Published

on

BlackRock Adds Over 60% of Bitcoin's $338 Million ETF Inflow While ETH Also Jumps

BlackRock led net inflows across both Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) exchange-traded funds (ETFs) on Aug. 24, with a $209 million Bitcoin ETF inflow from its iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) and $90.92 million from its Ethereum fund, ETHA.

Spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $337.60 million in total net inflows for the day, per CoinGlass data. Spot Ethereum ETFs added $116 million, marking a sixth straight day of gains.

BlackRock Leads Bitcoin ETF Inflows

IBIT’s $209 million accounted for roughly 62% of the day’s total Bitcoin ETF inflow, CoinGlass data shows. The fund extended a stretch of strong demand that included a $606 million Bitcoin inflow just days earlier.

Total net assets across spot Bitcoin ETFs stood at $79.16 billion as of the latest update. BTC traded over $80,000 at the time of writing.

Bitcoin is holding above $80,000/ Image Source: BeInCrypto

Ether ETFs Post Sixth Straight Day of Gains

BlackRock’s ETHA supplied $90.92 million of the day’s $116 million Ethereum ETF haul, about 78% of the total, per SoSoValue. Grayscale’s Ethereum Mini Trust added $12.50 million, the second-largest contribution.

The result builds on the biggest Ether ETF inflow in 10 months, recorded earlier in August. Ether changed hands near $2,486, up 2.4% over 24 hours.

BlackRock is the world’s largest asset manager, with $15.3 trillion in assets under management as of June 30, 2026. It led inflows across both crypto ETF categories on Aug. 24.

That dual dominance suggests BlackRock remains the primary entry point for institutional crypto exposure. The pattern held through most of August.

Advertisement

The post BlackRock Adds Over 60% of Bitcoin's $338 Million ETF Inflow While ETH Also Jumps appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

how Term Labs got governance hijacked

Published

on

Gnosis Pay exploit tied to Zodiac delay module as users exit

An attacker bought a controlling stake in a DAO governance token for less than $1,000, passed malicious proposals, and drained $8.5 million from strategy vaults. The exploit exposes a vulnerability that most DeFi protocols have not patched.

Summary

  • An attacker spent approximately $951 to acquire a controlling share of Term Labs’ governance tokens, then passed proposals that drained roughly $8.5 million from the protocol’s strategy vaults on August 23, 2026.
  • The stolen assets included 2,843 ETH (approximately $6.87 million) and 1.68 million USDC, later swapped for roughly 1.6 million DAI, with the attacker’s initial funding traced to just 2 ETH sourced through Tornado Cash.
  • The exploit did not involve a smart contract bug or a coding flaw. Every transaction was a permitted governance action executed by the address the protocol recognized as its legitimate governor.
  • Term Labs permanently shut down all Meta Vault deposits and revoked DAO governance roles in response, while keeping withdrawals open for existing depositors.
  • The attack is the fifth governance exploit of 2026 according to DefiLlama, bringing the combined total for the year to $25.1 million, led by a $20 million BonkDAO treasury drain in July.

The math is the story. An attacker spent $951 on governance tokens for a protocol that held $12.45 million in depositor funds. That $951 bought enough voting power to control four USDC strategy vaults and approximately 91% of the Ethereum Meta Vault. The attacker submitted proposals to move the funds, voted on those proposals with the tokens just purchased, and watched the vaults transfer $8.5 million to a wallet seeded with 2 ETH from Tornado Cash.

Every step was legal from the protocol’s perspective. The governance contracts worked exactly as designed. The proposals were submitted correctly, the votes were counted accurately, and the vault transfers executed precisely as the governance system instructed. The problem was not that the code broke. The problem was that the code did what it was told by someone who spent less than $1,000 to become its highest authority.

Advertisement

Term Labs confirmed the exploit on X on August 23, 2026. Security firms PeckShield and CertiK independently verified the incident and traced the stolen funds to attacker address 0xD5183d8BfC65a50863C62aF2538198A8288FFc13. The protocol’s on chain monitoring bot, Decurity’s Defimon, flagged the unusual transactions first.

This was not a novel attack. It was the fifth governance exploit of 2026 and the second in seven weeks. The pattern is repeating because the vulnerability is structural, and most DeFi protocols have not addressed it.

How the attack worked, step by step

Term Finance operates fixed rate lending through on chain auctions. The core lending infrastructure, where borrowers and lenders are matched through sealed bid auctions, was not affected by the exploit. The attack targeted a separate layer: the Meta Vaults and strategy vaults that Term Labs built on top of Yearn V3 infrastructure to automate yield strategies for depositors.

These vaults incorporated a custom governance layer developed by Term Labs. Governance token holders could submit and vote on proposals that directed how vault funds were deployed. The governance mechanism was designed to give the community control over strategy allocation, a feature that many DeFi protocols include as a decentralization measure.

Advertisement

The attacker exploited the thin liquidity of the governance token. With total market capitalization low and trading volume minimal, acquiring a majority stake required only a modest capital outlay. The $951 figure, identified by on chain analysts, represents the total cost of purchasing enough tokens to control the vote.

Once the tokens were acquired, the attacker submitted proposals to the four USDC strategy vaults and the Ethereum Meta Vault. The proposals directed the vaults to transfer their holdings to the attacker’s wallet. Because the attacker held a majority of governance tokens, the proposals passed without opposition. The vault contracts, functioning as designed, executed the transfers.

The entire sequence, from token purchase to fund extraction, required no technical exploit in the traditional sense. There was no reentrancy attack, no oracle manipulation, no flash loan. The governance system simply processed valid instructions from its recognized authority. The attacker became that authority for $951.

The BonkDAO precedent

Seven weeks before the Term Labs exploit, BonkDAO suffered a similar attack on a larger scale. On July 6, 2026, an attacker purchased roughly $4 million worth of BONK tokens on exchanges over several days, accumulated a dominant share of voting power, and submitted a proposal to the Solana based DAO’s treasury.

Advertisement

The proposal transferred 4.43 trillion BONK tokens, the bulk of the treasury, to a wallet the attacker controlled. When the vote closed, addresses linked to the attacker accounted for 99.878% of the votes cast. Only seven addresses participated in the vote. The proposal passed, and approximately $20 million in BONK drained from the treasury.

The BonkDAO attack was more expensive to execute ($4 million vs. $951 for Term Labs) because BONK tokens had higher liquidity and a larger market capitalization. But the mechanics were identical: acquire voting power, submit a malicious proposal, and let the governance system do the rest. Exchanges Upbit and Kraken paused BONK deposits and withdrawals after the incident, and BonkDAO coordinated with the Solana Foundation and law enforcement, though recovery prospects were described as limited.

The two attacks share a structural vulnerability that neither protocol had mitigated: the absence of safeguards between a governance vote passing and the resulting transaction executing. In both cases, there was no time lock, no multi signature requirement, and no secondary review mechanism that could have paused the execution long enough for the community to notice and respond.

Yearn V3 and the infrastructure distinction

Yearn Finance moved quickly to clarify its role after the Term Labs exploit. The affected products were Term’s Meta Vaults and strategy vaults, which operated on Yearn V3 infrastructure but incorporated a custom governance wrapper developed by Term Labs. Yearn stated that the vulnerability stemmed from Term’s additional governance layer not from any problem with standard Yearn vault designs.

Advertisement

This distinction matters for the broader DeFi ecosystem. Yearn V3 vaults are used by dozens of protocols for yield automation. If the vulnerability had been in Yearn’s core code, the implications would have extended far beyond Term Labs. The fact that it was isolated to Term’s custom governance layer limits the blast radius but does not diminish the lesson.

The lesson is that composability cuts both ways. DeFi’s modularity allows developers to build custom layers on top of established infrastructure, combining Yearn’s vault mechanics with Term’s lending auctions and a governance system that gives token holders control. Each layer works correctly in isolation. The vulnerability emerges at the intersection, in the governance wrapper that connects depositor funds to a vote that can be won for $951.

Advertisement

Yearn’s standard vault designs include protective measures that Term’s governance layer bypassed. Standard Yearn vaults use strategist multisigs and guardian addresses that can emergency revoke strategies. Term’s custom layer replaced these protections with token weighted governance, trading security for decentralization in a context where the decentralization was illusory because the governance token had no meaningful distribution.

Why thin governance is DeFi’s unpatched vulnerability

The term “governance attack” has entered the DeFi lexicon primarily in 2026. DefiLlama has classified five incidents as governance attacks this year, totaling $25.1 million in losses. The category barely existed before 2025 because governance tokens were either too expensive to accumulate (making attacks unprofitable) or too centralized (with founding teams retaining enough tokens to block malicious proposals).

The current wave of attacks exploits a specific market condition: protocols whose governance tokens have lost most of their value while the protocols themselves still hold significant depositor funds. Term Labs’ governance token was thinly traded with minimal market capitalization, but its vaults held $12.45 million. BonkDAO’s governance was conducted through a token that had fallen significantly from its peak, but the treasury still held $20 million in assets.

The ratio between governance token market capitalization and protocol controlled funds is the key metric. When the cost of acquiring 51% of governance tokens is less than the value of the assets those tokens control, the protocol is mathematically vulnerable to a governance attack. This is not a bug. It is an emergent property of token weighted voting in markets where token prices fluctuate independently of protocol usage.

Advertisement

Most DeFi protocols do not monitor this ratio. Governance structures are typically designed during the launch phase when token prices are high and the ratio favors security. As token prices decline through market cycles, the ratio inverts, and protocols that were economically secure at launch become vulnerable without any code change or governance update.

The defenses that exist but were not used

Several well known mechanisms could have prevented or mitigated the Term Labs exploit. Time locks, which impose a delay between a governance vote passing and the resulting transaction executing, are the most basic. A 24 or 48 hour time lock would have given the community and the Term Labs team time to notice the malicious proposal, mobilize opposition votes, or invoke emergency shutdown procedures.

Multi signature requirements for high value transactions provide a second layer of defense. Under this model, governance proposals that move funds above a certain threshold require approval from multiple independent signers in addition to the token vote. The BonkDAO attack and the Term Labs exploit both involved proposals that moved the majority of treasury funds in a single transaction, an action that a multi signature check would flag.

Quorum requirements are a third option. Both attacks succeeded with extremely low voter participation. The BonkDAO vote involved seven addresses. If the governance system required a minimum percentage of total token supply to participate before a vote could be considered valid, acquiring a controlling share would become proportionally more expensive.

Advertisement

Conviction voting, a model used by protocols like Gardens and 1Hive, replaces discrete voting periods with continuous signal aggregation. Under conviction voting, tokens must be staked for a sustained period before their voting weight reaches full strength. An attacker who purchases tokens and immediately votes would have negligible influence. This model directly addresses the purchase and vote pattern that both the Term Labs and BonkDAO exploits relied on.

The fact that these mechanisms are well documented, widely discussed, and available as open source implementations makes their absence from the exploited protocols harder to excuse. Term Labs chose to implement a custom governance layer without including any of them. The result was a system that trusted governance token holders unconditionally while making it trivially cheap to become one.

The response and what comes next

Term Labs responded to the exploit by permanently shutting down all Meta Vault deposits and revoking DAO governance roles. Withdrawals remained open for existing depositors, allowing them to retrieve whatever funds the attacker did not take. As of August 24, no recovery proposal, reimbursement commitment, or deadline for a postmortem had been announced.

The protocol’s core lending infrastructure, the fixed rate auction system, was not affected. Borrowers and lenders using Term’s auction markets continued to operate normally. The exploit was contained to the vault layer, which functioned as a separate product built on top of the core lending protocol.

Advertisement

For the broader DeFi ecosystem, the Term Labs exploit adds urgency to a conversation that the BonkDAO attack started but did not resolve. Governance attacks are not random. They target a specific structural weakness, thin governance token liquidity relative to protocol controlled assets, that is present in hundreds of DeFi protocols. The $25.1 million in governance attack losses in 2026 represents only the incidents that have already occurred. The number of protocols that are currently vulnerable to the same attack vector is almost certainly larger.

The August 2026 exploit wave extends beyond governance attacks. Total DeFi losses for the month surpassed $27 million, including the Sandbox bridge vulnerability and the BounceBit authorization exploit that led to a full chain shutdown. Each incident involved a different attack surface, but they share a common theme: the gap between the value secured by DeFi infrastructure and the security measures protecting it continues to widen.

What to watch

  • Term Labs postmortem publication: the technical details of how the governance takeover was executed and what safeguards the team plans to implement for future products.
  • Governance ratio monitoring tools: whether analytics platforms begin tracking the ratio between governance token market cap and protocol controlled assets as a vulnerability metric.
  • Time lock adoption across DeFi: whether the Term Labs and BonkDAO exploits accelerate the implementation of mandatory time locks for governance proposals that move funds.
  • Insurance protocol payouts: whether DeFi insurance products (Nexus Mutual, InsurAce) cover governance exploits or classify them as design failures outside their coverage scope.
  • Regulatory response: whether the SEC or CFTC cite governance attacks in their arguments for DeFi regulation, particularly in the context of the Regulation Crypto Assets comment period.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or security advice. DeFi protocols carry significant risk, including smart contract vulnerabilities and governance exploits. Readers should conduct their own research before depositing funds. Published August 25, 2026.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Bitcoin ETFs add $338M as six-day inflow streak hits $2.26B

Published

on

Bitcoin ETFs add $338M as six-day inflow streak hits $2.26B

Bitcoin ETFs add $338M as six-day inflow streak hits $2.26B

Bitcoin ETFs have drawn $2.26 billion over six trading days, while year-to-date net outflows have narrowed to about $2.57 billion.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025