Saudi Arabia’s central bank has withdrawn from mBridge, a China-backed project aimed at enabling cross-border transactions between central banks using digital currencies on a shared infrastructure. The Financial Times reported that the Saudi Arabian Monetary Authority (SAMA) joined as a full participant in June 2024 and completed its proof of concept before ending its involvement on May 13, 2025.

SAMA said it had planned to finish participation after completing the proof-of-concept stage, according to the central bank’s statement cited by the Financial Times. The move highlights both the practical limits of CBDC experimentation and the geopolitical scrutiny that increasingly surrounds cross-border digital currency networks.

Key takeaways

• SAMA participated in mBridge as a full participant starting June 2024, then ended its involvement after completing a proof of concept on May 13, 2025.
• mBridge is designed for central banks to issue and transact in their own digital currencies on a shared ledger rather than relying on a single stablecoin.
• The BIS-led project was handed over to participating central banks after reaching a “minimum viable product” stage in October 2024.
• US policymakers have raised concerns that mBridge-like systems could become alternatives for countries seeking to evade US sanctions.
• Separately, China’s central bank research arm has emphasized monitoring stablecoins and closer international coordination as cross-border use grows.

Saudi Arabia exits after proof-of-concept milestone

According to the Financial Times, SAMA joined mBridge in June 2024 as a full participant. The central bank then concluded its participation after completing a proof of concept on May 13, 2025. The report attributes the timing to SAMA’s stated plan to end participation after the proof-of-concept phase.

While SAMA’s exit does not necessarily signal that mBridge failed as a technical exercise, it does underscore a common reality in CBDC experimentation: participation often remains bounded to specific trials, governance requirements, and policy risk management. For market observers, it raises an immediate question—whether other participating central banks will extend their roles beyond initial testing, or similarly treat mBridge as a time-limited sandbox.

How mBridge works: multiple central-bank currencies on one ledger

mBridge was established in 2021 through a collaboration between the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) Innovation Hub and central banks from China, Hong Kong, Thailand, and the United Arab Emirates. The project’s stated goal was to make cross-border payments faster and cheaper.

Crucially, mBridge does not rely on a single stablecoin. Instead, participating central banks are able to issue and transact in their own digital currencies on a shared ledger. The platform is intended to support cross-border payments and foreign exchange transactions, reflecting an architecture designed to connect sovereign digital money systems rather than substitute for them.

That design choice matters for investors and builders because it frames mBridge as an interoperability experiment among central-bank systems, not a token economy that depends on one public-asset issuer. It also affects regulatory complexity: each participating jurisdiction remains responsible for the issuance and rules around its digital currency, even if settlement logic is coordinated on shared infrastructure.

BIS handover in October 2024 and ongoing political scrutiny

Development of mBridge continued under the BIS until October 2024. At that point, the BIS handed the project over to the participating central banks after the network reached what the BIS described as a minimum viable product stage.

The BIS has previously said its departure was not politically motivated. Then-BIS General Manager Agustín Carstens made remarks on the future of finance, noting that the BIS role in such projects should not be read as a political signal. The project’s institutional transition—from BIS experimentation to central-bank operation—suggests a move from proof-of-concept toward potential operationalization, but the ultimate pace depends on each country’s policy stance and technical readiness.

Even so, mBridge has attracted attention in Washington. A 2024 report by the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission said mBridge could eventually provide an alternative cross-border settlement system for countries trying to evade US sanctions. The report reflects a wider policy concern that digital settlement platforms—particularly those involving major financial hubs—might shift clearing and settlement dynamics in ways that complicate existing sanctions regimes.

For readers tracking the intersection of crypto infrastructure and regulation, this is a key tension. Technical interoperability efforts between central banks can be framed as efficiency improvements, but they can also become political touchpoints—especially if they mature into real settlement channels.

China’s stablecoin stance keeps evolving alongside CBDC experiments

As mBridge developments unfold, China has also been shaping its approach to stablecoins in cross-border payments. In June, People’s Bank of China Research Bureau director general Wang Xin called for closer monitoring of stablecoins and central bank digital currencies in cross-border payments, along with greater international coordination. The remarks were reported by Cointelegraph.

Wang’s comments came after Chinese authorities restricted unauthorized issuance of renminbi-pegged stablecoins and tokenized real-world assets, including those issued by foreign entities. Taken together, the pattern suggests that China is not simply embracing tokenized payments; it is attempting to manage risks and jurisdictional boundaries while positioning itself for future cross-border digital settlement.

For market participants, the implication is that cross-border digital settlement will likely remain a patchwork of models—some centered on regulated sovereign issuance, others on stablecoin rails—each subject to increasingly explicit monitoring requirements. Investors should watch whether international coordination steps translate into clearer compliance frameworks for tokenized payment systems, or whether restrictions tighten further.

What to watch next

SAMA’s exit from mBridge after a defined proof-of-concept period may be only one chapter in a broader CBDC experiment cycle. The next developments to track are whether remaining central-bank participants expand their work beyond trials, and how US policy scrutiny and China’s stablecoin monitoring agenda influence the direction of cross-border digital settlement infrastructure.

Stripe has added Samsung Pay support to its Crypto Onramp tools for Android applications built with React Native, giving developers another wallet option for users purchasing digital assets with fiat currency.

Stripe’s official React Native changelog shows that Samsung Pay support arrived in version 0.75.0, released on Aug. 18, 2026, nearly five weeks before the feature received fresh attention on Sept. 21. The release added configuration tools, availability checks, payment-method collection and an example implementation for Crypto Onramp on Android.

The update means React Native developers using Stripe’s Android integration can offer Samsung Pay inside supported Crypto Onramp flows, subject to the payment method being available for the user and integration. It does not represent a newly released Stripe version on Sept. 21, since the SDK has since moved through versions 0.76.0 and 0.77.0.

Stripe added Samsung Pay in its August SDK release

Version 0.75.0 introduced four Samsung Pay components for Crypto Onramp: configuration, availability checks, payment collection and example integration. Stripe listed each feature specifically under Android in the React Native release notes.

React Native lets developers maintain mobile applications for both Android and iOS using a shared JavaScript-based codebase. Stripe’s React Native SDK provides prebuilt payment interfaces and lower-level payment tools that developers can incorporate into their applications.

The SDK handles sensitive payment details through Stripe instead of requiring developers to send card information through their own servers. Its existing mobile payment support includes integrations such as Apple Pay and Google Pay, alongside standard card collection.

Samsung Pay support is specifically documented under Crypto Onramp for Android. Stripe’s release notes do not describe the feature as an iOS option, which fits Samsung Pay’s use on supported Android devices.

Crypto Onramp lets users buy assets without leaving apps

Stripe’s Crypto Onramp is designed to let users buy cryptocurrencies directly inside third-party applications instead of leaving the app for a separate exchange or payment website.

Stripe handles the payment and purchasing flow while developers embed the service inside their own products. The company says Crypto Onramp supports multiple digital assets and blockchain networks and provides crypto settlement after a successful fiat purchase.

Before the Samsung Pay SDK addition, Stripe publicly listed credit cards, debit cards, Apple Pay, Google Pay, instant ACH and regular ACH among its preferred Crypto Onramp payment methods. Its main product page still showed that list when reviewed on Sept. 21 and had not yet added Samsung Pay to the published payment-method section.

The GitHub changelog nevertheless confirms that Samsung Pay functionality exists in the Android React Native Crypto Onramp SDK. Developers can check whether Samsung Pay is available before presenting the option, then collect the selected payment method through the integration.

Stripe first introduced its fiat-to-crypto onramp in 2022 as an embeddable tool for wallets, decentralized applications and other Web3 services.

React Native developers can check Samsung Pay availability

The availability-check component is important because Samsung Pay may not be usable on every Android device or in every customer setup.

Stripe’s 0.75.0 release lets an application determine availability before attempting payment collection. The SDK then provides the configuration and payment collection functions required to incorporate Samsung Pay into the Crypto Onramp flow.

The release included example integration code, reducing the amount of custom implementation developers need to create before testing the wallet option.

Stripe did not publish separate Samsung Pay transaction fees, supported-country lists or cryptocurrency limits in the React Native changelog. Existing Crypto Onramp availability and compliance requirements therefore remain relevant when developers implement the feature.

The React Native SDK has continued changing since Samsung Pay arrived. Version 0.76.0, released Sept. 1, added the ability for Crypto Onramp users to delete a registered wallet address from their current Link account.

Version 0.77.0 followed on Sept. 16 and is the latest version listed in Stripe’s changelog. It added additional Crypto Onramp identity-document fields covering U.S. Social Security numbers, Canadian SINs, Colombian NITs and Philippine TINs.

The same release fixed an Android issue that could cause Crypto Onramp presentation failures after an Android Activity was recreated. Stripe moved Google Pay payment-method and token creation flows to Android’s Activity Result API in that release.

Version 0.77.0 also removed support for React Native’s old architecture, requiring developers using the current SDK to enable the newer architecture for Android, iOS or Expo applications.

Stripe keeps expanding crypto payment infrastructure

Samsung Pay support arrives as Stripe continues adding crypto payment products beyond its original fiat onramp.

Stripe acquired stablecoin infrastructure company Bridge in a transaction valued at approximately $1.1 billion and has since incorporated stablecoin payments, issuance and financial-account tools into its payment business.

Stripe launched Stablecoin Financial Accounts in more than 100 countries in 2025, allowing businesses to hold stablecoin balances and send digital dollars through its infrastructure.

Bridge has since expanded its regulated footprint. The Stripe-owned company secured MiCA and Electronic Money Institution authorization in Luxembourg, giving it a framework for regulated stablecoin services across the European Union. 

Stripe’s crypto tools are reaching consumer applications as well. World launched its World Money product across more than 150 countries on Sept. 17, with Stripe powering the U.S. Apple Pay funding route, according to related crypto.news coverage.

Meanwhile, Stripe-owned Bridge has worked with Visa on stablecoin-backed payment cards planned for more than 100 countries by the end of 2026. Visa’s program uses Bridge infrastructure for stablecoin-linked card issuance and on-chain settlement.

Stripe has expanded further into blockchain infrastructure through Tempo, the payments-focused network developed with Paradigm. The network launched its mainnet in March alongside a machine-payment protocol designed for automated transactions, For Android developers, Samsung Pay remains an SDK-level Crypto Onramp option introduced with version 0.75.0. Stripe’s current 0.77.0 release keeps the Crypto Onramp stack active while adding identity fields and correcting Android presentation issues that appeared after Activity recreation.

SecondFi has warned holders of compromised wallets not to redeem upcoming NIGHT allocations after confirming that Midnight’s claim system requires tokens to be claimed through the original wallet address.

According to SecondFi, some users affected by its June security incident are scheduled to claim NIGHT tokens on Sept. 22, but the wallets tied to those allocations remain permanently compromised. The company said it contacted the Midnight Foundation to explore alternative claiming options before issuing the warning.

Midnight’s current redemption system does not support moving an allocation to another wallet before it is claimed. NIGHT tokens assigned to an affected SecondFi address must therefore be redeemed through that original address, which could expose the newly claimed assets to theft.

SecondFi urged affected users not to attempt the redemption while the issue remains unresolved.

SecondFi says NIGHT claims cannot move to safe wallets

The restriction comes from the NIGHT claim process operated by the Midnight Foundation, which manages the token’s redemption rules separately from SecondFi.

SecondFi said it has no control over the NIGHT claiming mechanism and directed users seeking alternative options to the Midnight Foundation’s official channels.

The company’s own recovery tools cannot solve the problem. Its Wallet Migration Tool is designed to transfer eligible assets still held in SecondFi wallets, while a separate Asset Recovery Tool covers assets affected by the June incident.

Neither system can process or cover a NIGHT claim.

The warning expands on guidance SecondFi has previously given affected users. Its incident FAQ says recovery of NIGHT tokens redeemed to compromised wallets cannot be guaranteed because of the nature of the vulnerability. SecondFi said it was working to help affected users secure their Glacier Drop allocations and would publish verified updates through its official channels.

Midnight launched its mainnet in March as a privacy focused network using zero knowledge technology. Its NIGHT token forms part of the network’s ecosystem and was distributed to eligible users through the Glacier Drop program.

The token distribution has involved allocations that become available under scheduled redemption periods, leaving some SecondFi users with NIGHT claims tied to addresses later identified as compromised.

SecondFi wallet flaw exposed private key material

The problem stems from the SecondFi wallet security incident that occurred between June 21 and June 23.

An independent investigation commissioned by EMURGO found that approximately 16.1 million ADA, valued at roughly $2.6 million, was stolen from 374 wallets during the incident.

SecondFi traced the root cause to a cryptographic flaw in the way its wallet software generated signatures for individual transactions. A value that should have depended on secret information could, under certain conditions, be calculated using publicly available transaction data.

The flaw could allow affected private key material to be derived from information recorded on the public Cardano blockchain. Unlike a temporary application vulnerability, the exposure remains tied to the affected address and private key.

SecondFi has since patched the flaw and said wallets created with the corrected software are not known to be vulnerable.

Groom Lake, an independent forensic investigation and blockchain intelligence provider engaged by EMURGO, reviewed code, code history and public blockchain records while investigating the breach.

Its investigation found evidence of two separate attackers. The primary operation was described as sophisticated, external and well funded, with indicators being assessed for possible overlap with known DPRK linked Lazarus Group activity. A second party appeared to have targeted a separate group of wallets during the same period, with no overlap between the affected addresses identified at the time.

Recovery tools cannot protect upcoming NIGHT redemptions

Following the attack, SecondFi began separating its response into migration and recovery processes.

The wallet recovery plan initially involved engineers testing several methods to return assets safely. SecondFi moved approximately 129 million ADA to an independent third party custodian as an emergency measure while work continued.

Its Wallet Migration Tool now lets users transfer eligible ADA, Cardano native tokens and NFTs remaining in SecondFi wallets to newly created Cardano wallets with another provider. Non Cardano assets need to be moved through their respective network and wallet processes.

Affected users face a different procedure. SecondFi has been developing a recovery portal that uses zero knowledge proofs to allow users to prove ownership of compromised wallets and submit claims for assets affected by the June incident.

The NIGHT redemption sits outside both processes because the allocation has not yet entered the compromised wallet and its claiming rules are controlled by Midnight.

SecondFi’s warning means users whose allocations are tied to affected addresses currently face a choice between leaving their NIGHT allocation unclaimed or attempting to redeem it into an address whose private key may already be exposed.

The company has explicitly advised users to avoid the latter.

SecondFi is focused on asset recovery

SecondFi’s recovery work has become its main remaining operation since EMURGO confirmed in July that the wallet platform would not resume normal operations.

crypto.news previously reported that EMURGO instructed users to migrate from SecondFi even if their wallets were not identified as affected. Work on the platform was redirected toward migration, claims and recovering assets for users caught in the incident.

SecondFi has warned users not to delete its app and to retain their seed phrases because at least one of the two will be needed for the recovery process. Users who have already deleted the application need to retain their seed phrase to recover eligible assets.

The company has separately cautioned users against fake recovery services and impersonation attempts. SecondFi says it will never request private keys, recovery phrases or wallet credentials, while its official tools do not require users to sign transactions simply to check whether an address was affected.

For NIGHT holders approaching their scheduled redemption, SecondFi said questions about a safe alternative claiming method should be directed to the Midnight Foundation because changes to the claim process remain outside SecondFi’s control.

Coinbase has opened initial public offering access to eligible U.S. retail customers, starting with Oura’s $2.2 billion offering, as COIN shares gained more than 5% on Sep. 21.

Coinbase IPO access starts with Oura

Coinbase said in a Sep. 21 announcement that eligible U.S. retail customers can request IPO allocations through its mobile application, beginning with smart-ring maker Oura’s public offering this week.

Customers can open the IPO section of the Coinbase app, select an active deal, and fund their accounts to cover the requested shares. Once an expected price range becomes public, users can submit a conditional offer to buy the stock.

Investors may change or cancel an offer while the order book remains open. Coinbase said customers must submit another request if the IPO price rises above a limit attached to the original offer.

After the order book closes, Coinbase will distribute the available shares using its allocation system. Demand and the number of shares provided by the underwriters will determine whether each request receives a full allocation, a partial allocation, or no shares.

Allocated stock will enter the customer’s account at the final IPO price. Trading through Coinbase will start when the shares begin changing hands on the public market.

Oura and its existing shareholders are offering 50 million shares at between $40 and $44 each, according to Reuters. At the top of the range, the deal would raise as much as $2.2 billion and give the company a fully diluted valuation of about $15.62 billion.

The maker of wearable rings plans to list on Nasdaq under the ticker OURA. Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan are serving as the lead underwriters, while Eli Lilly has expressed interest in buying up to $100 million of shares and Dragoneer may purchase up to $300 million, Reuters reported.

Oura generated $1.21 billion in revenue during the nine months through June 30, representing a 74% increase from the same period a year earlier, according to the report.

Allocation rules favor longer holding periods

Coinbase said its allocation method will favor customers who appear more likely to retain their shares instead of selling shortly after an IPO begins trading.

Investors who dispose of allocated shares during the first 30 days may lose access to upcoming IPOs for 60 days. Repeated early sales could also result in smaller allocations or fewer opportunities compared with users who hold their shares longer.

“Our allocation algorithm prioritizes investors who believe in what they’re purchasing for the long haul,” the company said.

IPO shares will be offered through Coinbase Capital Markets, the exchange’s Financial Industry Regulatory Authority-registered broker-dealer. Securities accounts and crypto accounts will remain separate, and Securities Investor Protection Corporation coverage will not apply to digital assets or cash held with Coinbase’s crypto business.

Before requesting shares, each customer must complete a standard FINRA questionnaire designed to identify people who may face restrictions on participating in an offering.

Coinbase Capital Markets will act as a best-efforts selling-group member, collecting customer requests and sending them to Apex Clearing Corporation. The broker will act as an agent rather than an underwriter, meaning it will not purchase inventory or take the opposite side of customer orders.

Execution, custody, and clearing will be handled by Apex. Coinbase said additional IPOs will become available when its broker-dealer receives allocations from future selling groups.

IPO investing adds to Coinbase’s Everything Exchange

The IPO service adds another U.S. securities product to Coinbase’s plan to combine crypto, stocks, derivatives and other investments in one application.

“This new feature is yet another step toward growing the Everything Exchange, as our US customers now gain early exposure to high-interest companies before they hit public exchanges,” Coinbase said.

During a June product event, the company introduced an SEC-registered automated investment adviser alongside stock options, crypto options, prediction markets and equity index products. As crypto.news previously reported, Coinbase also disclosed plans for private-company derivatives tied to OpenAI and Anthropic.

Unlike the new IPO service, those pre-IPO perpetual contracts do not give investors company shares. The derivatives provide price exposure to a private business without ownership, voting rights, or a direct claim on its stock.

Coinbase began offering such contracts outside the United States with a SpaceX-linked perpetual before adding planned products connected to OpenAI and Anthropic. A June report on the contracts noted that pricing private-company derivatives can be difficult because the underlying businesses do not trade continuously on public exchanges.

Within the United States, Coinbase has also submitted registrations related to single-stock perpetual contracts. Two filings dated Sep. 1 seek to register Coinbase Derivatives as a security futures exchange and Coinbase Financial Markets as a limited-purpose security futures broker-dealer, according to a report on the filings.

Single-stock futures fall under the joint authority of the SEC and Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Coinbase has not provided a launch date, leverage limits or a final list of shares for the proposed U.S. contracts.

Outside the country, the company has already issued tokenized versions of U.S. stocks backed by securities held through an offshore structure and a regulated American broker. The products remain unavailable to U.S. persons under the current Regulation S offering, although verified overseas holders can request redemption. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong has said the structure is based on real underlying shares rather than synthetic exposure or unsecured debt.

COIN stock gains more than 5%

Coinbase shares rose 5.7% to $205.38 during U.S. trading on Sep. 21, adding $11.13 from the previous close. COIN opened at $205.05 and traded between $196.48 and $208.28 during the session.

Trading volume had reached 7.73 million shares by 3:15 p.m. UTC, while the company’s market capitalization stood at approximately $54.1 billion.

Halloween Mask (HMASK), a Solana-based meme coin inspired by the RuneScape nostalgia, recently came into the spotlight after seeing strong price action that attracted the attention of one of the crypto industry’s analysts, Jacob Crypto Bury.

Jacob, who is very popular on Discord and YouTube, spoke at length about the token in a series of posts on X, highlighting it as an asset to keep an eye on and potentially the best crypto to buy now.

The token exploded 1430% on the daily timeframe to hit the $0.0001 level, easily making it one of the strongest gainers in today’s broad-based rally

At the same time, its market cap has surged from $10k to $148k at press time, delivering nearly 14x returns to early buyers.

Jacob feels HMASK’s performance is a signal that the RuneScape meme coin narrative remains alive ahead of a new bull market.

GM crypto😎

20X for early buyers – INSANE

Woke up and saw $HMASK absolutely flying today, what a surprise!

Advertisement

Spotted this gem at $5-10k MC and naturally with a meme coin you get sceptical for a while

The RuneScape meme coin narrative remains strong @HMASKonchain is rallying… pic.twitter.com/AD58Q0MquH

— Jacob Crypto Bury (@BuryCrypto) September 21, 2026

What is Halloween Mask?

Halloween Mask is a meme coin that draws its identity from RuneScape, a gaming culture known for its deep-rooted nostalgia and iconic virtual economy.

This narrative has existed for decades before meme coin projects began to adopt it, tapping into its established internet community to gain traction.

So, it’s clear that much of Halloween Mask’s popularity comes from this phenomenon.

And like many other RunScape-themed meme coins such as $GNOME, $GP and $BOND, $HMASK doesn’t promise any practical utility.

Rather, its value is heavily influenced by social media trends and community sentiment.

One more unique advantage is that the project is built entirely for holders – no team allocation at launch, no dev buy.

The official mint and every market move are public on Solana, an attribute that has helped broaden its appeal within the investing community. Its contract address is EPJQWq9AUPsAEnT9ZU1vdj7mk1woAHt4QwaYdZLoPprb.

Halloween Mask Price Prediction

Halloween Mask has been on fire today, registering some of the strongest bounces amid the broad-based rally.

It is currently trading at $0.0001, up by 138% on the four-hour timeframe.

The meme coin’s recent rally is marked by soaring token holders and heavy whale investment. According to data from Birdeye, it boasts 428 holders at press time, an impressive figure for a relatively new token.

A breakout above its current level could pave the way for new highs. A rejection could result in more downside volatility, which could offer a better entry point for sidelined investors.

Unsurprisingly, prominent analysts are optimistic about its prospects. Popular Discord analyst Jacob Bury projects that the meme coin could be a top project to watch in 2026, considering its relatively small market cap.

All eyes will also be on Bitcoin, which has already crossed the $87k level and is targeting $90k. In the event that it sustains its bullish trajectory, there is a strong possibility that Halloween Mask will hit the $500k market cap milestone before the end of September.

What this means is that new buyers at today’s price would see 8x returns on their investments, which underscores its attractiveness to whales and retailers alike.

Is HMASK the Best Crypto to Buy Now?

Given Halloween Mask’s potential for growth in terms of value, it could be listed as the best crypto to buy now, particularly for short-term returns.

Smart money investors could also bet on other high-potential low-caps, out of which Bitcoin Hyper stands out.

A high-performance Layer-2 network, this project seeks to tackle the network congestion issues on Bitcoin without sacrificing security.

So far, it has raised nearly $35 million in its ICO, thanks to continuous investments from both short and long-term investors.

Crypto experts believe it is highly undervalued during its presale and could offer substantial returns when it eventually arrives on exchanges.

Strategy has spent $174 million repurchasing STRC preferred shares and $75.7 million buying Bitcoin, directing 2.3 times more cash toward its stock buyback even as it resumed BTC accumulation.

Strategy divides $307.1 million among three uses

Strategy’s Sep. 21 Form 8-K, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, showed that the company deployed $307.1 million across Bitcoin, preferred-share repurchases, dividends and interest between Sep. 14 and Sep. 20.

Of that amount, $174 million went toward repurchasing STRC shares, while $75.7 million funded the purchase of 950 BTC. Another $57.4 million came from the company’s USD Reserve to cover preferred-stock dividends and interest on outstanding debt.

The transactions mean nearly 57% of the disclosed weekly spending went to STRC repurchases. Bitcoin accounted for about 25%, while dividends and interest represented the remaining 19%.

Strategy bought 1,751,480 STRC shares during the period at an average price of approximately $99.34 each. The variable-rate Series A perpetual Stretch preferred stock carries a $100 stated amount and trades on the Nasdaq Global Select Market.

After the latest transactions, $876 million remained available under the company’s digital credit securities repurchase program. Strategy also retained its separate authorization to repurchase up to $1 billion of MSTR common stock.

The company made no sales through its MSTR, STRF, STRC, STRK, or STRD at-the-market offering programs during the week. As a result, it financed both the Bitcoin acquisition and STRC buyback with existing cash rather than proceeds from newly issued shares.

STRC remains the larger cash commitment

Strategy has continued buying back STRC after spending $139.3 million on 1,420,467 shares between Sep. 8 and Sep. 13. The company paid an average of about $98.06 per share during that earlier period, according to its previous SEC filing.

Combined, the two latest weekly disclosures show $313.3 million spent repurchasing STRC shares. Bitcoin purchases over the same two periods totaled $75.7 million because the company made no BTC transactions during the first week.

As previously reported by crypto.news, Strategy entered the latest reporting period after two weeks without buying or selling Bitcoin or issuing shares. Instead, the company had used cash to reduce the amount of STRC outstanding.

The latest filing changes part of that position because Bitcoin purchases have resumed. STRC, however, continued to receive more than twice as much cash as BTC during the reporting week.

Strategy’s February financing plans presented preferred stock as a way to raise money for additional Bitcoin purchases while offering a dividend-based product to investors. The company’s preferred-stock funding plan added another financing route beyond common-stock sales and convertible debt.

Its more recent filings show cash moving in the opposite direction through STRC repurchases. Each share bought back reduces the amount of preferred stock on which Strategy may need to pay future dividends.

The company’s SEC filings identify STRC as variable-rate perpetual preferred stock. Because the security has no maturity date, its dividend obligation can continue for as long as the shares remain outstanding, subject to the terms of the offering.

Strategy buys 950 Bitcoin without issuing shares

Alongside the STRC transaction, Strategy acquired 950 BTC for $75.7 million, including fees and expenses. The average purchase price was $79,670 per coin.

The acquisition lifted its Bitcoin holdings from 845,050 BTC to 846,000 BTC. Strategy reported an aggregate acquisition cost of $63.80 billion and an average purchase price of approximately $75,416 per BTC.

Bitcoin’s price recovery placed the latest acquisition above the company’s total cost basis but below BTC’s subsequent market price. Bitcoin traded above $85,000 during Monday trading after rebounding from lows near $75,000 earlier in September.

At $85,000 per coin, Strategy’s 846,000 BTC would carry a market value of about $71.91 billion. The position’s value changes with Bitcoin’s market price and does not represent realized proceeds.

Before the latest transaction, Strategy last purchased Bitcoin on Aug. 31. The company acquired 4,603 BTC for approximately $370 million at an average price of $80,318, ending a buying pause that had lasted about ten weeks.

The company has also sold Bitcoin during 2026 under a capital plan that allows BTC to be used for funding obligations and managing liquidity. During the week ending Aug. 3, Strategy sold 1,638 BTC for $104.73 million while raising $290.6 million through MSTR sales and repurchasing $81.2 million of STRC.

That earlier Bitcoin sale lowered its holdings to 842,138 BTC at the time. Purchases made since then have taken the position to a new disclosed total of 846,000 BTC.

Strategy’s cash balances fall after weekly spending

Following the Bitcoin and STRC purchases, Strategy’s USD Cash balance declined from $1.30 billion on Sep. 13 to $1.05 billion on Sep. 20. The approximately $250 million reduction corresponds with the $174 million STRC repurchase and $75.7 million Bitcoin acquisition.

Its separate USD Reserve fell from $5.10 billion to $5.04 billion after the company used $57.4 million for dividends and interest. Strategy maintains the reserve to support payments on its preferred stock and outstanding debt.

USD Cash serves a different role under the company’s capital framework. Management may use it to acquire Bitcoin, add money to the USD Reserve, repurchase securities, or cover other corporate purposes.

For U.S. investors, the weekly filing separates the financial exposure carried by Strategy’s Nasdaq-listed securities. MSTR holders own common equity, while STRC and the company’s other preferred shares carry their own dividend rates, payment terms, and positions within the capital structure.

The filing lists MSTR, STRC, STRF, STRK and STRD as securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Securities Exchange Act. All five classes trade on the Nasdaq Global Select Market.

The Zcash Foundation has denied any connection to two third-party products, ZRC-20 and the CASH token, after a post published through its X account described them as additions to the Zcash network.

Zcash Foundation says it had no prior knowledge

The Zcash Foundation said in a statement that it had not known about the ZRC-20 project or the related CASH token before the matter emerged publicly. According to the organization, both products come from an independent third party and are not official parts of the Zcash protocol.

The clarification followed an X post published through the Foundation’s account that announced a token standard for Zcash. The post said ZRC-20 would soon allow users to deploy, mint, and transfer tokens on the privacy-focused blockchain, with CASH presented as the first token using the system.

“Zcash now has a token standard,” the post said before directing users to the project’s website.

In its later response, however, the Foundation rejected any association with the products and urged users to conduct their own research before interacting with them. The statement identified ZRC-20 as a privately developed system rather than a feature created, approved, or operated by the nonprofit.

No public explanation has established how promotional material for an unrelated project appeared through the Foundation’s account. Without confirmation from the organization, the incident cannot be described as an account compromise or hack.

Public information about the team operating ZRC-20 also remains limited. The project has released technical documentation and promotional pages, but the reviewed material does not clearly identify a company, legal entity, or group of named developers responsible for the system.

ZRC-20 uses Zcash memos without changing its protocol

According to the project’s technical documentation, ZRC-20 is a draft fungible-token specification that stores JSON instructions inside encrypted memo fields attached to shielded Zcash outputs. Independent indexers would read the instructions in block order and calculate token balances outside the Zcash consensus system.

The documents describe three operations: deploy, mint, and transfer. A deployment would create a ticker and set its maximum supply, minting would issue units up to that limit, and transfers would move balances between accounts recognized by the indexer.

ZRC-20 borrows its basic structure from Bitcoin’s BRC-20 format, but the proposed data carrier differs. BRC-20 records token instructions through Bitcoin inscriptions, while the ZRC-20 draft would place them in the 512-byte memo field available in shielded Zcash outputs.

The specification states that ZRC-20 is not a consensus change and does not require smart contracts. Zcash nodes would neither validate nor reject its token instructions because the indexer, rather than the blockchain protocol, would maintain the balance sheet.

As a result, Zcash consensus would only confirm the underlying transactions. Recognition of CASH balances would depend on software following the third party’s indexing and validation rules.

The project also would not provide automatic privacy for publicly traded tokens. According to its documentation, an indexer needs access to the memos before it can calculate balances. One proposed design sends operations to a common protocol address and publishes its incoming viewing key, allowing indexers to decrypt the token instructions even though other parts of the transaction remain shielded.

Ownership would rely on signatures embedded in each payload because a Zcash shielded address does not publicly reveal who created an output. The draft proposes separate account identifiers and Ed25519 signatures to authorize minting and transfers at the indexing layer.

Several features remain unresolved. The documentation lists atomic trading, payloads exceeding 512 bytes, structured memos, and possible naming conflicts among its open questions. Early exchanges would also need to be custodial because the draft does not contain an atomic trading method comparable with tools used by some Bitcoin markets.

Official Zcash changes follow a separate process

The official Zcash Improvement Proposal system provides the established route for proposing protocol features, publishing implementation details, gathering community feedback, and recording design decisions. ZRC-20 does not appear as an adopted protocol feature under that process.

A third-party application can use Zcash transactions without gaining approval from the Foundation or becoming part of the network’s consensus rules. The Foundation’s statement makes that distinction central to the dispute: ZRC-20 may attempt to build on Zcash infrastructure, but its use of the blockchain does not make it an official Zcash token standard.

The name carries another source of possible confusion. ZetaChain already uses ZRC-20 for its omnichain fungible-token format, while members of the Zcash community discussed the same label years earlier when considering how token functionality could increase activity involving ZEC.

Recent Zcash development has instead centered on formal network changes. Planned NU7 proposals have included reducing the block target from 75 seconds to 25 seconds while adjusting block rewards to retain the existing issuance schedule. Unlike the independent token system, such protocol changes require coordination among network developers, node operators and other participants.

U.S. token buyers face separate issuer questions

For U.S. users, a third party’s use of an established blockchain does not settle how regulators may treat its token offering or sale. The legal assessment can depend on how the asset is issued, marketed and sold, rather than whether the underlying network’s foundation endorsed it.

In August, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission proposed crypto-asset rules covering certain investment contracts involving digital assets. The proposal included possible exemptions for offerings of up to $5 million over four years and up to $75 million during a 12-month period, subject to the proposed conditions.

The SEC proposal does not classify CASH or determine its status under U.S. law. It does, however, make the identity of a token’s operator, the terms of its distribution, and the claims made to purchasers relevant details for American participants reviewing a new launch.

The Foundation’s warning also arrived while ZEC was experiencing large price swings. As crypto.news reported on Sep. 7, ZEC gained about 43% during the first week of September and traded near $1,197 after breaking above $1,000.

By Sep. 14, the privacy coin had retreated toward $1,139 after touching a multi-year high near $1,290. Futures open interest fell by about 20% over 24 hours during the pullback, while roughly $17.2 million in long positions were liquidated.

ZEC then rose more than 20% to approximately $1,337 on Sep. 16, having reached an intraday high near $1,385. The move followed renewed attention on the NU7 vote and came as traders monitored resistance around $1,375 and $1,500.

Bitcoin Core developers have moved version 32.0 into release-candidate testing, with the stable software scheduled for a possible Oct. 10 release after weeks of public checks.

Bitcoin Core 32 targets an Oct. 10 release

Bitcoin Core’s official release schedule shows that developers created the version 32 branch and started the release-candidate cycle on Sep. 14. The first candidate, known as v32.0rc1, is now available for testing before developers decide whether to tag the stable release.

The project set Oct. 10 as the intended date for version 32.0, though the schedule describes it as a target rather than a confirmed deadline. Problems found during candidate testing could require additional releases and delay the final version.

Preparations began months earlier. Developers opened translations and introduced a soft freeze on translation changes on Aug. 6, followed by a feature freeze on Aug. 20. From that date, the version 32 branch accepted bug fixes but no new features ahead of final testing.

When the branch separated from the main codebase on Sep. 14, development of Bitcoin Core 33 also began on the main branch. The split allows contributors to test and repair the upcoming release without stopping work on the next version.

Release candidates give node operators, wallet developers and other users time to find bugs under different hardware and software conditions. Bitcoin Core’s testing process covers functions including block validation, peer-to-peer communication, wallet operations and remote procedure calls used by applications connected to a node.

Parallel database reads speed up block checks

One of the main performance changes allows Bitcoin Core to read data from its database in parallel while checking blocks. The method can shorten validation time because the software no longer has to complete every relevant database read one after another.

Faster validation does not mean Bitcoin will produce blocks more quickly. Miners still compete to add blocks under Bitcoin’s proof-of-work rules, which target an average interval of roughly 10 minutes. Version 32 changes how a node processes required information rather than the network’s issuance schedule or block timing.

The distinction matters because Bitcoin Core is node software, not a centrally managed update to the Bitcoin network. Operators decide which version to install, and the release does not automatically replace the software running on every node.

Version 32 also does not introduce a new consensus rule or require a soft fork. Its release process differs from protocol changes that need coordination among miners, node operators, and other network participants.

As previously reported by crypto.news, LayerTwo Labs CEO Paul Sztorc said every proposed Bitcoin soft fork since Taproot has failed to activate. BIP-110, a disputed proposal linked to transaction-relay policy, received 2.53% miner support before its enforcing branch stalled after two blocks.

Bitcoin Core 32 can therefore improve software performance without depending on the activation process required for a consensus change. Node operators remain free to test the candidate, continue using an older release, or install the stable version after publication.

Wallet commands adopt the newer PSBT format

Wallet functions account for another set of changes in version 32. Four commands will create partially signed Bitcoin transactions using PSBT version 2 by default, according to details shared by Bitcoin News.

A PSBT lets separate wallets, devices, or participants exchange the information needed to build and sign a Bitcoin transaction without exposing private keys. The format is commonly used with hardware wallets, offline signing setups, and transactions that require more than one signature.

PSBT version 2 changes how transaction information is organized and permits participants to update parts of a transaction without first creating a complete unsigned transaction. The older PSBT format will remain available when users or connected applications require it.

Keeping both versions reduces the chance of abruptly breaking wallets and services that have not adopted the newer format. Developers integrating Bitcoin Core with other software will still need to check whether their systems expect the previous default.

For individual holders, the change does not alter Bitcoin balances, private keys or the rules governing valid transactions. Its practical effect falls on wallet workflows and applications that call the affected commands.

Security fixes reduce command and memory risks

Version 32 also includes a patch for custom wallet names that could cause commands to run on non-Windows nodes. The issue concerned how specially constructed names interacted with command execution, rather than a change to Bitcoin’s underlying cryptography.

A separate fix addresses memory growth caused by unauthenticated HTTP activity. In one test cited by Bitcoin News, memory use reached about 3.2 gigabytes before the patch, compared with roughly 3 megabytes after developers applied the change.

Remote interfaces allow other programs to communicate with Bitcoin Core, making memory controls relevant to operators who expose node services to connected applications. Access settings, firewalls and authentication remain separate parts of securing a deployment.

For U.S. users, the candidate is most relevant to node operators, wallet providers, exchanges, miners and infrastructure companies that run Bitcoin Core in their systems. The release does not change the SEC’s treatment of spot Bitcoin exchange-traded products, investor tax rules or the legal status of BTC.

American financial firms have also increased their support for Bitcoin’s open-source security work. In July, Anchorage Digital, ARK Invest, BlackRock, Block, Blockstream, Coinbase, Fidelity Digital Assets, Galaxy and Strategy formed the Bitcoin Security Consortium with $15 million in pledges over three years.

According to the consortium’s announcement, each member will direct its funding independently rather than placing the money in a shared pool. The group said it will not control Bitcoin development, take positions on specific protocol proposals or speak for the project’s contributors.

Mike Schmidt, executive director of Bitcoin developer-funding nonprofit Brink, coordinates the consortium’s daily work in a volunteer role. Its initial focus is research into long-term security issues, including protections against future quantum-computing risks.