Fortitude Mining Holdings, the Zcash (ZEC) mining platform owned by Barry Silbert’s Digital Currency Group (DCG), has disclosed a set of disappointing financials that reveal tons of debt, years of losses, and ZEC as a minority of revenue.

The disclosure, which also reveals a highly adjusted EBITDA that disregards $32 million of depreciation, paints a very different picture to a pitch deck published by Fortitude last month.

The deck, which is listed on the company’s website, proudly claims that as of a conveniently selected period of the 2025 fiscal year, Fortitude was debt-free.

However, compelled by SEC rules to disclose more up-to-date financials pursuant to its all-stock merger with publicly-traded HeartSciences Inc., the company has admitted that it signed a $26 million credit facility on June 1 and drew over $8.3 million of actual debt from that facility before the deck was published on June 23.

The disappointment doesn’t end there.

The pitch deck also declared Fortitude Mining “a Zcash ecosystem leader.” However, filings show a $12.6 million net loss for 2025. That loss added to a $14.3 million in 2024.

Worse, net losses continued through March 2026, with Q1 draining another $4.6 million.

Even its self-characterization as a Zcash “leader” is questionable given its actual revenue split. Of the company’s $89 million in mining revenue for 2025, 65% or $58 million came not from mining ZEC but from mining BTC.

Indeed, only 28% of its 2025 revenue came from mining ZEC. BTC and other crypto assets generated 72%.

Infamous crypto scammer Bastille has apparently been doxxed by a former partner who has accused him of rape, financial manipulation, and refusing to cover their medical bills after he crashed the car they were traveling in. 

Anonymous X user “Slippage” shared the details of their relationship in a lengthy thread during which they claimed that Bastille’s real name is William Edmund Bateman.

Slippage claims they first came into contact with Bastille in July 2024 through a group chat and soon started launching cryptocurrencies together. 

The pair formed a close relationship, but Slippage claims Bastille soon began to accuse them “of farming his coins,” and stealing $40,000. He allegedly found out later that it was one of his close “guys.”

They would go on to meet several times, with Slippage claiming that during one meet-up in Japan, Bastille got drunk and became “aggressive,” called them names, and eventually fell asleep on the floor. 

At some point the pair also went to a casino where Slippage claims Bastille left them alone while “weird gross men” harassed them. 

Bastille and Slippage cooked rugpulls together

Despite this, the pair continued to launch tokens together with Slippage describing the process as “cooks.” They claim that Bateman came up with the ideas, while they crafted “the art, design, content and videos, Twitter, dex and bundle.”

However, despite it being an apparent joint venture, Bastille would allegedly tell Slippage that they didn’t deserve the money. “On one coin we made some money and he kept about 85% of profits,” they said. “Even though I had no sleep for approximately 40 hours and was working while he was sleeping.”

“Sometimes he didn’t pay me at all,” they added, “so i was genuinely surprised when we split 50/50.”

Bastille’s alleged abuse 

Slippage claims that bastille repeatedly lied about his financial affairs, and said that he would become incredibly angry when they launched coins with other people. 

“When Bastille lost money on perps or slots he took his anger out on me. He shouted, threw things around and became very very aggressive. I had to hide in another room and cry.”

They also accuse Bastille of “pushing” them into having sex against their will, and allege that he’d perform certain sexual acts they didn’t like. 

“My words, discomfort and boundaries were not enough for him to stop,” said Slippage. ”I couldn’t defend myself. I was scared he would leave.”

They added, “I had anxiety and panic attacks almost every day for about a year. I was always scared of him. I was scared to ask for anything, scared to talk about the things he did to me again, and scared to ask him to pay me for the projects we worked on together.” 

Read more: ‘Crypto Robin Hood’ faked prison for clout, rugged memecoins for Palestine

Bastille allegedly kept their relationship hidden, wouldn’t go halves on rent, and would frequently make Slippage pay for stuff despite making “7 figs.” He would also allegedly lie about “normal everyday things,” and frequently made cruel comments about their appearance and lifestyle.  

Advertisement

Eventually, Bastille allegedly had a major crashout after selling a coin from one of their launches too early. 

Slippage discovered that he was talking negatively about them to other people, and that he’d shared “private photos” with other people and planned to share them via one of his social channels. 

They eventually split, however, he reached out 10 days later asking for another chance. They decided to go to Norway where he allegedly crashed a BMW the two of them were traveling in.

Bastille allegedly won’t pay for medical bills

Slippage says the incident left them with six fractures in their spine, a ligament injury, a lung contusion, a disc protrusion, concussion, and resulted in them wearing a brace for three months.

Advertisement

The medical bills, according to Slippage, came to around €50,000 ($57,000). When they asked Bastille to pay €6,000 ($6,800) towards a Norwegian hospital bill, he allegedly agreed but never paid up. 

Read more: Memecoin traders praying for global hantavirus pandemic

“He saw my pain, anxiety, sleep problems and physical limits. But instead of support I got anger, arguments about money, silence and more broken promises,” Slippage said. “He also was trading in my kitchen while I was crying in my bed alone for days.”

Despite their split, bastille allegedly continued to hound Slippage and found ways to work around the blocks they’d set up. 

Slippage says leaving Bastille was hard

According to Slippage, they struggled to leave Bastille because they believed most of the promises and romantic gestures that would follow the abuse. 

Advertisement

Not only that, they say, “We were also connected through projects, money and people in crypto. A large part of the money we made was under his control.

Read more: Crypto devs accused of rug pull blame Iran draft for abandoning project

“I stayed because I was emotionally attached, financially connected and scared.”

However, his alleged actions proved too much, and Slippage eventually decided to dox him. “Since he doesn’t give a single fuck about what he did, the only thing I could do is to bring some balance to the universe.

Advertisement

“Do with this information whatever you want.”

Got a tip? Send us an email securely via Protos Leaks. For more informed news and investigations, follow us on X, Bluesky, and Google News, or subscribe to our YouTube channel.

The Bank of Russia published its first draft rules as part of the introduction of cryptocurrency regulations in the country, including capital requirements for companies that hold and record digital assets.

The proposals would extend systems already used in Russia’s securities markets, including exchange trading, custody, record-keeping and disclosure rules, to digital assets.

The framework would create “digital depositories,” regulated companies that would record holdings of cryptocurrencies and other digital assets. They would need between 50 million ($570,000) and 250 million rubles ($2.8 million) in capital, depending on the services they provide.

Settlement depositories would require 250 million rubles ($2.8 million) in capital The requirement falls to 100 million rubles ($1.1 million) for firms that control crypto addresses or hold assets with foreign custodians, and 50 million rubles ($570,000) for other digital depositories.

Assets counted toward those capital requirements must be liquid, while eligible financial assets must meet the central bank’s credit-quality standards. The requirements would also apply to operators of electronic platforms that settle transactions involving digital financial assets.

The central bank will maintain registers of digital depositories, crypto exchange operators and companies that issue digital financial assets.

Crypto losses topped $1 billion in the first half of 2026 as the industry recorded its highest number of hacks in a six-month period, according to onchain security platform Blockaid.

Ethereum and Solana recorded the largest losses from incidents affecting their networks, with roughly $332 million and $326 million in stolen funds, respectively, Blockaid said in its H1 2026 security report published Tuesday.

Blockaid tracked 212 security incidents during the period, with the largest single exploit coming from KelpDAO at $292 million, while the platform verified 3.4 times as many high-threshold exploits in H1 2026 as across all of 2025.

Code exploits drove Ethereum incidents, while breaches of keys and signing infrastructure accounted for most Solana losses, according to the report.

Ethereum losses reflected the risks of high-value protocols

Ethereum incurred the highest losses from incidents in H1 2026, with attackers primarily targeting vulnerabilities in applications built on the network.

Blockaid said code exploits dominated Ethereum incidents by count, with major losses also linked to key compromises involving Humanity Protocol and StablR. CoWSwap, an Ethereum-based decentralized exchange, was the only major Ethereum incident in the report classified as a user mistake.

Blockchain losses by network in the first half of 2026. Source: Blockaid.

Blockaid identified several common attack methods targeting Ethereum, including bugs in bridges and smart contracts, unauthorized access to privileged accounts and market manipulation techniques.

The report said Ethereum remains a major target because it hosts many of the crypto industry’s most valuable applications, including restaking platforms, stablecoins and decentralized exchanges.

Solana losses surged as attackers shifted focus

Solana incurred nearly as much in losses as Ethereum during the first half of 2026, a sharp increase from the roughly $127 million in stolen funds the network recorded during 2025.

“2025 had $2.58 billion lost across 63 incidents, concentrated in Q1 by Bybit’s $1.5 billion, with Ethereum and Arbitrum the top chains by stolen-fund flow,” Blockaid CEO Ido Ben-Natan told Cointelegraph.

Blockchain losses by network in 2025. Source: Blockaid.

The change did not stem from a rise in smart contract exploits. Instead, compromised keys accounted for more than 98% of Solana’s losses, driven largely by incidents involving Drift Protocol and Step Finance, which Blockaid linked to North Korea-linked cyber groups.

Unlike Ethereum, where attackers primarily exploited vulnerabilities in protocol code, Solana incidents targeted signer infrastructure and organizational security, while a handful of code exploits involving Raydium and Volo accounted for the remaining losses.

Magazine: A quantum roadmap would push Bitcoin much higher: Charles Edwards

Solana price fell about 5% from its July 27 high near $77 to $73 on July 28 as a break below short-term support triggered long liquidations.

Solana price drops back toward $73

According to data from crypto.news, Solana (SOL) price traded near $73.20 at the time of writing after falling from an intraday high around $77 during the previous session. The move represented a decline of about 5% from peak to trough.

The pullback followed SOL’s latest rejection from the upper half of a descending channel visible on the 4-hour chart. Buyers pushed the token toward $77 on July 27 but failed to challenge the channel’s upper boundary or the wider $78 resistance area.

Selling accelerated after SOL lost the $75 level, which had supported several earlier intraday rebounds. The token subsequently fell toward $73 before entering a narrow consolidation range.

The daily chart showed SOL trading below the Murrey Math major support-and-resistance pivot at $75. Its July 28 candle recorded a low of $72.86, although buyers prevented a sustained fall below $73.

SOL’s decline also came as capital showed a preference for Ethereum. ETH recently reclaimed $1,900, while SOL remained trapped below its July resistance range.

Crypto trader Daan Crypto Trades noted that the pair was beginning to lose its horizontal support area.

“[Solana] needs to break this local consolidation before we can start looking at the range high again.”

Daan added that Ethereum’s recent strength against Bitcoin had left Solana behind, making the ETH ecosystem more attractive while SOL remained weak.

Long liquidations accelerated the sell-off

The three-day CoinGlass liquidation heatmap shows that Solana’s slide cut through several leveraged trading zones between $75 and $73.

SOL first dropped sharply below $75 before falling through another band of liquidity around $73. The move likely forced leveraged long traders to close their positions, adding market sell orders to an already weak spot market.

The heatmap shows that the largest nearby concentrations now sit on both sides of the current price. A bright liquidity band has formed around $72.40–$72.70, while additional clusters are visible near $73.80–$74.20.

This positioning could keep short-term price action unstable. A move below $73 may attract SOL toward the lower liquidity pool, while an initial rebound could target the accumulated positions around $74.

Further liquidation interest is visible near $75 and $76.50. Those levels could act as upside targets if buyers regain control, but they may also become resistance because traders caught in the decline could use a recovery to exit positions.

The liquidation data support the view that derivatives positioning magnified the decline. However, the charts alone do not establish that institutional sell blocks caused the move.

SOL indicators point to weak momentum

Solana remains inside a descending parallel channel that has guided its 4-hour price action since the early-July peak above $83. The channel has produced a sequence of lower highs, including rejections near $79 and $77.

SOL is now approaching the channel’s lower half. The lower boundary sits close to $70, making that level the next broader technical support if $73 fails.

The 4-hour relative strength index has fallen to 35.57, below its signal average of 47.33. The reading shows that sellers control short-term momentum, although SOL has not yet entered the conventional oversold zone below 30.

Aroon readings also favor the downside, with the stronger line at 78.57% compared with 57.14% for the opposing measure. The indicator reflects the recency of price highs and lows rather than the size of a move, but its current configuration is consistent with SOL’s recent lower low.

On the daily chart, the average directional index stands at only 11.54. An ADX reading below 20 normally indicates a weak trend, suggesting SOL is still consolidating rather than entering a confirmed directional breakdown.

That weak reading leaves room for false moves around support. SOL could briefly sweep liquidity below $73 before recovering, particularly if selling pressure in the derivatives market eases.

Solana price levels to watch next

The first level buyers need to recover is $74. A move above that area would allow SOL to challenge the $75 pivot, which has changed from support into near-term resistance.

A daily close above $75 would weaken the immediate bearish case. Bulls would then need to clear $77–$78 and break above the descending channel to reopen a path toward the July high around $83.

Failure to reclaim $75 would leave SOL exposed to another test of the $72.50 liquidation cluster. Below that area, the channel boundary near $70 becomes the next likely target.

The daily Murrey Math chart places the bottom of the broader trading range at $68.75. That level may provide stronger support if a breakdown below $70 develops. A deeper correction could then extend toward the $62.50 pivot, although the current low ADX reading does not yet confirm such a move.

Fed decision adds risk for US traders

US investors are also awaiting the Federal Reserve’s next policy decision. Interest-rate expectations, movements in the dollar and Treasury yields can affect demand for high-risk assets such as SOL.

Treasury yields eased on July 28, while oil prices also fell as markets responded to renewed hopes for diplomacy in the Middle East. Brent traded below $87 and US crude near $81, reversing part of the inflation-driven pressure seen earlier in the week. The pullback reportedly followed a pause in attacks and renewed hopes for a US-Iran agreement.

That means SOL’s latest decline appears more closely linked to its technical breakdown and leveraged positioning than to a fresh rise in oil or Treasury yields. The Fed decision could still determine whether US liquidity conditions help SOL recover $75 or push it toward lower support.