Crypto World
Oil Price Slides Below $100 as China Defies US Hormuz Blockade
US oil prices fell back below $100 per barrel on Monday after a volatile session, reversing gains that pushed crude above $104 earlier in the day.
The sharp pullback came as China’s Defense Minister Admiral Dong Jun signaled that Chinese vessels would continue transiting the Strait of Hormuz under existing agreements with Iran.
China Challenges US Naval Blockade
Admiral Dong Jun delivered a pointed message to the Trump administration and the US Navy. He confirmed that Chinese ships are actively moving through the Strait of Hormuz and that Beijing will honor its trade and energy agreements with Tehran.
“Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz and it is open for us,” the Hormuz Letter reported, citing Admiral Dong Jun.
The statement reframes the standoff. What began as a bilateral US-Iran confrontation now involves a direct challenge from the world’s second-largest economy.
Analysts noted the repricing in oil markets reflects traders reassessing the blockade’s effectiveness now that China has entered the frame.
Notably, the US blockade of Iran affects China’s interests, as China is Iran’s largest oil export destination.
Trump Sets New April 27 Deadline
Speaking from the Oval Office, President Trump issued a fresh two-week ultimatum to Iran. He warned the situation “won’t be pleasant” if Tehran fails to reach a deal by April 27.
The deadline follows the collapse of US-Iran talks in Islamabad on April 12, which prompted Washington to declare a full naval blockade of the strait.
Brent crude had jumped more than 8% to above $103 following that announcement before reversing.
Markets now face a new variable. China’s willingness to test the blockade could determine whether oil stabilizes or enters another leg higher as the April 27 deadline approaches.
However, reports suggest that a tanker bound for China forced to turn back under the U.S. blockade.
“I believe the US intends to use this opportunity to pressure China to help urge Iran to reach an agreement, although this action is not specifically targeted at China,” one user commented.
The post Oil Price Slides Below $100 as China Defies US Hormuz Blockade appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Why dormant Bitcoin addresses are vulnerable to quantum threats
The common narrative surrounding the impact of quantum computing on Bitcoin focuses on a doomsday scenario in which the entire network collapses at once. However, this perspective overlooks a critical distinction in how the risk is actually distributed.
Bitcoin’s quantum vulnerability is not a blanket threat. It is concentrated in dormant addresses with exposed public keys. This includes many of the oldest coins from the “Satoshi era” and lost wallets.
While modern Bitcoin (BTC) addresses use stronger security layers, these legacy holdings could become the primary targets of the first generation of powerful quantum machines. These wallets offer attackers time, scale and minimal resistance. That combination makes them the most likely starting point for any future quantum-driven disruption.
Ultimately, this does not point to a sudden networkwide failure. Instead, it suggests a tiered risk model in which a specific segment of the supply is far more exposed than the rest.
The quantum debate is not just about how powerful computers become. It is also about which parts of Bitcoin are already structurally exposed and which can still adapt in time.
Did you know? Dormant Bitcoin wallets may hold coins secured by older cryptographic methods, making them potential targets if quantum computers ever break current encryption standards.
What quantum computers could actually attack in Bitcoin
Bitcoin relies on two broad cryptographic components: hash functions (SHA-256) for mining and block security and public-key cryptography (ECDSA/Schnorr) for transaction signatures.
Quantum computers affect these components differently.
Hash functions are relatively resilient. While Grover’s algorithm could theoretically weaken them, it would not render them useless. It would only reduce their effective security level.
Public-key cryptography is a different story. Using Shor’s algorithm, a powerful quantum computer could derive a private key from a known public key. In Bitcoin’s context, that means any coin with an exposed public key could be spent by an attacker.
The key distinction: On-spend vs. at-rest attacks
To understand why dormant wallets matter, it is important to distinguish between two types of quantum attacks:
On-spend attacks
-
They occur when a user broadcasts a transaction.
-
The public key becomes visible during the transaction process.
-
The attacker must derive the private key within a short window, roughly one block interval, or about 10 minutes.
At-rest attacks
-
They target coins whose public keys are already exposed on-chain.
-
The attacker has extended time, potentially days, weeks or longer, to compute the private key.
-
No immediate transaction trigger is required.
This timing difference is crucial. On-spend attacks are constrained by speed, while at-rest attacks are constrained only by computational capability.
Why dormant wallets could be more exposed than active ones
Dormant wallets combine three characteristics that make them uniquely vulnerable: no defensive action, long exposure windows and high-value concentration.
-
No defensive action: Active wallets can move funds to new addresses, adopt better practices or migrate to future quantum-resistant formats. Dormant wallets cannot. If the owner has lost access or is no longer active, those coins remain permanently exposed.
-
Long exposure windows: If a wallet’s public key is already visible, attackers can work offline without time pressure. This removes one of Bitcoin’s natural defenses: the short transaction confirmation window.
-
High-value concentration: Many dormant wallets belong to early Bitcoin users who mined or accumulated coins when they had little value. Today, some of these wallets may hold BTC worth tens of thousands of dollars. This creates a high-value, low-resistance target profile.
Did you know? Coins in inactive wallets cannot upgrade their security, which means quantum-resistant fixes may protect only active users, not untouched early Bitcoin holdings.
Which Bitcoin wallets are most exposed
Not all Bitcoin addresses are equally vulnerable. The most exposed categories include the following:
Old P2PK (Pay-to-Public-Key) outputs
-
They were common in Bitcoin’s early years.
-
Public keys are directly visible on-chain.
-
They have no additional layer of protection.
Address reuse
-
This happens when a user spends from an address and continues using it.
-
The public key becomes visible after the first spend.
-
Any remaining funds become vulnerable.
Certain modern script types
-
Some newer formats, such as Taproot outputs, include public keys directly.
-
While they were designed for efficiency and privacy, they may still fall into “at-rest” exposure under quantum assumptions.
Even relatively safer formats can lose that advantage if users reuse addresses.
The scale of the problem: Dormant coins dominate the risk
Quantum risk is not just theoretical. It is also measurable in terms of exposure.
Estimates suggest the following:
-
Bitcoin worth millions of dollars remains in addresses with exposed public keys.
-
A significant portion of these holdings comes from early-era mining rewards.
-
Many of these coins have not moved for more than a decade.
A large share of these holdings consists of 50 BTC block rewards from Bitcoin’s early days, often associated with miners who are no longer active.
This creates a structural imbalance:
In other words, the largest quantum targets are also among the largest Bitcoin holdings.
Did you know? Some of the largest Bitcoin holdings have not moved in more than a decade, creating a silent pool of assets that could be exposed to future quantum attacks.
A deeper challenge: Dormant wallets and network governance
Dormant wallets introduce more than a technical problem. They also raise governance and policy questions.
If quantum attackers begin targeting these coins, the Bitcoin ecosystem could face difficult choices:
-
Should such coins be claimable if the cryptographic conditions are met?
-
Should protocol changes attempt to freeze or protect long-dormant funds?
-
How should the network treat assets that are likely lost but still technically spendable?
This raises broader debates around property rights, immutability and digital salvage. Unlike active users, dormant wallets cannot participate in any migration or upgrade process, which makes them a unique edge case in protocol design.
Why this doesn’t mean Bitcoin is broken
It is important to distinguish between Bitcoin’s long-term structural risk and any immediate threat.
There is currently no widely accepted evidence that quantum computers capable of breaking Bitcoin’s cryptography exist today. The development of such systems is expected to take years, and possibly decades, of engineering progress.
Moreover:
-
The risk is expected to develop gradually.
-
The ecosystem has time to research and deploy mitigation strategies.
-
Active users can adapt more quickly than dormant wallets.
This means the first effects of quantum advances, if and when they arrive, may be selective rather than universal.
What can be done in the meantime
To reduce the vulnerability of dormant Bitcoin wallets to quantum attacks, holders can take a few steps:
-
Minimizing public-key exposure: Reducing address reuse and limiting when public keys are revealed remains a foundational practice.
-
Migration readiness: Developing pathways for users to move funds into future quantum-resistant formats will be critical.
-
Protocol research: Ongoing work is exploring how Bitcoin could integrate quantum-resistant cryptography without compromising its core properties.
These measures primarily benefit active participants, which reinforces the gap between movable and immovable coins.
RAVE, the native token of RaveDAO, has surged more than 6,000% over the past month, capping off one of the most explosive rallies in the crypto market this year and reigniting debate about speculative excesses in digital assets.
The token jumped 198% in the last 24 hours alone and more than 5,600% over the past week, briefly pushing it into the top 50 cryptocurrencies by market capitalization. Prices climbed from roughly $0.25 to above $14 in just seven days, drawing widespread attention across trading platforms and social media.
RaveDAO positions itself as a Web3 music protocol aimed at bridging electronic dance music (EDM) culture with blockchain-based experiences. Its pitch includes on-chain ticketing, crypto-enabled payments at live events, and staking mechanisms tied to real-world rave revenues. The project has claimed partnerships with major industry names including Binance and OKX and reported several million dollars in revenue, helping fuel a narrative of real utility behind the token.
However, market observers say the scale and speed of the rally suggest something more complex, and potentially concerning, beneath the surface.
Blockchain data indicates that only about 24% of RAVE’s total supply is currently in circulation, with the overwhelming majority held in a small number of wallets, according to a post on X. Three large wallets, widely believed to be controlled by the project team, reportedly hold roughly 90% of the total supply. When expanded to the top 10 wallets, concentration exceeds 98%, leaving only a thin float available for trading.
That structure can amplify price movements dramatically. The analyst pointed to a sequence of events shortly before the rally, when wallets linked to the project quietly transferred millions of tokens to exchanges while prices were still below $0.50.
Within hours, trading activity surged, open interest in derivatives markets spiked above $200 million, and daily volume approached the token’s entire market capitalization.
At the same time, a heavily short-positioned market—reportedly with a majority of traders betting against the token—set the stage for a large-scale short squeeze. As prices rose, forced liquidations accelerated the rally, with millions of dollars in short positions wiped out in a single day.
Such dynamics, combined with thin liquidity, can create rapid, self-reinforcing price spikes that are not necessarily driven by organic demand.
The episode comes amid broader concerns about ongoing vulnerabilities and questionable practices in the crypto sector, including recent exploits and controversies involving other projects. For some analysts, RAVE’s surge is less a sign of a healthy market recovery and more evidence that speculative froth and opportunistic behavior remain entrenched.
The company behind Starknet is pivoting from pure infrastructure toward revenue-generating products built on its proprietary tech stack.
StarkWare, the Israeli company behind the Starknet Layer 2 network, is laying off an undisclosed number of employees and reorganizing into two independent business units as it attempts to convert its zero-knowledge technology leadership into sustainable revenue.
Co-founder and CEO Eli Ben-Sasson announced the changes in a company-wide town hall and a subsequent post on X, telling staff that StarkWare has become “too big and too inefficient” for the leaner, faster-moving strategy the company now requires.
“We built the best, safest, most battle-tested ZK tech in blockchain,” Ben-Sasson wrote. “We’ve redefined blockchain using our technology, but that’s not enough.”
The restructuring comes amid a collapse in Starknet’s revenue, which peaked near $6 million in November 2023 but has since fallen to roughly $4,000 in daily fees through the first half of April, per DefiLlama.
The decline is not unique to Starknet. Ethereum’s Dencun upgrade in March 2024 introduced EIP-4844, which replaced gas-intensive calldata with lightweight blobs and significantly slashed Layer 2 transaction fees. The upgrade was a boon for users but gutted fee revenue across the board for rollup providers, a dynamic that has only intensified over the past year. DeFi protocols deploying across multiple L2s have found that over 90% of their fee income still accrues on the Ethereum mainnet.
Under the new structure, StarkWare will operate two purpose-focused units, one led by researcher Avihu Levy and another led by Tom Brand, each serving as a general manager with dedicated business development, engineering, product, and go-to-market teams. Ben-Sasson said the company would adopt a “startup mode” mindset, emphasizing small teams, rapid experimentation, and iterating quickly toward product-market fit.
Levy recently led work on a quantum-safe Bitcoin transaction scheme that uses only existing Bitcoin consensus rules to sidestep the network’s contentious upgrade process. That research is broadly in line with the direction Ben-Sasson outlined for the new applications unit, which will focus on products with “immense potential revenue” that rely on StarkWare’s proprietary stack, including Cairo, Sierra, and its STARK-based cryptography, while minimizing dependencies on external L1 networks.
Additional leadership changes accompany the restructuring. CFO Ran Grinshtein will take over supervision of finance, human resources, security, and IT. Head of Core Engineering Gideon Kaempfer will become chief architect, reporting directly to Ben-Sasson. COO Oren Katz is leaving and will remain in the role through the end of April.
STRK, Starknet’s native token, is trading near $0.033, according to CoinGecko, down more than 95% from its all-time high in March 2024.
The cuts add to a wave of layoffs across the crypto sector this year. StarkWare, which closed its Series D at an $8 billion valuation in 2022 and has raised $287 million in total funding, declined to comment.
This article was written with the assistance of AI workflows. All our stories are curated, edited and fact-checked by a human.
The World’s oldest Parliament, the Isle of Man’s Tynwald, has passed the Foundations (Amendment) Bill 2025, creating the world’s first statutory framework that formally recognizes data as a legal asset – giving organizations a jurisdictional home where datasets can sit on a balance sheet, be licensed, used as collateral, and governed with the same structural clarity applied to physical property.
For decentralized AI protocols, that is not a minor jurisdictional footnote. That is the legal precondition they have been missing since inception.
Before this legislation, data operated in a governance vacuum across virtually every major jurisdiction. Under English common law, which the Isle of Man follows, property exists as either things in possession or things in action. Training datasets, model weights, and behavioral data logs fit neither category cleanly.
The Foundations (Amendment) Bill 2025 changes that by establishing Data Asset Foundations – a formal legal structure built on the island’s existing Foundations Act 2011 – that enables data to be recognized, governed, and monetized within a clear statutory framework.
“What’s unique here isn’t just that it’s a world-first legal framework, it’s the timing. AI is driving an exponential increase in data value, but ownership and structure haven’t kept pace. The Isle of Man is now the first jurisdiction seriously attempting to close that gap, and that’s where entire new markets tend to emerge,” said Samuel Cooling, Founder of Isle of Man-based AI-firm Cooling Strategies.
Yet, despite the emerging opportunity, a core question for DeAI operators remains: does this actually translate into enforceable digital ownership, or is this another regulatory sandbox with limited commercial reach?
- World-first framework: The Isle of Man is the first jurisdiction to establish a statutory framework recognizing data as a legal asset under the Foundations (Amendment) Bill 2025.
- Data Property Rights structure: Data Asset Foundations (DAFs) allow organizations to formally govern, license, and value datasets – enabling balance-sheet recognition and collateral use.
- Built on existing law: The framework extends the island’s Foundations Act 2011, giving it immediate statutory teeth rather than requiring new institutional infrastructure.
- DeAI implications: Decentralized AI protocols with community-contributed training data now have a jurisdiction where that data constitutes a recognized legal asset subject to enforceable Digital Ownership rights.
- CLOUD Act protection: The framework explicitly protects data assets from foreign access laws including the U.S. CLOUD Act, preserving Isle of Man jurisdictional independence.
- Commercial pathways unlocked: DAFs enable data valuation, licensing, fiduciary services, and use of datasets as investment collateral – with MannBenham’s subsidiary Manavia already administering foundations with datasets at “staggering” valuations.
- Competitive regulatory pressure: The UK Law Commission has proposed similar changes but has not legislated – the Isle of Man’s first-mover status creates direct competitive pressure on larger jurisdictions.
Discover: How AI Agents Are Reshaping On-Chain Demand
What the Foundations (Amendment) Bill 2025 Actually Changes for DeAI Operators
The practical mechanics matter here. A Data Asset Foundation under the new framework is a legal entity – built on the Foundations Act 2011 structure – that holds data as its primary asset.
Organizations can deposit datasets into a DAF, assign governance rules, define access terms, and leverage that data as a formally recognized asset in financing, licensing, or acquisition contexts.
For DeAI protocols specifically, this resolves three long-standing structural problems. First, training datasets – often the most valuable asset a decentralized AI project holds – have had no clear legal status in any major jurisdiction.
Under this framework, a DeAI protocol operating through a DAF on the Isle of Man holds its training data as a recognized legal asset, not an intangible without formal status.
Second, data contributed by community members across distributed networks can now be governed with auditable, enforceable rules – addressing the provenance and ownership disputes that have plagued open-source AI models.
Third, institutional investors and lenders can now extend financing against data assets held in DAFs, unlocking capital pathways that were previously unavailable to data-intensive AI startups.
Compare this to the UK, US, and EU positions. The UK Law Commission proposed recognizing a third category of personal property for digital assets in 2023, but has not legislated it.
In the US, data remains largely unrecognized as property at the federal level – the legal treatment varies by sector, with no unified framework.
The EU’s approach under GDPR and the Data Act focuses on data access rights and portability, not formal asset recognition with balance-sheet implications. None of these frameworks give a DeAI operator what the Isle of Man now offers: a statutory home for data as a legal asset with enforceable Digital Ownership structures.
Aga Strandskov, Head of Data Strategy at Digital Isle of Man, put it plainly: “The challenge has never been the availability of data, it has been the lack of a trusted framework to use it with confidence. What this legislation provides is the legal and governance infrastructure that has been missing.”
MannBenham Managing Director Miles Benham went further, noting that gaming operators – one of the island’s core industries – “sit on extraordinarily valuable data estates that have never been formally recognized in law,” and that DAFs change that calculus entirely. This is the structural unlock that comparable jurisdictions have discussed and failed to deliver.
This is directly analogous to Japan’s reclassification of crypto as a financial instrument under the amended FIEA – both moves convert previously ambiguous digital assets into legally recognized instruments with enforceable rights and commercial infrastructure attached. The Isle of Man just did that for data.
The post New ‘Data Asset’ Laws: Why AI Agents Might Move to the Isle of Man appeared first on Cryptonews.
Establishing a strong Bitcoin (BTC) uptrend in 2026 remains a challenge, as exchange-traded fund (ETF) flows have shown limited growth since peaking above $60 billion in 2025.
At the same time, inflows to the gold ETF also dropped by nearly 25% in Q1 and the lack of a capital rotation into BTC signals muted institutional demand.
Bitcoin demand acceleration lacks pace
A recent report from Ecoinometrics shows a clear shift in the demand and persistence of Bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) flows. Before the October 2025 price peak for BTC, ETF inflows often came in extended streaks, including a 15-day run of $4.4 billion in June 2025, which helped sustain upside momentum.
That consistency has faded in recent weeks. The recent direction of ETF flows has changed quickly, with inflow streaks lasting only a few days. Outflows have also clustered, reaching up to 10 consecutive days, totaling $3.2 billion in January, suggesting more reactive positioning.
The cumulative data reinforces this slowdown. Bitcoin ETF flows have plateaued at $55–$60 billion in 2026, showing little net growth. Over the same period, gold ETF flows dropped sharply to near $45 billion from around $60 billion, without a corresponding pickup in Bitcoin demand.
Ecoinometrics explained that the Federal Reserve’s lack of relief reinforces the slowdown in demand. US Treasury yields have shifted higher across maturities, with the 30-year yield rising toward 4.9% from 4.7% six months ago, while the shorter durations (10-year bond yield) also moved to 4.3% from 3.8% in October 2025.
The elevated yields offer competitive returns, reducing the need for sustained ETF-driven exposure to Bitcoin. Ecoinometrics added,
“As long as the bond market holds this view, Bitcoin is operating without a liquidity tailwind. And without that tailwind, sustained upside becomes much harder to build.”
Related: Bernstein says Bitcoin market already priced in quantum risk
Will Bitcoin overcome a key resistance level?
Crypto trader Ardi explained that one reason the current BTC range near $74,000 refuses to break is that retail and professional traders show similar behavior. Long positions drop as the price tests resistance, while the short exposure increases.
Hyblock’s four-hour chart highlights this repeated pattern. Long accounts decline sharply at highs, while short positioning builds at the same levels. These flows treat upward moves as opportunities to exit rather than extend exposure.
The profit-taking from longs meets fresh short entries in the order book. That interaction reinforces the upper boundary and interrupts attempts to retain the uptrend.
Ardi said that a shift would require stronger long-term accumulation near the resistance, where buyers absorb available supply rather than react to it. For now, the positioning data near $75,000 continues to cap each rally.
However, the above condition could soon change as early Bitcoin adopter Willy Woo noted the return of capital flows into BTC for the first time since January. In an X post, Woo said,
“Capital flows into BTC just flipped positive, first time since January. Liquidity is repairing… spot remains stable while derivatives after being destroyed 10 Oct is now making its second attempt at rebounding. 80k remains key test level.”
Related: Nigel Farage-backed Stack BTC adds $2.7M in Bitcoin to treasury
This article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and is intended for informational purposes only. It does not constitute investment advice or recommendations. All investments and trades carry risk; readers are encouraged to conduct independent research before making any decisions. Cointelegraph makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information presented, including forward-looking statements, and will not be liable for any loss or damage arising from reliance on this content.
The exchange’s head of security said there had been two incidents involving “inappropriate access” to client data, involving about 2,000 user accounts.
Kraken’s chief security officer said that the company would not be negotiating with a criminal group threatening to release certain information related to client data.
In a Monday X post, Nick Percoco reported an attempt to extort an unspecified amount from the cryptocurrency exchange by an unnamed group “threatening to release videos of our internal systems with client data shown.” He said Kraken’s systems “were never breached” and user funds were not at risk from the attempt.
“We will not pay these criminals,” said Percoco. “We will not ever negotiate with bad actors.”
According to Percoco, there had been two incidents involving “inappropriate access” to client data in February 2025 and “more recently,” involving about 2,000 user accounts. He added that Kraken was working with federal law enforcement to investigate the criminal group, potentially leading to arrests.
Related: US Treasury expands cybersecurity threat intel to crypto industry
The incident highlights how crypto exchange security protecting personal data and user funds remains paramount as the industry continues to expand. There have been numerous instances where individuals tied to crypto companies or with digital asset holdings have been extorted or faced attempts at extortion.
Coinbase faced similar extortion attempt
In May 2025, Coinbase reported that cybercriminals threatened to leak user data in an attempt to extort $20 million out of the crypto exchange.
The breach, which the exchange said had compromised data from about 70,000 users, was the result of bribes to customer support contractors.
More than $178 million was lost across major crypto incidents in March 2026, up from February’s $49.3 million, according to blockchain intelligence firm Nominis.
Authorization abuse continued to represent the primary attack vector, according to the report, with multiple incidents last month involving victims unknowingly approving transactions that gave hackers direct access to their funds.
Magazine: Should users be allowed to bet on war and death in prediction markets?
Nigel Farage has become the first sitting UK MP to publicly buy Bitcoin, fronting a £2 million ($2.5 million) purchase through Stack BTC Plc.
The move marks a historic crossover between politics and crypto, and signals growing institutional confidence in Bitcoin as a treasury asset.
Inside the £2.5 Million Bitcoin Treasury Strategy
The transaction, executed on April 13, 2026, positions Farage as both the first sitting Member of Parliament and the first UK political party leader to publicly participate in a Bitcoin purchase.
The deal was carried out at Blockchain.com’s London headquarters, where Farage was filmed taking part in the process.
According to Stack BTC, the move is a “landmark moment,” amid the firm’s strategy to build a corporate Bitcoin reserve.
Farage, a key shareholder, emphasized the rationale that a Bitcoin treasury company must actively accumulate the asset to remain credible.
The $2.5 million buy was funded through recent capital raises totaling over £4.2 million ($5.25 million). Stack BTC’s model combines acquiring profitable UK businesses with converting surplus capital into Bitcoin, effectively treating BTC as a long-term balance sheet asset.
The company previously held a small position of 21 BTC but is now scaling aggressively with 68.19 Bitcoins in its treasury as of this writing.
This mirrors a broader trend among firms globally adopting Bitcoin as “digital gold” amid inflation concerns and fiat currency volatility.
Backing the initiative is Kwasi Kwarteng, former UK Chancellor and Executive Chairman of Stack BTC, adding political and financial credibility to the strategy.
“…our mission to build the UK’s premier Bitcoin treasury company and put London at the centre of this new monetary era,” wrote Kwarteng in a post.
Market Impact and Investor Signals
Farage’s move lands at a sensitive moment for crypto markets, with Bitcoin experiencing recent price weakness. The timing reflects conviction, buying during dips rather than chasing highs, much like what MicroStrategy and Michael Saylor does.
The main question, however, is whether this signals a broader wave of UK corporate Bitcoin adoption. Public, politically-linked participation could normalize BTC exposure among institutional and retail investors alike.
However, the move raises questions around optics and potential conflicts of interest, given Farage’s equity stake in the company executing the purchase.
Policy Pressure and Crypto Adoption
Farage has long advocated for the UK to become a global crypto hub. Reform UK previously accepted cryptocurrency donations and has pushed for more favorable digital asset policies.
This high-profile purchase intensifies pressure on UK regulators and rival political parties to clarify their stance on crypto.
It also highlights the growing intersection between political influence and financial innovation.
The immediate financial impact of the £2 million purchase is modest, but its symbolic weight is significant. As Stack BTC continues to deploy capital into Bitcoin, markets will watch for follow-on buys and balance sheet growth.
More importantly, Farage’s move could accelerate political debate around crypto regulation, taxation, and institutional adoption in the UK.
If additional public figures or companies follow suit, Bitcoin’s role in mainstream finance—and politics—may expand rapidly in the months ahead.
The post UK Far-Right Leader Nigel Farage Buys Over $2 Million in Bitcoin appeared first on BeInCrypto.
As quantum computing edges closer to practical reality, a nuanced risk picture is taking shape for Bitcoin. Rather than a sudden, network-wide catastrophe, researchers and industry observers are highlighting a tiered vulnerability focused on dormant addresses with exposed public keys. Many of these are among the oldest coins from Bitcoin’s early era, and their combination of long-standing exposure, high value, and inertia in defense makes them salient targets for a first generation of quantum-enabled attackers, should such capabilities mature.
Key takeaways
- Dormant Bitcoin addresses with exposed public keys represent a concentrated risk, especially among early-era holdings that haven’t moved in years.
- Quantum threats affect public-key cryptography (ECDSA/Schnorr) more directly than hash functions, meaning on-chain exposure of a public key is a critical vulnerability.
- The risk separates into on-spend attacks (tight time windows tied to block confirmations) and at-rest attacks (longer horizons when keys are exposed but no immediate transaction is triggered).
- Large, long-dormant holdings — including many 50 BTC block rewards from the early mining era — create a high-value target pool that could attract quantum-driven attacks first.
- Beyond technology, the dormant-wallet challenge raises governance questions about asset salvage, protection, and how the protocol might accommodate or address historically inaccessible coins.
Where the risk converges on Bitcoin’s cryptography
Bitcoin relies on two cryptographic pillars: the hash function SHA-256 for mining and block security, and public-key cryptography (ECDSA/Schnorr) for transaction signatures. Quantum computers would affect these components in distinct ways. Hash functions are relatively resilient; even with Grover’s algorithm, they would be weakened but not rendered obsolete. Public-key cryptography, however, presents a sharper exposure path. With Shor’s algorithm, a sufficiently powerful quantum computer could derive a private key from a known public key. In practical terms for Bitcoin, that means any coins whose public key has been revealed could theoretically be spent by an attacker if a quantum-capable adversary can perform the computation in time to act on a vulnerability.
The on-spend vs at-rest distinction and why it matters
Understanding the timing of attacks is crucial to assessing risk. There are two broad categories of quantum attacks:
On-spend attacks
- Trigger a transaction to reveal the user’s public key.
- Attackers must derive the private key within a short window — roughly the span of a single block, or about 10 minutes — to successfully move funds.
At-rest attacks
- Target coins whose public keys are already exposed on-chain.
- Aim for a longer horizon: days, weeks, or longer — with time as the primary constraint, not a rapid transaction window.
- No immediate transaction trigger is required; attackers can plan and execute when they have sufficient quantum capability.
The contrast is telling. On-spend attacks face a tight clock, while at-rest attacks operate on a long-term timescale, hinging on technical breakthroughs rather than a race against a block window. If a large tranche of the supply has already disclosed its public keys, the window for opportunistic action expands dramatically.
Dormant wallets: three vulnerability factors
Dormant wallets—those that have not actively moved funds or upgraded security—combine three attributes that amplify risk:
- No defensive action: Active holders can migrate funds, refresh security models, or move assets into newer, quantum-resistant formats. Dormant holders lack such pathways, leaving coins exposed without recourse.
- Long exposure windows: Since public keys may already be on-chain, attackers can operate offline with less urgency, reducing the urgency imposed by short confirmation times.
- High-value concentration: Many early Bitcoin holdings have appreciated substantially in value. High-value, dormant coins create a prime target profile for any future quantum-era exploit.
Notes from industry observers emphasize that coins in inactive wallets cannot upgrade their security after the fact. Thus, the burden of adoption and migration would fall to active participants and future protocol changes, not the dormant accounts themselves.
Which wallets are most exposed
The risk is not uniform across the blockchain. Several categories stand out as more exposed than others:
Old P2PK outputs
- These early formats reveal public keys directly on-chain when spent, offering little additional protection against quantum-enabled adversaries.
Address reuse
- When an address is spent from and then reused, the public key becomes visible after the first spend. Any remaining funds in that address become more vulnerable as well.
Certain modern script formats, such as those associated with Taproot, also expose public-key material in ways that could fall into an at-rest exposure category under quantum assumptions. While Taproot was designed to improve efficiency and privacy, it does not entirely escape the theoretical risk if keys remain exposed long-term due to address reuse or legacy holdings.
The scale of the problem: dormant coins dominate the risk
Quantifying quantum risk goes beyond theoretical math; it hinges on measurable exposure. Reports indicate that billions of dollars’ worth of Bitcoin remains in addresses whose public keys are exposed, with a significant portion tracing back to early-era mining rewards. A notable share of these coins has not moved for more than a decade, creating a silent pool of assets that could become vulnerable as quantum capabilities advance. Among the most cited examples are the large blocks rewarded to miners in Bitcoin’s infancy — many of these blocks yielded 50 BTC rewards that subsequently remained idle for years. This concentration implies that the largest quantum-targets are often the largest Bitcoin holdings.
A deeper challenge: Dormant wallets and network governance
The emergence of a quantum threat for dormant wallets also raises governance and policy questions that extend beyond pure cryptography. If a future quantum attack were to surface, the Bitcoin community might face difficult choices about asset salvage, fund protection, or even temporary protocol adjustments to address long-dormant coins. Questions include whether such coins should remain spendable, whether there should be mechanisms to protect or freeze longitudinal holdings, and how public policy interacts with the immutable nature of the protocol when a subset of assets appears irrecoverable by design.
Why this doesn’t mean Bitcoin is broken
Crucially, observers stress that there is no current, widely accepted evidence that quantum computers capable of breaking Bitcoin’s cryptography exist today. The development path toward practical, scalable quantum systems is expected to span years, if not decades, of sustained engineering progress. The risk is not imminent, but incremental and evolving. In the near term, the impact is likely to be selective rather than universal as early-stage quantum capabilities emerge and defenses are refined. Active users can adapt more quickly than dormant wallets, which means mitigation may initially favor those who actively manage their keys and upgrade security models.
What can be done in the meantime
Holders and the broader ecosystem can take concrete steps to reduce exposure and accelerate readiness:
- Minimize public-key exposure: Avoid address reuse and curb unnecessary early revelation of public keys, maintaining better separation between on-chain activity and key exposure.
- Migration pathways: Develop and promote clear routes for moving funds into quantum-resistant formats as these technologies mature, ensuring a smooth transition for users who want to upgrade their security posture.
- Continued protocol research: Ongoing work explores integrating quantum-resistant cryptography with Bitcoin’s core properties, aiming to preserve security and decentralization without introducing new central points of failure.
Practically, these measures primarily benefit active participants today, highlighting the gap between movable funds and long-dormant assets. The broader lesson is that a staged approach to upgrading cryptography may be essential to maintain resilience as technology evolves.
In summary, the dormant-wallet vulnerability reframes the quantum risk narrative for Bitcoin. It underscores a layered challenge: the network isn’t threatened as a monolith, but certain pockets of the supply could be more fragile than others if and when quantum capabilities advance. The future resilience of Bitcoin will depend not only on breakthroughs in quantum hardware but on decisive action by the ecosystem to strengthen, migrate, and adapt the way keys are managed across the lifecycle of the blockchain.
Readers should watch for ongoing research into quantum-resistant cryptography, milestones in post-quantum upgrades, and policy discussions about how to handle historical holdings that may be irretrievably exposed to future computational breakthroughs. The next phase will likely hinge on practical migration pathways and protocol-level safeguards that can extend protection to both active and dormant users without compromising Bitcoin’s core principles.
Crypto World
Crypto wallet firm Exodus sues W3C and its CEO Garth Howat, seeking to compel $175M acquisition
Listed cryptocurrency firm Exodus Movement (EXOD) is suing W3C, the parent company of crypto card and payments specialists Baanx and Monovate, and its chief executive, Garth Howat, to complete its $175 million acquisition of W3C, agreed in November of last year.
A lawsuit in the Delaware Court of Chancery seeks to compel Howat to comply with obligations under the November 24, 2025 Stock Purchase Agreement.
Howat and W3C accepted $80 million worth of loans from Exodus upon signing the deal, with $10 million given to Howat personally, who then declared that they did not need to repay these loans, according to the lawsuit.
“Defendants Garth Howat and W3C are engaged in a blatant, reckless, and improper campaign to escape closing a transaction for the sale of W3C to Exodus that they had promised to complete in a binding agreement,” the lawsuit states.
“They have attempted to pilfer millions of dollars from one of their own subsidiaries. They have falsely backdated documents filed with government authorities. They have purported to summarily dismiss entire boards of directors, as well as the CEO and CFO of their key operating entity, and replace them with lackeys of their choosing, despite being precluded from doing so by the binding agreement,” it said.
Howat did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
W3C companies Baanx and Monovate were behind the Crypto Life digital asset cards business that worked with the likes of Mastercard and MetaMask.
JP Richardson, CEO and Co-founder of Exodus commented, “We have a binding agreement with W3C and expect it to be fully honored. We’re confident in the path forward and anticipate a swift resolution.”
TLDR
- The American Bankers Association disputed the White House analysis on stablecoin risks.
- Bankers said policymakers must study a market where stablecoin yield remains allowed.
- Lawmakers drafted a compromise to restrict yield-like rewards on stablecoins.
- The Senate Banking Committee has not scheduled a hearing on the bill.
- Senator Cynthia Lummis called for urgent action to advance the legislation.
U.S. banking leaders have challenged a White House report that downplayed risks from stablecoins. They argue that stablecoin yield could draw deposits away from traditional banks. The dispute has stalled the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act in the Senate.
Bankers Dispute White House Findings on Stablecoin Yield
The American Bankers Association rejected a recent Council of Economic Advisers report. The group said the report examined the wrong policy scenario. It argued that economists should have studied a market where stablecoin yield remains permitted.
ABA economists wrote, “The CEA paper minimizes the core risk by starting from the wrong question.” They said a ban on yield for payment stablecoins would protect insured deposits. They also said such a rule would support stablecoins as payment tools rather than deposit substitutes.
Bankers warned that allowing yield could speed deposit migration. They said returns from stablecoins may exceed bank interest rates. They argued that customers would move funds to chase higher rewards.
The ABA estimated that stablecoin markets could grow from $300 billion to $2 trillion. It said yield would act as the main driver of that expansion. It added that growth at that scale would reshape deposit flows.
Senate Negotiations Stall Over Crypto Bill
Lawmakers have struggled to advance the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act. The bill seeks to set rules for U.S. crypto markets. However, disagreements over stablecoin yield have delayed committee action.
Senators from both parties considered bankers’ concerns about deposit flight. They discussed how depositors fund lending activities. They then drafted a compromise to limit certain reward structures.
The compromise would ban yield on holdings that resemble deposit accounts. It would allow activity-based rewards similar to credit card programs. Still, banks have not publicly endorsed the proposal.
Senator Cynthia Lummis urged action on the social media platform X. She wrote, “America needs Clarity.” She also said the time to move the bill forward is “now or never.”
The Senate Banking Committee has not scheduled a hearing. Lawmaker advocates had expected a session before the month’s end. As of this week, no official date appears on the calendar.
Bank representatives have kept a lower public profile. However, they continue to circulate policy papers and letters. They argue that early safeguards would limit systemic shifts.
The White House economists had said banks face limited risk. They examined a scenario where Congress bans yield. Bankers countered that lawmakers must assess a no-ban environment.
Bitcoin’s Dormant Wallets Could Be the Weakest Link in a Quantum Era
Champions League quarterfinal scenarios: What each team needs to move on
Xbox CEO called Game Pass ‘too expensive for players’ in a leaked memo
-
Politics3 days agoUS brings back mandatory military draft registration
-
Fashion3 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Veronica Beard
-
Sports3 days agoMan United discover Nico Schlotterbeck transfer fee as defender reaches Dortmund agreement
-
Tech6 days agoHow Long Can You Drive With Expired Registration? What Florida Law Says
-
Politics1 day agoWorld Cup exit makes Italy enter crisis mode
-
Crypto World4 days agoCanary Capital Files SEC Registration for PEPE ETF
-
Business3 days agoTesla Model Y Tops China Auto Sales in March 2026 With 39,827 Registrations, Beating Cheaper EVs and Gas Cars
-
Politics4 days agoMalcolm In The Middle OG Turned Down ‘Buckets Of Money’ To Appear In Reboot
-
Crypto World5 days agoBitcoin recovers as US and Iran Agree a Ceasefire Deal
-
Fashion6 days agoLet’s Discuss: DEI in 2026
-
NewsBeat22 hours agoPep Guardiola and Gary Neville agree over Arsenal title problem that benefits Man City
-
Business3 days agoOpenAI Halts Stargate UK Data Centre Project Over Energy Costs and Copyright Row
-
Business2 days agoIreland Fuel Protests Enter Day 5 as Blockades Spark Shortages and Government Prepares Support Package
-
Crypto World2 hours agoThe SEC Conditionalises DeFi Platforms to Be Avoided for Broker Registration
-
Politics4 days agoLBC Presenter Mocks Trump Over Iran War Failures
-
Crypto World3 days agoFederal judge blocks Arizona from bringing criminal charges against Kalshi
-
Tech4 days agoA version of Windows 10 released a decade ago is now eligible for additional security patches
-
NewsBeat2 days agoJD Vance announces ‘no agreement’ with Iran over nuclear weapons fear
-
Business3 days agoIMF retains floor for precautionary balances at SDR 20 billion
-
Business3 days ago
Coreweave CSO Venturo sells $5.5m in class a common stock
You must be logged in to post a comment Login