Blockcast

CoinDCX has confirmed an internal loss of about $16 million from retired deposit wallets while stating that customer balances were not affected. The Indian exchange said 15.99 million USDT was drained from deprecated Tron wallets after sweeping failures and legacy vulnerabilities, and it added that the company would absorb the loss rather than pass it to users.
The problem centered on an automated service that was supposed to sweep deposits from old deposit addresses into current secure wallets. According to CoinDCX, that service quietly failed, so user deposits accumulated in the old infrastructure instead of being moved into the main treasury. Investigators traced roughly 15.99 million USDT and about 5,783 TRX from CoinDCX-related wallets into a single Tron address and then on to venues including Binance, OKX and Gate. CoinDCX described the event as an operational wallet loss rather than a breach of a live trading wallet, and independent reporting matched that basic account. Tether reportedly froze around $2.2 million of the stolen USDT across several addresses, but there was no sign yet that most of the funds had been recovered.
CoinDCX insists that customer funds remain safe in segregated cold wallets and that trading, deposits and withdrawals continued. The exchange also said users who accidentally sent funds to old addresses were credited immediately. Even so, the episode raised questions about communication and operational discipline. CEO Sumit Gupta initially called breach reports a false alarm and suggested attackers were only reusing addresses from a prior 2025 incident before the company later confirmed the new loss. Onchain analysts such as ZachXBT publicly disputed that narrative, citing continued use of one of the addresses by a liquidity provider months after the earlier hack. The new loss also follows a roughly $44 million hack in 2025 tied to a compromised internal account, which had already raised concerns about internal controls and employee-targeted attacks.
The incident highlights several risk themes for CoinDCX users and for centralized exchange users more broadly. Operational risk is the first theme because failures in automated sweeping and monitoring of old deposit addresses show that infrastructure debt can be as dangerous as hot wallet exposure. Communication risk is the second theme because the gap between initial denials and later admissions shows why users and regulators scrutinize exchange statements after suspicious onchain movements. Regulatory and market risk is the third theme because Indian regulators may investigate, and counterparties and users could reassess exposure or demand clearer proof of reserves and stronger wallet lifecycle management. For users, the practical lessons are to stick to current deposit addresses obtained directly from the app or website, minimize idle balances on any centralized exchange, and monitor how venues handle prior incidents, including whether they disclose timeline, cause and remediation clearly.
CoinDCX’s $16 million retired wallet loss looks like a mix of legacy infrastructure risk and monitoring failure rather than a direct hit on current customer wallets. It nevertheless reinforces concerns about the exchange’s security culture and transparency. The broader takeaway for crypto users is that centralized exchange risk often hides in unglamorous plumbing such as old deposit addresses and sweepers, so venue choice and custody habits remain as important as token selection.

Solana is down 1.68% to $102.20 over the past 24 hours, underperforming a slightly weaker broader market. The move was driven primarily by macro-led risk aversion across crypto rather than by a failure specific to Solana. As a high-beta Layer 1 asset, Solana moved in the same direction as the broader market but fell harder, reflecting its sensitivity to shifts in sentiment.
The primary reason for the decline was a broader market sell-off. Bitcoin and total crypto market cap fell as Brent crude oil rose above $116 a barrel, amplifying inflation fears and tightening expectations for central-bank policy. Total crypto market cap dropped 0.97%, while Bitcoin fell 0.93%. This risk-off move across equities and crypto reduced appetite for risk assets and weighed on Solana as well.
Secondary pressures came from Solana-specific ETF outflows and network concerns. U.S. spot Solana ETFs recorded $8.9 million in net outflows on October 22, part of a broader rotation away from crypto ETFs that day. At the same time, Bitwise’s Q4 Staking Report noted that Solana’s validator count declined from 696 to 659 in the third quarter, citing operating-cost pressures, and that the gross staking yield fell from 6.38% to 5.99%. JPMorgan’s expansion of tokenized funds to Solana is a positive institutional story, but it was outweighed by immediate selling pressure from ETF redemptions and mild concerns about network health.
Technically, SOL is trading below its key short-term moving averages, with the 7-day SMA at $103.11 and the RSI at 34.87, which indicates oversold conditions. The immediate support level is the recent swing low at $101.80. A daily close below that level could open a path toward $100, while resistance sits near $105.03. If SOL holds above the $101.80 swing low, it may consolidate, but a break below that level risks a test of $100.
The near-term trend is bearish, although oversold levels suggest a bounce could occur if macro pressures ease. The Federal Reserve meeting on Oct 27 to 28 is the next major macro trigger. Any hawkish signals could extend the sell-off, while a hold might allow for stabilization. Market participants should watch the Fed’s policy statement and whether SOL can reclaim the $103 to $104 zone to signal short-term strength.
The market outlook is cautiously bearish. Solana’s 24-hour drop stems primarily from a macro risk-off move, amplified by minor outflows and network concerns. The coin remains in a downtrend within its recent range. The key watch items are the Federal Reserve’s tone later this week and whether SOL defends the $101.80 support, which would determine if the sell-off accelerates or stabilizes.

Mastercard and BVNK announced the Global Money Platform on 15 Oct 2026. It is a modular infrastructure layer that lets banks, fintechs, and enterprises offer multi currency accounts holding fiat and stablecoins side by side. Through a single API, businesses can provide real time conversion, stablecoin linked cards, and local bank payouts. Stablecoin balances can then be spent across Mastercard’s merchant network in more than 130 countries. The platform also plugs into Mastercard Move, which reaches over 17 billion payment endpoints and can turn stablecoin balances into local currency bank payments worldwide.
Early integrators include Nuvei, Marqeta, Ontop, Beem, and Almond FinTech. That means consumers will access these features through those apps and card programs rather than through a direct consumer product from Mastercard itself. The move effectively turns regulated stablecoins, especially USDC and similar tokens, into spendable balances at retail checkouts using familiar card form factors. BVNK’s documentation supports USDC on major chains, with dollar, euro, and sterling collection and payouts described.
For crypto users, this lowers friction between holding stablecoins and using them in day to day payments. Cards can charge against a stablecoin wallet and automatically handle FX and settlement in the background. It also pushes stablecoins further into institutional and business use cases such as cross border payouts and treasury flows, which Mastercard has previously highlighted as key real world applications. Competition is heating up as Visa, Stripe, and others pursue similar stablecoin card and settlement rails. This suggests stablecoins are becoming a mainstream payments primitive rather than only a trading or DeFi asset.
What this means is that if you hold regulated stablecoins through supported fintechs, you could increasingly spend them like normal card balances. Most merchants would still see fiat deposits and would not need to touch crypto directly. Coverage is expected to expand to more than 40 currencies across over 200 countries and territories in 2027, according to Mastercard focused reports. The pace of that rollout will depend on local licensing, stablecoin regulations, and which partners go live in each market.
Key open questions include which specific stablecoins and chains are supported per jurisdiction, how consumer fees compare to traditional FX and card products, and whether merchants ever opt to settle directly in stablecoins rather than fiat. Regulation matters as well, since Mastercard has obtained a New York BitLicense for stablecoins and tokenized deposits, but other regions may apply stricter rules. For crypto markets, any sustained growth in stablecoin payment volumes through card rails could reinforce the role of dollar backed tokens as the default digital money. It could also put pressure on less regulated or thin liquidity stablecoins that struggle to integrate with major networks.
Mastercard’s Global Money Platform does not replace banks or wallets. Instead, it gives them an off the shelf way to turn stablecoin balances into everyday card spending and bank payouts at global scale. If partner adoption and regulatory approvals keep progressing, this could shift stablecoins from a niche trading tool into a standard payments rail behind the scenes. The big variables are which tokens are supported, in which countries, and on what terms for users and merchants.

Brazil’s securities regulator has started a controlled pilot to test tokenized securities trading on blockchain platforms. The Comissão de Valores Mobiliários, or CVM, issued Resolution 249 to run an experimental tokenization program on decentralized ledger platforms. The pilot uses only simulated stocks and simulated money, so no real assets are at risk. The CVM will compare public and private blockchains and study cybersecurity, interoperability and network resilience. The goal is to gather evidence that can inform a future regulatory framework for tokenized securities.
Platforms taking part in the pilot must encode Brazil’s market rules directly into smart contracts. That means products are meant to be compliant by default rather than compliant only after manual checks. Operations must remain private, yet they must also be auditable by supervisors. The regulator plans to use AI tools to monitor activity, which points to an oversight model built for high volume, always on digital markets. Only members of a CVM tokenization working group can submit proposals, and a steering committee from that group will oversee the tests.
The pilot is about regulated securities, not coins, but it still pushes blockchain infrastructure closer to the center of Brazil’s capital markets. If the CVM concludes that tokenized stocks and bonds can be safely run on chain, it could open the door to regulated, blockchain native products. Those products could sit alongside traditional brokerage accounts and crypto exchanges. For crypto users, the important question is whether this experiment evolves into real money tokenized stocks and bonds.
Brazil’s main exchange, B3, is also building a tokenization platform that targets a 2027 launch. That platform is expected to have its own stablecoin and a design that mixes digital and traditional liquidity pools instead of pure 24/7 trading. Together with the CVM pilot, this suggests Brazil is preparing full stack infrastructure for tokenized real world assets, from regulation to trading venue and settlement currency. If you follow tokenized assets, Brazil is positioning itself as a significant future market where regulated stocks and bonds may eventually trade on chain under securities law, not only in gray zone crypto venues.
In the near term, the pilot is about learning, not live investment. One key milestone will be the CVM’s published findings on cybersecurity, smart contract design and investor protection, along with any draft rules that emerge from the working group. A second milestone will be B3’s platform design choices, including how its stablecoin is backed and whether retail investors can directly hold tokenized securities.
Over the next few years, the critical question is whether Brazil moves from simulated assets to real tokenized listings. Another question is how Brazil coordinates with other regulators that are experimenting with tokenized markets. For crypto users and builders, the opportunity is in infrastructure and compliance focused projects that can plug into these regulated tokenization stacks once they go live.
Brazil’s tokenized securities pilot shows that regulators are now testing blockchain as core market plumbing rather than treating it only as a speculative asset class. If the CVM and B3 translate these experiments into production systems, tokenization could become a standard way to access Brazilian stocks and bonds, with crypto style settlement and compliance baked directly into smart contracts. The outcome will shape how far regulated tokenization can go and which projects are best positioned to provide the rails and tools for it.

A wave of forced selling swept through crypto after an Asian chip-stock rout pressured risk assets and punished heavily long traders. Market trackers counted about $803 million in leveraged positions liquidated over 24 hours across 10 exchanges. Long positions accounted for roughly $694 million, or 86 percent of the total. Around 172,000 traders were liquidated, with Bitcoin near $181 million, Ethereum near $178 million and Solana near $60 million in forced closures. The largest single liquidation was a $9.65 million BTC long on Binance that closed near $81,773. These figures were broadly consistent across TokenPost and CoinDesk coverage.
The scale of the long liquidations showed how skewed positioning had become. Because most of the forced closures hit bullish bets, the move behaved more like a classic long flush than a balanced deleveraging event. Traders who had crowded into leveraged longs were quickly pushed out as prices fell, and the resulting selling added momentum to the drop.
The trigger came from Asian chip stocks. South Korea’s KOSPI dropped more than 6 to 7 percent, while Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix fell roughly 8 to 10 percent on worries about Chinese rival CXMT’s DRAM advances. That stress spilled into crypto venues that list tokenized chip exposure. Perpetual contracts tied to SanDisk saw roughly $19 million in liquidations, slightly more than XRP, which highlighted how much AI-chip leverage now sits on crypto derivatives platforms. CoinDesk noted that these equity-linked perps were liquidated alongside BTC and ETH as the chip rout hit broader risk sentiment.
The episode underlined that crypto is not only correlated with tech stocks. It now directly hosts leveraged bets on chip names, so an AI-equity shock can mechanically cascade into crypto liquidations. When tokenized semiconductor exposure sells off, the forced selling can spread into major tokens and amplify an already risk-off move.
Despite the shakeout, aggregate perpetuals open interest was only marginally lower over 24 hours and remained around $404 billion. Derivatives volume jumped, which showed that speculative activity stayed high. Bitcoin briefly dipped below $81,000 before rebounding above $83,000 in the same window. Several analyses flagged $80,000 to $82,000 as near-term support and $84,000 to $87,000 as resistance, with attention framed around the next U.S. inflation print and AI-equity sentiment. Market-wide, total crypto market cap was roughly $2.79 trillion, BTC dominance was near 60 percent and a neutral sentiment index suggested a shakeout rather than a full regime change.
The immediate liquidation shock may be over, but the market is not out of danger. If Bitcoin loses the $80,000 to $82,000 area into a negative macro surprise, a fresh wave of forced selling could follow as leverage rebuilds. The interaction between macro data, AI-chip equities and how aggressively traders re-lever will shape whether this remains a one-day shakeout or becomes the start of a deeper deleveraging phase.
An Asian AI-chip sell-off sparked a risk-off move that cascaded through tokenized chip perps and heavily long BTC and ETH positioning, producing about $803 million in crypto liquidations. The flush cleared a chunk of long leverage without breaking key market-cap or dominance structures, but it showed how tightly crypto is now linked to AI and semiconductor narratives. Going forward, macro data, AI-chip equities and trader risk appetite will determine whether the shakeout fades or deepens.

Security researchers have identified an iPhone spyware strain called P7 DarkSword that hunts for cryptocurrency wallet apps and pulls wallet related data from devices that have already been compromised. According to iVerify, this malware is an upgraded variant that can recognize crypto wallet users and extract information from the imToken wallet. It uses wallet_scan and wallet_extract commands to target imToken files every 15 seconds, and it frequently contacts an attacker controlled server so operators can send new instructions without exploiting the phone again. This design makes surveillance continuous and stealthy after the initial compromise.
P7 DarkSword is not described as a brand new universal iOS vulnerability. Reports indicate it is a tool used after an iPhone has already been exploited through a broader DarkSword attack chain aimed at specific iOS versions and regions. Apple has since patched the related vulnerabilities in newer releases. Even so, those protections only help users who install the updates.
The current risk is serious but not fully confirmed as a theft campaign. Reports say the spyware can harvest Apple Keychain data, Notes databases, photos, and selected app files. Any of these could contain recovery phrases, passwords, or other wallet credentials. However, researchers have not confirmed a case of stolen cryptocurrency or proven extraction of private keys. Infections were observed starting in early 2026. Associated fixes include an iOS 18.7.7 update and earlier patches. Once an iPhone is compromised, wallet data stored on it or generated by it should be considered exposed, even if attackers have not acted yet.
For iPhone users who hold crypto, practical protection starts with device integrity. Keep iOS on the latest version and consider Apple’s hardened modes, especially if immediate updating is not possible. Google’s threat team also recommended these hardened settings for users who cannot update right away. Unexplained mobile device management enrollment, strange configuration profiles, or unusual phone behavior should be treated as red flags. If any of these appear, stop using that device for crypto activity.
If infection is suspected, the safer path is to migrate funds to a new wallet created on a different and trusted device with a fresh recovery phrase. Avoid storing seeds or credentials in Notes, photos, or general purpose apps. Treating a compromised phone as a compromised wallet is conservative, but it is also realistic. Crypto is only as safe as the phone it lives on.
The discovery of P7 DarkSword shows that attackers are now explicitly targeting mobile crypto users by scanning for wallet apps and harvesting surrounding data after an iPhone is compromised. No confirmed theft has been linked to this spyware yet, but the case reinforces a broader trend. Wallet security depends not only on choosing a good app, but also on using a fully trustworthy device, a clean operating system, and disciplined handling of recovery phrases and credentials. For anyone using an iPhone for self custody, the main safeguard is maintaining device integrity and being ready to move to a clean setup at the first credible sign of compromise.

Bitcoin options traders have assembled a large upside bet, with about $4.5 billion in high-strike call exposure clustered around the $90,000 to $100,000 range. Data shows roughly 54,750 BTC in calls at the 90,000, 95,000, and 100,000 strikes, concentrated in expiries over the next few months. At a reference price near $82,800, that exposure represented about $4.53 billion in notional value. The size of the position has drawn attention because it signals strong interest in further upside, but it also carries important nuances.
Deribit’s largest listed BTC options position is about 25,030 BTC in 95,000 dollar calls expiring 30 October, worth roughly $2.07 billion at current prices. Deribit also shows around 15,158 BTC in 90,000 dollar calls and 14,562 BTC in 100,000 dollar calls. Together, those three high strikes total about 54,750 BTC. However, open interest only shows how many contracts exist. It does not reveal whether traders are net long those calls, short them, or using them as hedges for spot or futures positions. The options board is therefore heavily populated with upside tickets in the 90k to 100k region, which can act as both a magnet and a source of volatility around those strikes.
Across the BTC options market, calls account for about 268,357 BTC of open interest, or 60.24 percent of outstanding contracts, compared with 177,148 BTC in puts. Calls are also just over half of recent trading volume. Despite this bullish tilt, estimated max pain for the 30 October expiry is near $78,000 on Deribit and around $81,000 to $82,000 on Binance and OKX. All of those levels sit below the spot area above $82,000. Futures open interest is about $51.7 billion, roughly 624,000 BTC, and has slipped recently from earlier peaks. Total BTC options open interest has cooled from more than $50 billion to the $35 to $40 billion range. The market shows strong interest in upside, but without the extreme, leveraged froth seen before past crashes, and options pricing still allows for pullbacks toward lower max pain zones.
Near term, the 30 October expiry and its cluster of 90k to 100k calls are the key date. The 25 December expiry follows, and on some venues its max pain sits even lower. Three broad scenarios matter. Spot could grind toward max pain and soften option payouts. A sharp squeeze above 90k could pressure call sellers. A breakdown could leave high-strike calls expiring worthless. To gauge which path is developing, traders should monitor changes in open interest at those strikes, funding rates and liquidations in BTC futures, and spot demand, including flows into or out of spot Bitcoin ETFs. The 90k to 100k band and the late October and December expiries should be treated as stress points, where shifts in positioning can quickly translate into larger BTC price swings.
BTC options data shows a market leaning toward upside through large high-strike call positions. Yet max pain and moderating leverage signal that a straight line higher is far from guaranteed. How BTC trades around the 30 October and 25 December expiries, and whether spot demand joins or fades, will determine whether these calls become fuel for a breakout or just expensive lottery tickets.

Europol has warned that future quantum computers could expose cryptocurrency wallet keys, making some existing crypto holdings vulnerable while blockchains themselves remain largely resistant. The agency’s core message is that the main quantum risk sits with wallet private keys derived from exposed public keys, not with the core blockchain hashing that records and secures transactions. No machine currently exists that can break mainstream crypto, and Europol expects adaptation rather than systemic collapse.
Many crypto systems use public-key cryptography to prove that a wallet owner authorized a transaction. A sufficiently powerful quantum computer running algorithms like Shor’s could, in theory, derive a private key from an exposed public key and then sign transactions without permission. By contrast, the hash functions that secure blockchain history, such as Bitcoin’s 256-bit proof-of-work hashing, are far harder to attack even with quantum speedups. That makes wallet control the weak point rather than chain integrity.
The reports highlight that many Bitcoin wallet public keys are already visible on chain, often from early Satoshi era coins, legacy script types, and reused addresses. Once a public key is exposed, Europol says it remains permanently vulnerable to future quantum decryption, and there is no cryptographic way to un-expose it. Estimates differ, but on-chain analytics cited by Europol and media outlets put the exposed Bitcoin supply in the multi-million range. Glassnode data reported by Decrypt found about 6.04 million BTC, over 30 percent of supply, with visible public keys, while other analyses point to between roughly 4 and 7 million BTC at risk. Migrating all unspent outputs to safer formats could consume at least 76 days of full Bitcoin block capacity, or around 300 days if only a quarter of each block is reserved.
Europol and cryptography agencies recommend a phased shift to post-quantum signatures and stronger wallet practices well before any quantum deadline is imposed. NIST has already standardized several post-quantum schemes, such as ML-KEM and ML-DSA, and projects including Bitcoin, Ethereum, Sui, and Monad are exploring quantum-safe account types and signature changes. Europol also flags harvest-now, decrypt-later risk for long-lived encrypted data, but it finds no clear evidence that such attacks are already happening at scale.
For everyday users, the near-term focus is less about rushing moves and more about hygiene. Avoiding unnecessary address reuse, favoring modern wallets that keep public keys hidden until spend time, and staying informed about future migration tools offered by exchanges and custodians are practical steps. The goal is to reduce exposure and be ready to move when safer options become available.
What this means is that quantum risk is real but slow-moving. The advantage goes to ecosystems that start designing migration plans and wallet upgrades now, so that when practical quantum machines emerge, exposed funds are already in safer key formats. Preparation matters more than panic.
Europol’s warning reframes quantum computing as a targeted risk to exposed wallet keys rather than a looming destruction of blockchains. The largest danger sits with long-dormant or reused addresses and institutions that depend on static encryption for years. For crypto users, the story is about preparation, not panic: watching for post-quantum roadmap progress, minimizing key exposure through good wallet habits, and expecting network-wide migrations once quantum-safe signature schemes mature and are ready to deploy.

The US Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, known as FinCEN, has withdrawn two major proposed rules that would have expanded surveillance of self-hosted crypto wallets and mixing services. Neither proposal will be implemented. FinCEN scrapped its 2020 unhosted wallet proposal and a 2023 mixer reporting rule that never took effect. The agency cited a deregulatory agenda and heavy privacy concerns. For users and exchanges, this removes looming extra reporting on self-custody and mixers, but existing anti-money laundering and sanctions rules still apply to crypto activity. The policy area is now reset, not settled. Future narrower rules and broader US crypto frameworks from agencies such as the CFTC remain key to watch.
FinCEN formally withdrew two long-running proposals: a 2020 rule for self-hosted wallets and a 2023 rule for crypto mixing activity. The wallet proposal would have required banks and crypto businesses to keep records for transfers above $3,000 and report transactions over $10,000 involving customers’ self-controlled wallets. It also covered aggregated transfers over 24 hours and would have required identity checks on both sides of the transfer. The mixer proposal was based on a USA PATRIOT Act Section 311 finding. It would have classified certain international mixing as a primary money laundering concern. That would have triggered additional reporting of wallet addresses, transaction hashes, IPs, and customer identifiers whenever institutions suspected foreign-linked mixing. Both were only proposals, never binding rules, and they are now formally off the table.
For everyday users, especially those using self-custody wallets, nothing new is being imposed. The extra reporting and verification steps that hung over self-hosted transfers will not be introduced in their proposed form. That reduces the immediate risk that banks would treat any larger transfer to a private wallet as automatically suspicious under a bespoke rule set. For privacy tools and mixers, the withdrawal avoids a broad definition of mixing that critics said would capture routine privacy techniques. Treasury has acknowledged in a recent report that lawful users may use mixers to protect financial privacy, even while stressing ongoing illicit use. However, existing Bank Secrecy Act obligations, suspicious activity reporting, sanctions programs, and criminal cases remain in force.
Confidence in this account is high because multiple primary policy and news sources agree on the withdrawals and their scope. Compliance pressure from these specific proposals is gone, but users should not assume mixers or large private transfers are risk free under broader AML and sanctions rules.
The withdrawals reset, rather than resolve, US policy on wallet surveillance and mixing. Any attempt to regulate these areas now requires a fresh rulemaking process, likely with narrower definitions and more explicit privacy safeguards. At the same time, other regulators are moving ahead on different parts of the crypto stack. The CFTC has opened consultation on a federal licensing framework for leveraged crypto trading and exchanges. That could reshape how US platforms operate and how AML obligations are implemented in practice. Court cases around privacy tools, including Tornado Cash and similar services, also remain active, and outcomes there could influence how future rules are written.
FinCEN’s decision to drop its unhosted wallet and mixer proposals removes two of the most controversial, yet never implemented, surveillance plans around crypto privacy. For now, it eases regulatory overhang for self-custody users and institutions while leaving the core AML and sanctions framework intact. The key forward-looking question is how US regulators will balance financial privacy with enforcement in the next round of rulemaking and exchange-focused reforms.

Blast, an Ethereum layer 2 network, is winding down and has told users they can withdraw through its normal interface until October 26. The team sees no credible path to economic sustainability and is asking users to move assets back to Ethereum mainnet. This deadline applies to balances held in the main app and its progressive web app.
The shutdown process has three main steps, but they unfold in a simple sequence. Withdrawals will pause for about one week while Blast unwinds staked ETH held through Lido. After that, withdrawals will reopen with a shorter 24-hour delay instead of the previous seven-day challenge period. On or after October 26, the interface route will close, and any remaining funds can only be recovered by interacting directly with Blast’s bridge contracts on Ethereum. The team has promised detailed instructions before the cutoff.
The economics behind the closure are stark. Blast says maintaining the chain now costs more than it earns, and there is no credible fix. At its peak in June 2024, Blast secured more than $2 billion in value, but that has fallen to roughly $30 million to $60 million depending on whether only bridge assets or full DeFi TVL are counted. Revenue from network usage has also collapsed to very low levels. One analysis cited chain income of only around $100 per day recently, far below ongoing infrastructure, development, and security costs. BLAST has dropped about 98 percent from its June 2024 high and fell again on the shutdown news, showing how market confidence eroded as activity drained away.
Risk analysis sites cited in coverage note that Blast’s contracts are controlled by a small multisig where three of five keyholders can change bridge logic or pause withdrawals instantly. Its fraud proof system never fully worked. That design amplifies governance and implementation risk during a rushed unwind, even though there is no allegation of misuse. More broadly, Blast is one of several smaller L2s shutting down this year, as generous incentives and early deposits proved insufficient to sustain ongoing costs once user activity dropped.
For users, the practical message is straightforward. Anyone on Blast who prefers a simple path out may want to plan withdrawals through the official interface before October 26. Anyone using newer L2s should pay close attention to their economic model, exit paths, and keyholder setup.
Blast’s closure is a clear example of an L2 that could attract capital with yield and incentives but could not sustain usage enough to cover its own costs. The chain is aiming for an orderly wind down that preserves user funds, but it creates a hard timeline for interface-based exits. It also underlines why L2 users should evaluate not just fees and airdrops, but also long-term economics, security assumptions, and how they would get their assets out if the chain ever decides to shut down.

The SEC has proposed a new crypto custody rule under the Investment Advisers Act and the Investment Company Act that would clarify how registered investment advisers and regulated funds can hold client crypto assets. The framework would permit advisers to self-custody crypto only in limited circumstances, such as when they can document that no eligible third party custodian exists. It would also impose strict requirements for key security, segregation of client holdings, and multi-person approval for transfers.
It would explicitly allow state chartered trust companies, and in some versions regulated broker dealers, to act as qualified crypto custodians if they meet safeguarding, audit, and customer protection standards. Several reports note that this proposal replaces a more restrictive 2023 Safeguarding Rule that was withdrawn in 2025 after criticism that it made crypto custody nearly impossible for advisers.
Today many advisers avoid direct crypto exposure because it is unclear which arrangements count as qualified custody for digital assets. The new proposal aims to remove that uncertainty and widen investor access, letting asset managers and hedge funds hold Bitcoin and other crypto directly rather than only through ETFs or structured products. Analysts point out that clearer custody rules could unlock large pools of adviser managed capital, with initial flows most likely into assets that already have robust institutional custody, such as Bitcoin and Ethereum.
Smaller or more exotic tokens may still face limits because they will only be available where custodians support them, and self-custody is constrained by cost and compliance burdens. Custody providers, state trust companies, and some broker dealers could see new business if they qualify, while less regulated custodians may lose market share. If this rule is finalized, the key practical question will be which custodians support which coins, since that will largely determine what advisers can offer clients.
The custody framework is only a proposal. Public comments will be open for about 60 days after Federal Register publication, after which the SEC can revise, narrow, or even withdraw the rule before a final vote. The initiative comes after the CLARITY Act stalled in the Senate, so the SEC and CFTC are pushing ahead with rulemaking under existing authority, including separate proposals on token offerings and tokenized stocks.
Key uncertainties include how strict the final requirements for self-custody and state trust companies will be, whether broker dealers are widely included, and how global regulators respond. If standards are very tight, the practical easing could be modest and concentrated in a few blue chip assets. If the SEC is more flexible, advisers’ crypto menus could broaden, but compliance and audit costs will still rise.
The SEC’s move does not instantly liberalize crypto custody, but it starts to replace ambiguity with a concrete, if demanding, framework for advisers and funds. The real impact will depend on the final rule text and on which custodians step up to support specific assets, with large cap coins best positioned to benefit and smaller tokens still dependent on infrastructure and regulatory comfort.

Altcoins are gaining ground against Bitcoin, according to today’s CMC Altcoin Season Index reading of 61 out of 100, which places the market in a neutral zone that leans toward altcoin season. The trend is mixed, but the balance is shifting toward altcoin rotation as capital begins to move beyond Bitcoin.
Bitcoin dominance slipped to 58.6%, down 0.12 points over 24 hours, while the Altcoin Season Index rose to 61/100, up 1.67% in 24 hours and 165% over 30 days. This suggests a gradual transfer of capital from Bitcoin to altcoins, although Bitcoin still accounts for more than half of the market’s total value. The rotation appears early and incomplete, and investors seem to be testing higher-risk assets cautiously.
Specific narratives are driving sharp moves in select altcoins. Moonriver surged 73% on renewed Kusama and EVM interest. Midnight climbed 20% as chatter around privacy smart contracts increased. Stacks rose 15% amid optimism about the Nakamoto upgrade and Bitcoin DeFi. These gains show that speculative capital is concentrating in privacy and Bitcoin Layer 2 themes, which are now among the clearest areas of altcoin momentum.
Market sentiment and liquidity are supporting this risk appetite. The Crypto Fear & Greed Index remains at 67, indicating Greed. Spot volume increased 8.6% to $99.2 billion over 24 hours, while derivatives open interest fell. That combination points to reduced leverage but still healthy trading activity, which can help sustain altcoin rallies without necessarily creating extreme volatility.
Altcoins are beginning to outperform Bitcoin, helped by sector narratives and improving liquidity. Even so, Bitcoin’s dominance remains historically elevated, so the rotation is still in an early stage. A sustained move above 75/100 on the Altcoin Season Index would provide stronger confirmation that a full altseason has arrived.

European central banks are asking European Union lawmakers to rethink how stablecoin reserves are regulated under the Markets in Crypto Assets framework, known as MiCA. Their central argument is that fixed quotas for bank deposits can create fragile funding links between stablecoin issuers and commercial banks. Under current rules, issuers must hold at least 30 percent of reserves in bank deposits, and that requirement rises to 60 percent for tokens classified as significant. The European System of Central Banks wants those deposit floors removed and replaced with rules that focus on how quickly reserve assets can be converted into cash.
The alternative approach draws on European Banking Authority standards that emphasize liquidity and maturity. For significant stablecoins, at least 40 percent of reserves would need to mature within one working day, and 60 percent would need to mature within five days. For non-significant tokens, the proposed thresholds are 20 percent within one working day and 30 percent within five days. This framework would push issuers toward very short-term sovereign bonds, overnight repurchase agreements, and similar instruments, while reducing the pressure to keep large balances in commercial bank accounts.
For banks, the aim is to limit contagion risk from concentrated stablecoin deposits that can leave quickly during a redemption run. Central bank commentary and coverage of the proposal have repeatedly highlighted this concern. For issuers, a liquidity maturity rule could be more flexible than a hard deposit percentage. It could also allow more reserves to be held in short-term government debt, which often yields more than bank deposits. At the same time, central banks want to reinforce MiCA’s ban on stablecoin remuneration. Their proposal would explicitly cover lending, borrowing, staking, and layered products that make stablecoins resemble savings accounts.
The practical result may be mixed. Issuers could gain more freedom to earn yield on reserve assets, but European users are unlikely to see interest-bearing stablecoin products. Dollar stablecoins would also face closer scrutiny because of bank and financial stability risks. The changes are not law yet. The European Commission’s MiCA consultation runs through late September 2026, and policymakers expect a legislative revision around 2027. That revision would need approval from both the European Parliament and member states.
Until MiCA is amended, the existing 30 percent and 60 percent deposit rules still apply. This is one reason some platforms have restricted USDT and other stablecoins in the European Union. The European System of Central Banks has also pointed to enforcement gaps, noting that non-compliant offshore platforms can still reach EU customers. At the same time, regulators are developing alternatives such as the Pontes system, which is intended to settle tokenized assets directly in central bank money.
If the liquidity rules and the expanded yield ban are adopted, the effects could be broad. They may influence which stablecoins exchanges choose to support, how euro stablecoins are structured, and whether issuers such as Tether reconsider EU licensing once the reserve framework changes. The overall direction is clear. EU central banks want to contain the systemic risk that large stablecoin reserves pose to commercial banks while keeping stablecoins in the category of payments rather than savings. If their proposals become part of MiCA, the European market could move toward highly liquid, tightly supervised stablecoins with less user yield but potentially more resilient backing and a clearer separation from bank funding.

AI assisted tools are arriving at the same time as a sharp rise in malware that treats public blockchains as part of its infrastructure. Chainalysis reports roughly a 440 percent jump in what it calls onchain malware writes, meaning malicious data stored on blockchains. The overall increase in malicious data written to blockchains over the past year is about 420 to 440 percent, and state linked hackers from North Korea and Iran are behind most of that growth.
North Korea and Iran linked groups account for roughly two thirds of the new activity. They embed encrypted routing data and server information in transactions on Bitcoin, Tron, Aptos, and BNB Chain. One campaign tied to the North Korea linked group UNC5342 used Tron and Aptos transactions to point infected machines to a specific BNB Chain transaction that held configuration data for remote access and data theft.
Chainalysis notes that the surge began shortly after high capacity open source Chinese AI models became able to generate malicious code with minimal safeguards. The timing overlap is striking. Their cybercrime lead describes a clear point in time association between those AI releases and the increase, while also noting that direct attacker use of those models is not proven in every campaign.
Other research supports the idea that AI acts as a force multiplier. Anthropic and others have shown AI agents quickly finding exploitable smart contract bugs. Security leaders warn that small protocol teams now face adversaries who can iterate malware far faster than before. AI is best viewed as an accelerant for existing threat actors rather than a brand new type of exploit, but it compresses the time defenders have to react.
Recent campaigns show how onchain malware intersects directly with crypto. Elastic’s KREMLIN malware uses Ethereum smart contracts as a dead drop to update attack servers without redeploying the malware. Another campaign hijacked HBO Max’s Reddit account to push malware that stole browser credentials and deployed crypto address clippers, while using Binance Smart Chain contracts as part of its command and control rotation.
These designs do not break consensus or steal funds directly from chains. Instead, they use blockchains as a permanent, censorship resistant bulletin board for malware instructions that ultimately target wallets, browsers, and DeFi users offchain. Even if onchain approvals look safe, compromised devices and browsers can silently redirect transactions or exfiltrate keys. Endpoint security and phishing resistance therefore matter as much as smart contract risk.
Confidence in this picture is high, based on the Chainalysis report and multiple independent security write ups from 2025 to 2026.
In conclusion, AI has made it easier for sophisticated actors to produce and maintain malware that leans on public blockchains for resilience, driving a large increase in onchain malware writes. For crypto users and builders, the main shift is not a new exploit class but a faster, more automated version of existing threats that now blend onchain infrastructure with offchain phishing and malware. Monitoring AI driven threats, hardening user devices and wallets, and adopting stronger verification and auditing practices will be key to keeping blockchains and DeFi usable as AI capabilities continue to advance.

The Securities and Exchange Commission is pressing ahead with crypto regulation using its existing authority after Congress failed to pass a major market structure bill. SEC Chair Paul Atkins publicly pledged that the Commission will act decisively within its statutory authority to provide certainty for investors and entrepreneurs, with or without legislation. This commitment builds on the agency’s Regulation Crypto Assets proposal, which is designed to create a tailored regime for certain crypto investment contracts, including capital raising exemptions and a conditional safe harbor for some token launches. The message is clear: the SEC does not intend to wait for Congress to define a new crypto law before clarifying how securities rules apply to digital assets.
Under current law, the SEC can issue rules and guidance that interpret existing securities statutes, then enforce them through registration requirements and enforcement actions. The crypto offering rule now in the Federal Register, with its exemptions and safe harbors, shows how this path works. However, agency rules do not have the permanence of legislation. Future administrations or courts can modify or overturn them, and the SEC must fit crypto into frameworks built for traditional securities, which can leave gray areas. Analysts and media have noted that the CLARITY Act was meant to fix this problem by providing a more stable, bespoke market structure law.
For crypto users and builders, the practical effect is likely to be more detailed compliance obligations and definitions in the near term, but not the long term certainty that a full statute would provide. Reports indicate that the SEC has at least one crypto asset offering rule open for public comment until late October, with additional proposals queued behind it. The CFTC chair has similarly pledged to ship rules for the new frontier of finance using existing powers. Industry voices, including Coinbase’s Brian Armstrong and Ripple’s Brad Garlinghouse, now describe regulatory agencies as the main path to clarity, even while warning that fragmented rulemaking can be confusing.
Market participants should therefore watch several specific developments. They should track SEC and CFTC comment windows and final rule texts. They should follow how those rules classify different token types and DeFi protocols. They should also watch whether courts or political changes later constrain aggressive interpretations. These factors will shape how many tokens are treated as securities and how trading venues and DeFi protocols must operate.
The pledge to set crypto rules without Congress signals that U.S. regulators will keep shaping the landscape using existing securities and commodities laws, despite legislative gridlock. For crypto users and builders, the near term trajectory points toward more detailed, agency driven rulebooks and enforcement rather than a single comprehensive statute. That makes it important to track specific SEC and CFTC rulemakings and their practical impact on tokens, exchanges, and DeFi.

The UK House of Lords has voted to require the Treasury to develop a national digital assets strategy that could reshape how crypto, stablecoins, and tokenized finance are regulated. Peers backed an amendment to the Financial Services and Markets Bill by a vote of 194 to 138. The amendment would mandate a published strategy within 12 months of the bill becoming law. That strategy would cover cryptoassets, qualifying stablecoins, central bank digital currencies, and tokenized securities. It would also include a review of how banks and payment providers treat crypto businesses, particularly the withdrawal of services from legitimate firms. Support came mainly from Conservative and Liberal Democrat peers, while most Labour peers opposed the move. The vote is therefore a political signal that the government is being pushed toward a more explicit and coordinated approach to digital assets rather than ad hoc rules.
A mandated strategy would sit above the Financial Conduct Authority’s new cryptoasset regime. That regime was finalized on 30 June and is set to begin authorizations in late 2026, with full enforcement in 2027. The strategy would give the UK a chance to explain how those rules fit into a broader vision for tokenized finance, payments, and market integrity. It also aims to tackle the ongoing problem of UK banks and payment firms de-risking by cutting off crypto businesses. That practice has been a major operational risk for exchanges, custodians, and fintechs trying to base themselves in London. Internationally, the EU’s MiCA framework became fully applicable in December 2024, and the US GENIUS Act sets federal rules for payment stablecoins. A UK national strategy is partly about avoiding falling behind these regimes on clarity and competitiveness. For UK-based and UK-facing crypto firms, this means they should expect a more joined-up conversation about licensing, reserve rules, custody, payments, and banking access, but the balance between innovation and restriction is not yet known.
The bill is not yet law. It still has a third reading in the Lords and must then pass the House of Commons. After that, the Treasury would start work on the strategy and open consultations. Three practical signals to watch are whether the Commons keeps or softens the Lords amendment, how strongly the eventual strategy prioritizes financial stability and consumer protection versus innovation and competitiveness, and whether it explicitly addresses bank access for crypto businesses and integration of a possible digital pound with private stablecoins. A risk note is that if the strategy leans heavily toward caution, stricter bank access and conservative stablecoin rules could push more activity into offshore venues. Confidence in this assessment is high, based on recent legislative reporting and FCA rule timetables.
The Lords mandate marks a clear shift toward treating crypto, stablecoins, and tokenized finance as a strategic policy area rather than a set of isolated regulatory problems. For crypto users and firms, the main takeaway is that the UK is signaling a comprehensive framework is coming. The exact mix of opportunity and constraint will only emerge as the bill moves through Parliament and the Treasury publishes its strategy.

SINGAPORE, 10 September 2026 – TOKEN2049, the world’s largest digital assets conference series, announced the line-up for AFTER 2049, the official closing event of this year’s Singapore edition. Global house icon Claptone headlines, joined by Madrid’s Crusy. Taking place on 9 October 2026 at the Marina Bay Sands SkyPark Observation Deck, the night’s lineup is completed by returning acts ANONM and Hong Kong’s Leon (FR), along with Milam and Mo-Shi.
Once a year, the SkyPark Observation Deck closes to the public and hands the 57th floor to AFTER 2049, with Formula 1 arriving below. Polygon Live returns with its hemispherical 360° spatial audio rig. Limited-capacity tickets are now on sale, exclusively via Megatix.
“AFTER 2049 returns to the Marina Bay Sands rooftop for Grand Prix weekend with Claptone, 57 floors above the circuit, on the only Polygon rig in Asia this year,” says AFTER 2049 Founder Raphael Strauch. “Nothing else comes close.”
Headliner Claptone is one of dance music’s most recognizable figures. A German producer whose golden beak and white gloves have become a global calling card. He runs his own Golden Recordings label and stages The Masquerade parties worldwide, including residencies at Pacha in Ibiza.
Crusy is one of Spain’s most sought-after house and tech-house producers. The Madrid-based artist broke through with his Toolroom debut ‘SELECTA’, and has since stacked up Beatport hits and releases across Toolroom, Defected and Knee Deep In Sound. With 80-plus shows spanning Ibiza, Tokyo, London and beyond, expect a set built for peak-time abandon.
Polygon Live returns to deploy its 360° stage and spatial audio system, sending individual elements of each track around, above and through the crowd to place guests “inside the mix” in a way conventional stereo cannot. This will be the only Polygon Live production in Southeast Asia for 2026.
“As always, collaborating with AFTER 2049 has been extraordinary. Our teams share a dedication to outdoing ourselves year after year. We’re thrilled to be returning to Singapore, where our system will make for an unforgettable night above the city skyline,” commented Nico Elliott, Polygon CEO.
AFTER 2049 is the official close of TOKEN2049 Singapore, capping two days of conference programming on 7-8 October, and the room where the industry ends its week.
AFTER 2049 partners include Moët Hennessy Diageo, Heaven Sake, American Fortress, Aria One, Ault Blockchain, BTCC, ChangeNOW, DWF Labs, EverValue Coin, Midnight, Websea, TxFlow and $TRUMP.
First Release tickets are now on sale.
To purchase tickets, please visit: https://megatix.com.sg/events/after2049
###
About TOKEN2049
TOKEN2049 is the largest global digital assets conference series, organized semi-annually in Singapore and Dubai, where decision-makers in the global digital asset ecosystem connect to exchange ideas, network, and shape the industry. TOKEN2049 is the preeminent meeting place for entrepreneurs, institutions, industry insiders, investors, builders, and those with a strong interest in the digital assets industry.

CONTACTS
General info: community@after2049.com
Table reservations: reservations@after2049.com
Media: token2049@wachsman.com