Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Why Privacy Coins Often Appear in Post-Hack Fund Flows

Published

on

Why Privacy Coins Often Appear in Post-Hack Fund Flows

Key takeaways

  • Privacy coins are just a step in a broader laundering pipeline after hacks. They serve as a temporary black box to disrupt traceability.

  • Hackers typically move funds through consolidation, obfuscation and chain hopping and only then introduce privacy layers before attempting to cash out.

  • Privacy coins are most useful immediately after a hack because they reduce onchain visibility, delay blacklisting and help break attribution links.

  • Enforcement actions against mixers and other laundering tools often shift illicit flows toward alternative routes, including privacy coins.

After crypto hacks occur, scammers often move stolen funds through privacy-focused cryptocurrencies. While this has created a perception of hackers preferring privacy coins, these assets function as a specialized “black box” within a larger laundering pipeline. To understand why privacy coins show up after hacks, you need to take into account the process of crypto laundering.

This article explores how funds move post-hack and what makes privacy coins so useful for scammers. It examines emerging laundering methods, limitations of privacy coins like Monero (XMR) and Zcash (ZEC) as laundering tools, legitimate uses of privacy technologies and why regulators need to balance innovation with the need to curb laundering.

How funds flow after a hack

Following a hack, scammers don’t usually send stolen assets directly to an exchange for immediate liquidation; instead, they follow a deliberate, multi-stage process to obscure the trail and slow down the inquiry:

  1. Consolidation: Funds from multiple victim addresses are transferred to a smaller number of wallets.

  2. Obfuscation: Assets are shuffled through chains of intermediary crypto wallets, often with the help of crypto mixers.

  3. Chain-hopping: Funds are bridged or swapped to different blockchains, breaking continuity within any single network’s tracking tools.

  4. Privacy layer: A portion of funds is converted into privacy-focused assets or routed through privacy-preserving protocols.

  5. Cash-out: Assets are eventually exchanged for more liquid cryptocurrencies or fiat through centralized exchanges, over-the-counter (OTC) desks or peer-to-peer (P2P) channels.

Privacy coins usually enter the stage in steps four or five, blurring the traceability of lost funds even more after earlier steps have already complicated the onchain history.

Advertisement

Why privacy coins are attractive for scammers right after a hack

Privacy coins offer specific advantages right at the time when scammers are most vulnerable, immediately after the theft.

Reduced onchain visibility

Unlike transparent blockchains, where the sender and receiver and transaction amounts remain fully auditable, privacy-focused systems deliberately hide these details. Once funds move into such networks, standard blockchain analytics lose much of their efficacy.

In the aftermath of the theft, scammers try to delay identification or evade automated address blacklisting by exchanges and services. The sudden drop in visibility is particularly valuable in the critical days after theft when monitoring is most intense.

Breaking attribution chains

Scammers tend not to move directly from hacked assets into privacy coins. They typically use multiple techniques, swaps, cross-chain bridges and intermediary wallets before introducing a privacy layer.

This multi-step approach makes it significantly harder to connect the final output back to the original hack. Privacy coins act more as a strategic firebreak in the attribution process than as a standalone laundering tool.

Advertisement

Negotiating power in OTC and P2P markets

Many laundering paths involve informal OTC brokers or P2P traders who operate outside extensively regulated exchanges.

Using privacy-enhanced assets reduces the information counterparties have about the funds’ origin. This can simplify negotiations, lower the perceived risk of mid-transaction freezes and improve the attacker’s leverage in less transparent markets.

Did you know? Several early ransomware groups originally demanded payment in Bitcoin (BTC) but later switched to privacy coins only after exchanges began cooperating more closely with law enforcement on address blacklisting.

The mixer squeeze and evolving methods of laundering

One reason privacy coins appear more frequently in specific time frames is enforcement pressure on other laundering tools. When law enforcement targets particular mixers, bridges or high-risk exchanges, illicit funds simply move to other channels. This shift results in the diversification of laundering routes across various blockchains, swapping platforms and privacy-focused networks.

Advertisement

When scammers perceive one laundering route as risky, alternative routes experience higher volumes. Privacy coins gain from this dynamic, as they offer inherent transaction obfuscation, independent of third-party services.

Limitations of privacy coins as a laundering tool

Privacy features notwithstanding, most large-scale hacks still involve extensive use of BTC, Ether (ETH) and stablecoins at later stages. The reason is straightforward: Liquidity and exit options are important.

Privacy coins generally exhibit:

These factors complicate the conversion of substantial amounts of crypto to fiat currency without drawing scrutiny. Therefore, scammers use privacy coins briefly before reverting to more liquid assets prior to final withdrawal.

Advertisement

Successful laundering involves integration of privacy-enhancing tools with high-liquidity assets, tailored to each phase of the process.

Did you know? Some darknet marketplaces now list prices in Monero by default, even if they still accept Bitcoin, because vendors prefer not to reveal their income patterns or customer volume.

Behavioral trends in asset laundering

While tactical specifics vary, blockchain analysts generally identify several high-level “red flags” in illicit fund flows:

  • Layering and consolidation: Rapid dispersal of assets across a vast network of wallets, followed by strategic reaggregation to simplify the final exit.

  • Chain hopping: Moving assets across multiple blockchains to break the deterministic link of a single ledger, often sandwiching privacy-enhancing protocols.

  • Strategic latency: Allowing funds to remain dormant for extended periods to bypass the window of heightened public and regulatory scrutiny.

  • Direct-to-fiat workarounds: Preferring OTC brokers for the final liquidation to avoid the robust monitoring systems of major exchanges.

  • Hybrid privacy: Using privacy-centric coins as a specialized tool within a broader laundering strategy, rather than as a total replacement for mainstream assets.

Contours of anonymity: Why traceability persists

Despite the hurdles created by privacy-preserving technologies, investigators continue to secure wins by targeting the edges of the ecosystem. Progress is typically made through:

Advertisement
  • Regulated gateways: Forcing interactions with exchanges that mandate rigorous identity verification

  • Human networks: Targeting the physical infrastructure of money-mule syndicates and OTC desks

  • Off-chain intelligence: Leveraging traditional surveillance, confidential informants and Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs)

  • Operational friction: Exploiting mistakes made by the perpetrator that link their digital footprint to a real-world identity.

Privacy coins increase the complexity and cost of an investigation, but they cannot fully insulate scammers from the combined pressure of forensic analysis and traditional law enforcement.

Did you know? Blockchain analytics firms often focus less on privacy coins themselves and more on tracing how funds enter and exit them since those boundary points offer the most reliable investigative signals.

Reality of legitimate use for privacy-enhancing technologies

It is essential to distinguish between the technology itself and its potential criminal applications. Privacy-focused financial tools, such as certain cryptocurrencies or mixers, serve valid purposes, including:

  • Safeguarding the confidentiality of commercial transactions, which includes protecting trade secrets or competitive business dealings

  • Shielding individuals from surveillance or monitoring in hostile environments

  • Reducing the risk of targeted theft by limiting public visibility of personal wealth.

Regulatory scrutiny isn’t triggered by the mere existence of privacy features, but when they are used for illicit activity, such as ransomware payments, hacking proceeds, sanctions evasion or darknet marketplaces.

Advertisement

This key distinction makes effective policymaking difficult. Broad prohibitions risk curtailing lawful financial privacy for ordinary users and businesses while often failing to halt criminal networks that shift to alternative methods.

Balancing act of regulators

For cryptocurrency exchanges, the recurring appearance of privacy coins in post-hack laundering flows intensifies the need to:

  • Enhance transaction monitoring and risk assessment

  • Reduce exposure to high-risk inflows

  • Strengthen compliance with cross-border Travel Rule requirements and other jurisdictional standards.

For policymakers, it underscores a persistent challenge: Criminal actors adapt more quickly than rigid regulations can evolve. Efforts to crack down on one tool often displace activity to others, turning money laundering into a dynamic, moving target rather than a problem that can be fully eradicated.

Cointelegraph maintains full editorial independence. The selection, commissioning and publication of Features and Magazine content are not influenced by advertisers, partners or commercial relationships.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Prediction Markets Hit New Milestones in March Despite Growing Regulatory Scrutiny

Published

on

Prediction market transactions surpassed 192 million in March 2026. This represents an all-time record as volume and user growth continued to accelerate year over year.

The figures, tracked by Dune, reflect a sector that has shifted from a niche use case into a multibillion-dollar financial market.

Prediction Market Monthly Transactions
Prediction Market Monthly Transactions. Source: Dune

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

The number of monthly users grew to a record high of 865,411, a roughly 118% increase from 396,642 in March 2025. 

Monthly notional trading volume for prediction markets reached roughly $23.89 billion so far in March, a roughly 1,107% year-over-year increase. Nonetheless, it remains around 10.7% below January’s all-time high of $26.7 billion.

Advertisement

BeInCrypto’s exclusive analysis found that sports, crypto, and politics lead weekly volume on Polymarket. On Kalshi, the exotics category overtook politics in late February to secure a position among the top three categories by weekly volume according to Dune data.

The behavioral data also suggests a structural shift. On Polymarket, over 57% of users trade less than $100 per position. 

The average active participant executes roughly 25 trades per day. That frequency mirrors patterns seen in retail stock trading rather than traditional betting.

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

Advertisement

Despite the growth, prediction markets face increasing regulatory scrutiny. Lawmakers have introduced multiple bills in March alone, ranging from curbing insider trading to banning war-related contracts.

The post Prediction Markets Hit New Milestones in March Despite Growing Regulatory Scrutiny appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Lido DAO Plans $20M LDO Buyback to Stabilize After Historic Decline

Published

on

Crypto Breaking News

Lido DAO’s decentralized autonomous organization is weighing a one-off $20 million buyback of its governance token, LDO, in a bid to address a pronounced price dislocation relative to Ether. The plan would swap 10,000 stETH tokens from the treasury for LDO, with proponents arguing that the governance token is undervalued given the protocol’s fundamentals.

The proposal, submitted on Friday, outlines a staged approach: the treasury would acquire up to 10,000 stETH in smaller batches of 1,000 and swap each batch for LDO. Lido argues this move could restore alignment between LDO’s market price and the underlying health of the protocol, a gap it says has widened to historically large levels. As part of the process, each batch would require tokenholder approval, and results would be reported before the next tranche proceeds.

“This is not a routine fluctuation. It represents one of the most significant dislocations between LDO’s market price and its underlying protocol fundamentals in the token’s history.”

The time to act comes as LDO sits at an extended discount to Ether. Lido DAO notes LDO trades at about 0.00016 ETH, roughly 63% below its two-year median. At the same time, Lido remains the dominant force in Ethereum’s liquid staking market, holding about 23.2% of staked Ether, according to Dune Analytics data. That leadership has not come without controversy; previous assessments flagged the potential centralization risks tied to a single protocol’s dominance in securing a large share of the network’s staking.

Price and market metrics underscore the scale of the challenge. LDO is currently trading around $0.30, down about 95.9% from its peak near $7.30 in August 2021. Its market capitalization sits near $255 million, placing it around the 141st-largest token by value. The plan’s proponents argue that the proposed buyback could shore up sentiment by demonstrating active governance-driven capital allocation tied to the protocol’s real-world performance.

Advertisement

Key takeaways

  • The Lido DAO proposal would execute a one-off $20 million buyback by swapping up to 10,000 stETH from the treasury for LDO, in batches of 1,000 stETH each, using limit orders or dollar-cost averaging to manage volatility.
  • Approval for each batch would be required from tokenholders, and results would be disclosed after every tranche before proceeding.
  • LDO trades at a steep discount to ETH (approximately 0.00016 ETH per LDO, about 63% below the two-year median), despite Lido’s leadership in Ethereum’s liquid staking sector.
  • Lido’s dominance has been cited in the past as a potential centralization risk for the network, though the current governance move focuses on price alignment and treasury management.
  • Revenue and fee dynamics in 2025 show Lido’s take rate rising to 6.1% even as staking fees declined, with total staking revenue dipping amid a broader market retrenchment.

Mechanics, governance, and investor considerations

The proposed buyback plan hinges on a staged governance process. If approved, Lido would execute batches of 1,000 stETH each, swapping them for LDO until the 10,000-stETH target is reached. The strategy emphasizes price discipline: Lido intends to use limit orders or a dollar-cost averaging approach to smooth entry and avoid abrupt price moves. Each batch would require a new round of tokenholder approvals, and the DAO would report results after every step to maintain transparency and accountability.

The broader context includes a look at Lido’s earnings trajectory. In 2025, Lido’s revenue declined by about 23% to roughly $40.5 million, driven largely by a drop in staking fees to about $37.4 million. Despite the revenue dip, the protocol’s take rate—defined as the percentage of staked ETH rewards retained as fees—improved from about 5% to just over 6% in 2025. Lido argues that the core fundamentals remain robust even amid a wider market pullback and a 13% cost improvement in 2025 versus 2024.

The idea of a buyback is not entirely new within Lido’s ecosystem. In November, a member proposed an automated buyback mechanism to support LDO’s price, but that proposal has not been implemented. The current plan reframes the concept as a one-off, governance-driven initiative tied directly to the treasury’s assets and the DAO’s long-term interests.

Implications for holders and the broader ecosystem

If the proposal advances, the immediate effect could be a temporary lift in LDO’s trading dynamics, especially if the market interprets the buyback as a signal that the DAO is willing to put treasury-backed resources toward balancing token price with protocol fundamentals. For investors, the move highlights a visible attempt to align incentives between token economics and the platform’s operational strength, particularly given Lido’s entrenched position in Ethereum staking and its influence on validator economics.

However, the plan also introduces governance risk and execution risk. The need for multiple rounds of tokenholder approvals means outcomes will be contingent on community sentiment and turnout. Moreover, the market’s reaction will hinge on how the buyback intersects with broader SEC-like scrutiny, market liquidity conditions, and the pace at which LDO could absorb new supply without dampening demand for the token’s governance role.

Advertisement

Looking ahead, observers will be watching whether the DAO proceeds with the proposed schedule, how each batch performs relative to market conditions, and whether this approach invites further debates about token economics, centralization concerns, and the resilience of Ethereum’s staking architecture as it evolves post-merge.

Readers should monitor Lido DAO’s governance votes and the market’s reaction to any announced results from each tranche, as these steps will illuminate how the community weighs treasury-backed interventions against the need to maintain decentralization and protocol integrity in a challenging macro environment.

Risk & affiliate notice: Crypto assets are volatile and capital is at risk. This article may contain affiliate links. Read full disclosure

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Bitcoin recovers to $67,400 after dipping below $65,200 as Houthis enter Iran war

Published

on

Bitcoin recovers to $67,400 after dipping below $65,200 as Houthis enter Iran war

The war just got bigger. Bitcoin briefly got smaller.

Bitcoin dipped to $65,112 early Monday morning, its lowest level since the February crash, before recovering to $67,402 as Asian markets opened.

The 24-hour range of $65,112 to $67,389 reflects a market that sold hard on overnight escalation headlines and found buyers near $65,000, a level that hasn’t been tested since the war’s opening weekend five weeks ago.

Ethereum recovered 2% to $2,044, Solana gained 0.9% to $83.48, and XRP added 1.4% to $1.35. The 24-hour green across the board masks a rougher weekly picture though. BTC is still down 1% on the week, ETH 0.9%, XRP 1.9%, and SOL 3.7%. Tron is the one name sitting in green, up 2.6% in a day and 4.6% on the week, quietly outperforming the entire majors complex.

Advertisement

The escalation this time came from multiple directions simultaneously. Iran-backed Houthi forces entered the conflict, opening a new front beyond the direct U.S.-Israel-Iran theater. Additional U.S. troops arrived in the Middle East, fanning fears of a ground operation.

The Wall Street Journal reported Trump is weighing a military operation to extract uranium from Iran, though no decision has been made. And Iran attacked two aluminum production sites in the region, sending the metal up as much as 6% and extending the war’s economic damage beyond oil and into industrial commodities.

Brent crude rose 2.5% to around $115 a barrel, now up roughly 90% year-to-date. Asian equities fell sharply, with South Korea’s benchmark down 3.2% on a technology stock selloff and Japan’s Nikkei dropping 3.4%. S&P 500 futures pared losses and were trading roughly flat, suggesting some stabilization after the initial reaction.

The $65,112 low matters technically. That level is within range of the $64,000 low from Feb. 28, the day the war started. Bitcoin has spent five weeks building a pattern of higher lows on each escalation, from $64,000 to $66,000 to $68,000 to $69,400 to $70,596.

Advertisement

Monday’s dip below $66,000 is the first time in weeks the floor has moved lower rather than higher. Whether it recovers and re-establishes the uptrend or marks the beginning of a break below the range that has held since the war began is the question for the rest of the day.

Meanwhile, oil at $115 and aluminum spiking on direct attacks on production facilities means the inflationary impact is broadening beyond energy into industrial supply chains. That makes the Fed’s position even harder and the rate cut timeline even more distant.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Polymarket Trader Profits $67K on UFC Fight Mix-Up

Published

on

Polymarket Trader Profits $67K on UFC Fight Mix-Up

A Polymarket trader turned $676 into $67,608 on Saturday by capitalizing on a rare mistake during a UFC heavyweight bout, where the wrong fighter was initially announced as the winner. 

The trader, known as LlamaEnjoyer on Polymarket and Verrissimus on X, watched the live fight between Tyrell Fortune and Marcin Tybura and suspected that a mistake may have been made when UFC presenter Bruce Buffer announced Tybura as the winner.

During that time, Polymarket shares for Fortune fell to one cent, and LlamaEnjoyer was able to place the $676 bet moments before Buffer corrected himself and declared Fortune the winner. 

LlamaEnjoyer profited roughly $67,000 from the UFC’s brief blunder, allowing him to capture a near 100x return.

Advertisement
Receipt of the LlamaEnjoyer’s win on Polymarket. Source: Polymarket

The incident shows the speed at which odds on prediction markets can whipsaw during live events. 

Related: NYSE parent ICE completes new $600M investment in Polymarket

LlamaEnjoyer almost lost $100,000 initially

Speaking about the incident, the Polymarket trader said they almost put $100,000 on Tybura at 99 cents, presumably once the initial decision was made before realizing that something “was off.”

“Cancelled my order, scooped up 1c shares instead. the UFC corrected the winner seconds later. easiest 100x ever.”