Bitcoin AI Generated News

A Canadian judge has ordered that a laptop containing a Bitcoin wallet be returned to the family of William Sandeson, a man serving a life sentence for the 2015 killing of university student Taylor Samson — a decision that highlights the evidentiary challenges prosecutors face when trying to tie cryptocurrency to criminal activity. What happened - Justice John Bodurtha of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that prosecutors failed to show the Bitcoin was connected to the murder or to drug proceeds. Bodurtha said the Crown had not met its burden and that any suggestion the cryptocurrency was used in the drug transaction was “hypothetical.” - Sandeson, who appeared virtually at the Halifax hearing, had sought the return of personal items seized during the police search of his apartment after his 2015 arrest. - The judge did rule, however, that roughly $3,600 (C$5,000) in cash seized at the time was “offence-related property” and will not be returned. Amounts and valuation - Sandeson previously estimated the Bitcoin’s value at the time as roughly $5,800–$7,200 (C$8,000–C$10,000). - A lawyer representing Samson’s family in a separate wrongful-death suit has said the cryptocurrency — which Global News did not disclose the quantity of — could now be worth more than $144,000 (C$200,000) given Bitcoin’s price appreciation. Case background - The case stems from the August 15, 2015 killing of 22-year-old Taylor Samson, who was allegedly lured to Sandeson’s apartment to sell cannabis Sandeson had arranged to buy for C$40,000. Prosecutors said Sandeson shot Samson, kept the drugs and money, and later admitted dumping the body in a river; the remains have never been found. - Sandeson, then 23 and about to begin medical school at Dalhousie University, was convicted of first-degree murder in 2017; that verdict was overturned on appeal in 2020. At a 2023 retrial he admitted shooting Samson but said it was self-defence; a jury convicted him of second-degree murder. He is serving his sentence in Quebec and will be eligible for parole in 2030. Why it matters to crypto - The ruling underscores a recurring legal hurdle: prosecutors must provide clear evidence linking cryptocurrency assets to criminal acts or proceeds. Volatility in value, anonymized ownership, and gaps in transaction history can make that link difficult to prove in court. - For victims’ families and defendants alike, the decision also highlights how the current legal framework treats seized digital assets differently from cash when the provenance is uncertain. The decision leaves open questions about how much Bitcoin was in the wallet and what will become of it if its value continues to climb. It may also prompt closer scrutiny of how law enforcement documents and proves the criminal provenance of crypto assets in future cases. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

A Trust Wallet user says he woke up to find $3,830 gone from his self-custody wallet — and no transaction approval ever appeared. On Nov. 3, Iaroslav Dubovoi (@noirvox_studio) posted on X that he opened Trust Wallet and discovered 3,830 USDT had been transferred out. Blockchain records, he added, show a completed transfer, but he says he never approved any transaction. His post — which drew more than 166,000 views in the shared screenshot — pressed Trust Wallet for answers and asked others to amplify the issue. Dubovoi later published the transaction hash for investigators to follow: 6e26ec6faf90f1c9f484e5f19d29a207da0c55918191c8dbf20625d9250ac25d. Dubovoi says he’s used the same wallet for roughly five years and has long taken precautions to protect his keys. Still, he insists there was no prompt or approval before the funds moved. The exact attack vector in this case has not been identified in his posts — and the recipient address and chain weren’t disclosed in the thread. This report arrives alongside other Trust Wallet complaints. Another user, Abdul (@HasbullahAbdulH), reported issues swapping tokens; Trust Wallet Support replied with troubleshooting guidance on Nov. 4. Separately, a user going by Mister Tee (@meeyatariq) said his wallet was drained after interacting with someone impersonating Trust Wallet support on the NEAR Protocol Discord, showing multiple outgoing transactions across ETH, BTC, BNB and NEAR (including a 3 NEAR transfer worth about $11.49). Why this matters: Trust Wallet is a self-custody wallet — users control the private keys required to sign transactions. Unauthorized transfers can occur without a platform hack if attackers gain control of private keys, trick users into signing malicious contract approvals, exploit permit signatures, or push malicious browser or app updates. The specific mechanism behind Dubovoi’s loss hasn’t been confirmed. Trust Wallet’s history includes high-profile security incidents. In December 2025, the team acknowledged that a compromised Chrome extension (v2.68) allowed attackers to drain funds from affected users without transaction approvals. Blockchain investigator ZachXBT flagged suspicious transfers, and Binance founder Changpeng Zhao said affected users would be compensated while the company investigated. That exploit ultimately accounted for roughly $7 million in losses, investigators said, after malicious code was distributed via a tampered Chrome Web Store release. More recently, Trust Wallet warned about phishing sites impersonating its crypto card service and about permit-signature attacks — an October investigation by Salus found malicious USDG permit signatures that let attackers reuse previously granted permissions to withdraw funds. Safety takeaways for wallet users: - Never share your recovery phrase or private keys. - Be cautious granting token approvals or signing permit messages; review and revoke unnecessary approvals (via reputable on-chain permission tools). - Confirm official support channels — do not trust unsolicited messages or people claiming to be support on Discord/Telegram. - Keep apps and extensions up to date from official sources, and be wary of browser extensions. Trust Wallet has previously advised users to use official support channels when investigating suspicious activity. For Dubovoi’s case, the posted transaction hash gives a starting point for blockchain sleuths and investigators to trace the outflow — but without more detail from the user or Trust Wallet, questions about how the loss occurred remain unresolved. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

The CFTC has greenlit the first-ever perpetual futures tied to individual U.S. stocks, clearing the way for the crypto-style, no-expiration contract model to trade on regulated American equity derivatives venues. What the approval means On Nov. 3 the Commodity Futures Trading Commission announced that perpetual contracts on single equity securities — dubbed “Equity Perps” — may begin trading on CFTC-registered exchanges that have also registered with the SEC as national securities exchanges for security futures trading. Chairman Michael Selig said the move brings the perpetual structure “into a regulated framework” for U.S. investors, highlighting its uses in risk management and price discovery. Legal and regulatory framework The CFTC said the contracts are deemed approved under Commission Regulation 40.3 as security futures products under the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. That classification places equity perpetuals under the Commodity Exchange Act and relevant federal securities laws, subjecting them to oversight by both the CFTC and the SEC. The approval was granted via the agency’s deemed-approval process, in which products are treated as approved when the statutory review period (initially 45 days, with possible extensions) ends without a notice of non-approval. Who has filed Three firms filed rule proposals ahead of the clearance: Kalshi, Coinbase Derivatives and Bitnomial. Each has outlined contract mechanics, margin proposals and eligibility criteria: - Kalshi: Proposes perpetuals with no preset expiration and a minimum customer margin floor of 15.50% of current market value — meaning a $10,000 position would require $1,550 in margin (about 6.45x exposure). Long and short holders would exchange funding payments tied to the spread between the perpetual and the underlying stock. Kalshi’s filings also require underlying securities to meet strict liquidity and size thresholds, including at least $100 billion market capitalization, more than 20 million shares of estimated deliverable supply, and $450 million in average daily trading value over six months. Its proposed trading hours run Sunday 6:00 p.m. ET through Friday 5:00 p.m. ET, with a daily maintenance break from 5:00–6:00 p.m. Trading would halt for regulatory pauses on the underlying security. - Coinbase Derivatives: Filed rules for cash-settled perpetual futures on individual stocks and ETF shares, proposing margin requirements generally at or above 15% of current market value. Coinbase’s application — which follows its prior offering of stock perpetuals offshore — outlined plans for more than 50 single-stock perpetuals and said contract-specific materials would specify trading hours, pricing methods and funding arrangements. - Bitnomial: Proposed a customer-margin floor of 15.25% for unhedged positions, while allowing clearing firms and intermediaries to require higher collateral. Its filing also notes the SEC may, after consulting the CFTC, abrogate a CFTC approval within 60 days and require refiling under the standard securities-exchange review process. Context and precedent The CFTC tied this announcement to its May 29 decision that approved Kalshi’s Bitcoin perpetual futures contract, which references a regulated Bitcoin spot price. In a same-day policy note, the agency said perpetual contracts referencing other assets should be reviewed case-by-case because contract features depend on the nature of the underlying market. Market reaction and pushback Not everyone agrees with the regulatory treatment. Cboe argued in an Oct. 14 letter that stock perpetuals should not be handled as security futures and urged the SEC to subject the rules to the standard securities-exchange review. Advocacy group Better Markets raised similar concerns on Nov. 2, warning that high leverage can quickly wipe out investor deposits and stressing that perpetual holders do not have stock ownership rights. Broader industry moves Separately, Intercontinental Exchange (parent of the NYSE) disclosed on Oct. 29 an agreement with Trade[XYZ] to build a dedicated U.S. market and clearing structure for Hyperliquid-based perpetuals, covering equities, crypto, commodities and FX — subject to regulatory approvals. Why it matters for crypto and equities Perpetual futures are a cornerstone of the crypto derivatives ecosystem because they allow continuous exposure (no expiry) and use periodic funding payments to anchor contract prices to the underlying. Bringing that structure into regulated U.S. equity markets could expand product choice for institutional and retail traders, but it also raises novel regulatory, market-structure and investor-protection questions that the CFTC and SEC will continue to wrestle with. What’s next Eligible exchanges that have completed both CFTC and SEC registration steps may begin listing these products within the statutory review windows. Continued scrutiny from the SEC, industry rivals and public-interest groups means expect further debate and potential refinements as trading begins. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Ethereum is showing signs of life against Bitcoin after slipping through October’s weakness, with traders pointing to technical breakouts even as U.S. spot Ether ETFs continue to see outflows. Technical picture: ETH/BTC flips the script On Nov. 3, several crypto analysts flagged moves in the ETH/BTC pair that suggest a shift in momentum. Max Crypto highlighted a daily breakout through a descending resistance line that had capped rebounds since earlier highs above 0.033 BTC. After several sessions around 0.029 BTC, fresh green candles carried the pair through that falling trendline, prompting Max Crypto to declare, “ETH/BTC downtrend is now over,” and calling the development “GIGA BULLISH FOR ALTS.” Ash Crypto offered a longer-term view: his chart connected the 2025 low with subsequent higher lows and showed the latest monthly candle closing above that rising support line despite a red October. He called this a bullish sign but cautioned that a sustained bounce above key resistance would be needed to confirm Ethereum is genuinely strengthening versus Bitcoin. Analyst views and context Michaël van de Poppe described Ethereum’s dollar setup as “pretty decent” but said a move through a critical resistance zone is still required to validate the bullish case. He also noted that momentum currently looks stronger in altcoins than in Bitcoin and that he remains fully allocated to positions expecting outperformance—if ETH can breach its resistance. Trader il Capo framed the recent pullback as a fractal replay of 2025 price action: the retracement started and stopped at the same horizontal zones, and he expects a bullish continuation similar to the prior pattern. What the charts mean The ETH/BTC ratio measures how Ether is performing relative to Bitcoin; a rising ratio means ETH is outperforming BTC—even in environments where both assets may be falling in dollar terms, Ethereum is losing less or gaining more. Max Crypto’s daily break suggests short-term dominance is shifting to ETH, while Ash Crypto’s monthly close above rising support points to a more structural holding of strength. ETH price and ranges Ether has been bouncing back toward the $2,300 area after reclaiming $2,250 on Nov. 1. CoinGecko’s Nov. 3 snapshot put ETH’s 24-hour range between $2,235.31 and $2,301.63, and its seven-day range between $2,178.62 and $2,384.72. During the Nov. 1 session, ETH rose about 1.12% to roughly $2,270 while Bitcoin hovered near $78,000. ETF flows remain a headwind Despite technical optimism, U.S. spot Ether ETFs continued to record net outflows. Farside Investors’ latest completed session showed $139.7 million in withdrawals on Nov. 2. BlackRock’s ETHA accounted for $138.3 million of that, while ETHB recorded $4.6 million in outflows. Morgan Stanley’s MSSE saw a $3.2 million inflow. Over the six trading sessions from Oct. 26 through Nov. 2, spot Ether ETFs posted combined net withdrawals of $571.1 million, with every session in that span finishing negative (including $155.7 million pulled on Oct. 30). The Nov. 2 outflow was roughly $16 million smaller than the previous session. Farside’s Nov. 3 row showed incomplete fund-level figures for that day. Bottom line Traders are increasingly bullish on ETH relative to BTC after both a daily breakout through descending resistance and a monthly close above a multi-month support line—two different technical angles pointing toward improving strength for Ethereum. That optimism is conditional: analysts want to see confirmed breaks of key resistance zones. At the same time, significant ETF outflows highlight that institutional demand remains a notable headwind to monitor as the market tries to sustain any rally. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Headline: Bhutan’s Gelephu region gets royal sign-off for central bank that can hold crypto reserves Gelephu Mindfulness City (GMC) has secured royal approval to convert its financial regulator into an autonomous central bank with the authority to invest in cryptocurrencies alongside traditional reserve assets. GMC announced the decree on Nov. 2, and Bhutan’s state broadcaster BBS reported that King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck signed the measure granting the regulator full central banking powers. What changed - The Gelephu Financial Services Office (GFSO) will become the Gelephu Central Bank. Its remit will combine financial supervision with core central bank duties: monetary policy, foreign reserve management, financial stability, payment and settlement systems, and liquidity support. - Crucially for crypto markets, the authorization explicitly covers investment in digital assets and cryptocurrencies. The decree does not set a fixed allocation or specify any mandatory Bitcoin purchases. Currency powers and governance - The royal approval also paves a route for GMC to introduce its own currency — including a digital version — subject to the King’s concurrence. - GMC operates as a special administrative region of Bhutan under a “One Country, Two Systems” framework, covering more than 4,046 sq. km on the southern border with India’s Assam. It has executive and legislative autonomy and an independent judiciary separate from Bhutan’s national government. Background and reserve strategy - GMC was established by Royal Charter in February 2024 and has prioritized finance and digital assets among its key industries. Its regulator already supervises both traditional financial services and virtual asset businesses. - The region’s crypto reserve plans predate this central bank move. In January 2025 GMC identified Bitcoin, Ether and BNB as assets it intended to recognize as strategic reserves, favoring large-cap, liquid tokens on mature, monitorable blockchains. - In December 2025 Bhutan announced a Bitcoin Development Pledge committing up to 10,000 BTC to support GMC’s long-term development. That initiative ties the country’s hydroelectric-powered mining operations to job creation, skills development and economic activity, and emphasizes capital preservation, oversight and transparency. GMC says its Bitcoin reserve is accumulated by converting surplus hydropower into digital assets — a notably different provenance than government BTC holdings derived from seizures. Asset management and partnerships - In July GMC appointed Canadian digital asset manager 3iQ to manage a dedicated mandate backed by an undisclosed portion of its Bitcoin treasury. That agreement included a commitment from 3iQ to establish a long-term presence in Gelephu, train Bhutanese talent and transfer investment-management expertise. 3iQ is majority-owned by Coincheck Group (Nasdaq-listed Coincheck acquired 99.8% beneficial interest in 3iQ in February). - In an Aug. 6 interview published by 3iQ, chief strategy officer Matteo Dante Perruccio framed the mandate as protecting assets and helping “accumulate more Bitcoin for deployment into the project and the development of GMC.” Regulation, custody and staffing - GFSO guidance places traditional finance and virtual asset activities under a single Financial Services Act 2025 and supporting rulebooks. Firms must obtain a financial services license to operate in GMC. - The regulator’s public directory lists custody permissions for firms including Matrix Gelephu, DK and Ceffu Digital. BTSE Exchange is authorized to run a multilateral trading facility and provide custody services. - The transition to a central bank includes hiring more than 50 Bhutanese and international professionals across virtual asset supervision, AML, banking operations, technology, regulatory policy and macroeconomics. Why this matters Gelephu’s central bank authorization signals a rare, formal embrace of cryptocurrencies at the sovereign-reserve level, backed by a declared, domestically sourced Bitcoin supply and an intent to professionalize custody and asset management. If GMC follows through on its pledge and reserve strategy, it could become a distinctive case study in integrating renewable-energy-powered mining, institutional reserve holdings, and public-private stewardship of digital-asset exposure. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Binance says the frantic outflow following the $6 billion hack has eased — for now. In an update on Tuesday, the exchange reported that by 03:00 UTC on November 3 hourly deposits were finally outpacing withdrawals, a sign that user activity is stabilizing after days of one-way flows. “By 03:00 UTC, we are seeing hourly deposits exceed withdrawals, reflecting improving user activity and stabilizing flows,” Binance posted alongside its hourly chart. What happened - After reopening withdrawals in phases on Sunday, November 1 (three days after the breach), Binance initially saw massive withdrawals. In the first 9.5 hours after withdrawals resumed the platform processed $4.649 billion in withdrawals versus $1.01 billion in deposits — a net outflow of roughly $3.64 billion (about 2.1% of the $171 billion in assets Binance reported pre-attack). CEO Changpeng “CZ” Zhao noted much of that net outflow occurred in the first couple of hours when withdrawals peaked. - Looking at Binance’s full hourly chart from 06:00 UTC on November 1 through 04:00 UTC on November 3, cumulative crypto outflows reached $10.97 billion against $5.695 billion in deposits, for a net outflow of $5.276 billion. The single worst hour was 08:00 UTC on November 1, when withdrawals hit $1.243 billion and the net outflow peaked at $936 million. USDT, USDC and BTC were the largest tokens withdrawn. - Since then the hourly gap has been closing. Binance recorded net positive hourly inflows in six separate hours on November 2 and early November 3. In the key 03:00 UTC hour it took in $193 million in deposits versus $183 million in withdrawals — the first clear sign the run had moderated. Why it matters Deposits exceeding withdrawals — even briefly — is the strongest signal yet that the initial rush to pull funds has cooled and that many users are remaining on the platform. A $3.64 billion net outflow in under ten hours is large in absolute terms but represented just a small slice of Binance’s pre-hack asset base; the broader outflows have been tapering. How Binance is handling losses Binance says it is covering the stolen funds itself, supported by its Secure Asset Fund for Users (SAFU). Co-CEO Richard Teng promised, “We are committed to covering all hacked losses through our company funds.” By Sunday the exchange said it had covered about 95% of the stolen assets (up from roughly 90% a day earlier), buying remaining less-liquid tokens via open-market and OTC deals. Major coins — BTC, ETH, USDT, BNB, SOL, USDC and XRP — are fully backed at 100%, and Binance plans to rebuild SAFU to around $1 billion. What’s next Users will be watching whether deposits continue to outpace withdrawals as Binance finishes buying back the last missing tokens and publishes an updated proof-of-reserves. For now, the numbers suggest the hack withdrawals were a sharp, short-lived surge rather than the start of a sustained exodus. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Bitwise’s scheduled rebalancing on Oct. 30 will add NEAR to several of its large-cap crypto indexes — but don’t assume that automatically means a guaranteed price boost. The firm announced the changes on Oct. 22, specifying which tokens NEAR will replace across different benchmarks. In the Bitwise 10 Large Cap Crypto Index and its ex-Bitcoin counterpart, NEAR takes the slot being vacated by UNI. In the Bitwise 10 Select Large Cap Crypto Index, NEAR replaces AVAX. Separately, LIT will replace ETHFI in Bitwise’s decentralized-finance index. The BTC/ETH Equal Weight index was not scheduled for a rebalance this cycle. These moves matter to investors who rely on rules-based crypto exposure, but it’s important to read each announcement at the benchmark level. A token’s inclusion in an index defines the reference portfolio — the “what” and “how” of weighting and updating — but an index is not the same as a fund that tracks it. Funds may implement benchmarks differently, incur costs, and time trades in various ways, so the return an investor actually experiences can diverge from the published index return. Index changes can create real trading activity: products that must hold the newly added token may buy it, while those tracking the removed asset may sell. The scale and timing of these flows depend on how much capital follows the index, the target weight assigned to the new constituent, and how managers execute the rebalance. Traders may also front-run or price in announced rebalances before the effective date, which complicates any simple cause-and-effect link between inclusion date and price movement. Likewise, removal from an index is not an automatic judgement on a token’s technology or long-term prospects. It’s an index-seat decision driven by eligibility rules and methodology — not a universal rejection by all managers or investors. The differing outgoing constituents across Bitwise’s products highlight why the exact benchmark matters. A “large-cap” index, an “ex-Bitcoin” index, and a “select” index can have distinct eligibility criteria, weighting methods and constraints. For anyone evaluating exposure, the more useful questions are: how concentrated is the index, how often does it rebalance, which risks remain embedded in its rules, and how tightly do tracking products adhere to the published constituent lists and weights? Fees and trading costs will also explain part of any gap between index returns and what investors receive. Bottom line: NEAR’s addition is a concrete change to Bitwise’s reference portfolios. Whether that leads to significant inflows or a price rally depends on the amount of capital tied to those benchmarks and how managers execute their trades — not the inclusion announcement alone. News Desk. Edited by Samuel Rae. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Alchemy Pay has plugged its fiat-to-crypto and crypto-to-fiat rails directly into Walt, the Telegram-based digital-asset platform, letting users in 173 countries buy and sell supported cryptocurrencies without leaving the app. What’s new - The integration—announced November 3—connects Alchemy Pay’s payment infrastructure to Walt (backed by The Open Platform), enabling in-app purchases and conversions using Visa, Mastercard, mobile wallets and local bank transfers depending on the user’s market. - Alchemy Pay says it supports more than 50 fiat currencies and over 300 payment channels (local and international), and it handles both on-ramps (fiat → crypto) and off-ramps (crypto → fiat). Why it matters - Walt users can now acquire cryptocurrencies directly via familiar payment methods instead of buying on a separate exchange and transferring assets in. That smooths the entry and exit process for casual users and traders alike and extends fiat access to Telegram’s large audience. About Walt - Previously known as Wallet in Telegram, the app rebranded to Walt on September 28, 2026, after expanding beyond Bitcoin and Toncoin to support a multi-asset platform. - Walt supports more than 300 cryptocurrencies across four blockchains, offers trading for over 200 assets, and provides services including yield products, tokenized stocks, ETFs, precious metals and perpetual futures. - Founder and CEO Andrew Rogozov has signaled upcoming products such as crypto cards and AI-powered tools. AI trading and other recent product launches - On October 20, Walt launched AI trading for perpetual futures, letting users interact with trading functions via AI assistants (including ChatGPT, Claude and Mira). The company says these connected agents can analyze markets, review positions and execute trades per user instructions. - The AI feature builds on Walt’s earlier product expansions: perpetual futures trading via Lighter (April), and an on-chain yield account for Bitcoin, Ethereum and USDT (February). Custodial vs non-custodial, access and migration - Telegram’s own non-custodial wallet—now called Money—is developed by Telegram and keeps users in control of their private keys. Walt, by contrast, is a custodial platform that manages users’ keys on their behalf. - Walt is available through the @walt Telegram account; the former @wallet address still redirects to the service. Existing users retained balances, histories and wallet addresses after the rebrand and did not need to re-verify accounts. The two wallet services can operate side-by-side, with Walt offering a way to add funds to Telegram’s native wallet. Alchemy Pay’s track record and compliance - This Walt deal follows Alchemy Pay’s September 2024 rollout of crypto payment services on The Open Network (Telegram’s associated blockchain). Prior partnerships include a March 2025 integration with Ledger Live to let users buy and sell crypto inside Ledger’s desktop and mobile apps. - In September 2025 Alchemy Pay launched a tokenized investment product with xStocks, offering access to more than 60 tokenized U.S. stocks and ETFs with fractional purchases from $1 via bank transfers, credit cards and mobile payments. - On the regulatory side, Alchemy Pay says it holds 19 U.S. Money Transmitter Licenses plus licenses and registrations across Southeast Asia, South Korea, Europe and the U.K. Bottom line The Alchemy Pay–Walt integration removes a notable friction point for Telegram users by bringing fiat rails into a widely used messaging-based crypto platform. Combined with Walt’s expanding product suite—now including AI-enabled trading and tokenized assets—the move further blurs the line between messaging apps and full-featured crypto brokerages, and could accelerate on-ramps for mainstream users. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Blockstream CEO Adam Back has once again taken aim at the controversial BIP-110 proposal after its attempted fork failed to win meaningful market or miner support. In a November 3 post on X (formerly Twitter), Back—referencing commentary from Bitcoin advocate Francis Pouliot—told BIP-110 backers bluntly: “Attempts to impose your views on bitcoin get market rejected.” He reiterated a familiar theme: efforts to change Bitcoin’s consensus rules face not just technical scrutiny but market and community resistance. Back added that the disagreement “isn’t necessarily about the payload,” arguing the core issue is attempts to override consensus, and later described the proposal as having “failed the first gate hard” because of serious technical problems. He also resurfaced a quip from July: “Time is a flat circle,” framing the episode as another round in a recurring debate over Bitcoin’s immutability. What BIP-110 proposed - Authored by Dathon Ohm and formally titled the “Reduced Data Temporary Softfork,” BIP-110 sought to temporarily (about one year) restrict the storage of arbitrary, non-financial data in Bitcoin transactions. - Key limits included cutting standard transaction output scripts to 34 bytes, allowing OP_RETURN outputs up to 83 bytes, restricting certain data fields to 256 bytes, and adding constraints affecting Taproot transactions. - Supporters argued inscriptions and other non-financial data impose long-term storage costs on nodes, and that limiting such activity would lower operating costs and preserve Bitcoin’s role as a payments network. Supporters and opponents - Prominent supporters included developer Luke Dashjr (Bitcoin Knots, OCEAN mining pool). Some backers later discussed more drastic measures—such as changing the minority network’s proof-of-work to BLAKE2b—after the activation attempt faltered. - Opponents—including Back and, earlier in the debate, Michael Saylor—argued that changing consensus to reject specific transaction types undermines Bitcoin’s neutrality and risks fracturing the network. The activation attempt and fork - BIP-110 required 55% miner signaling for voluntary activation. During the signaling window only 2.53% of blocks supported it—far short of the threshold. - On August 8, a small cohort of nodes enforcing BIP-110 rejected a block accepted by the main network, producing a minority branch that mined two blocks before falling behind the established chain. That branch failed to attract sufficient mining power to persist as a viable competitor. Current adoption snapshot - The proposal’s official status is Closed. - Public monitoring data from bitdis.org (Nov. 3) recorded only eight enforcing nodes among 18,870 observed nodes—roughly 0.04%—and zero BIP-110 signaling blocks among the 649 blocks mined in the current difficulty period. These figures are a snapshot of publicly observable nodes and don’t capture private deployments, but they underline the tiny footprint of BIP-110 enforcement in the wild. - Bitcoin Core remains the dominant client (about 90% of monitored nodes), with Bitcoin Knots representing roughly 10%. Running Bitcoin Knots does not automatically equate to backing BIP-110, as the software supports different configurations. Why this matters The BIP-110 episode highlights persistent tensions in Bitcoin governance: how to balance technical limits, node operating costs and the network’s neutrality and immutability. Back’s rebuke—framed as a market-based rejection—underscores how changes to consensus rules face multifaceted barriers: technical scrutiny, miner economics, node operator choices, and community norms. As the dust settles, BIP-110 has failed to form a lasting rival chain or win broad adoption. For now, the incident reinforces the status quo: meaningful protocol changes require broad technical, miner and community alignment—something BIP-110 could not secure. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Liquid’s LBTC once again fully backed by real bitcoin after $320M exploit Liquid Network users can breathe easier: every LBTC token is now redeemable 1:1 for bitcoin after the federation restored the missing reserves nearly two months after a software bug allowed an attacker to mint and cash out unbacked LBTC. Liquid is a Bitcoin sidechain operated by a federation of firms led by Blockstream and used by exchanges and traders who want faster, off-chain bitcoin movements. The system works by users locking BTC with the federation and receiving LBTC in return — tokens that are supposed to be directly redeemable for the same amount of bitcoin at any time. That guarantee broke on Sept. 6, when a bug in Liquid’s code let an attacker mint roughly 4,000 LBTC without depositing BTC, then redeem those tokens for on-chain bitcoin. Blockstream’s incident report showed the federation’s reserve plunged from about 4,205 BTC to just 197 BTC. The attacker — who claimed to be a white hat — returned roughly 3,400 BTC the following day, but about 600 BTC remained missing. On Monday the Liquid Federation announced on X that the final 250 BTC transfer had closed that gap, restoring full 1:1 backing for all LBTC. The group pointed users to the network’s public dashboard, where the reserve balance can be independently verified. The restoration is a relief for Liquid users and counterparties, but the episode highlights the risks of federated sidechains: software vulnerabilities and centralized custody points can expose users to large, rapid losses. The federation’s public updates and the visible dashboard aim to rebuild transparency and confidence after the $320 million incident. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Headline: North Korea Rejects FBI’s Attribution of $6.3B Binance Heist as “Political Provocation” North Korea’s regime has flatly denied any involvement in the massive October crypto theft from Binance, calling the FBI’s attribution to a DPRK-linked hacking group a politically motivated attack on Pyongyang. What North Korea said - Kim Yo Jong, sister of leader Kim Jong Un, issued an unusually direct rebuttal via KCNA, quoted by Yonhap News. She called the U.S. allegations a “grave political provocation,” described the accusation as “absurd rhetoric,” and accused Washington of trying to brand the DPRK a “cyber criminal state.” - Kim also criticized U.S. plans to confiscate recovered cryptocurrency, suggesting that who ultimately receives any recovered funds could reveal the true perpetrators — while offering no alternative attribution or evidence. She warned North Korea was “closely monitoring” U.S. actions and implied the government would reconsider its stance toward Washington. What the FBI and investigators say - On October 31 the FBI publicly attributed the October 29 theft — initially pegged at roughly $6.3 billion — to TraderTraitor, a hacking operation the agency says has ties to North Korean cyber activity. - Working with the U.S. Secret Service and the IRS Criminal Investigation division, investigators tracked the movement of stolen funds and warned the attackers were converting assets primarily into Ethereum and routing them through decentralized finance platforms and instant swap services. - The FBI published wallet addresses and urged exchanges, blockchain operators, analytics firms and other digital-asset providers to block transactions linked to those addresses. Blockchain analysis and evolving totals - Independent blockchain firms quickly mapped the flows. TRM Labs told reporters it had high confidence in the TraderTraitor attribution. - Elliptic’s November 2 analysis put the theft at about $6.43 billion — slightly higher than the commonly cited $6.3 billion — and documented expansive movement across networks: roughly 12,000 wallets, more than 40,000 transactions, and activity spanning 11 blockchains in the first four days. - Much of the initial activity occurred on Tron, where funds were spread across about 7,700 addresses before being bridged to Ethereum to complicate tracing. - Elliptic estimated about $786 million in stablecoins were converted into other tokens before issuers could freeze them. - Approximately $2.85 billion was frozen or seized (around 44% of the firm’s total estimate), leaving about $3.24 billion remaining in addresses tied to the incident — primarily in Bitcoin and Ethereum. - Only a small portion appeared to have been converted into readily spendable funds; tracing included about 28 BTC moved through mixers. Binance’s response and recovery efforts - Binance’s preliminary probe pointed to a compromised engineer’s laptop that may have enabled unauthorized access to internal systems; the exchange said it had found no evidence of leaked wallet private keys. - The exchange began restoring withdrawals on November 1 after temporarily halting services. By November 2 Binance completed a reserve verification covering ten major tokens — including Bitcoin, Ethereum, BNB, Solana, USDT, USDC, XRP, and others — and said it had replaced roughly 95% of affected assets from company resources, with less-liquid tokens accounting for the remaining gap. - Binance has committed to absorbing the losses rather than passing them onto customers and said additional withdrawal capabilities would resume progressively from November 3, subject to security checks. What’s next - Law enforcement and blockchain trackers continue to follow fund movements and are coordinating with industry providers to block tainted addresses. The U.S. government’s public attribution has been amplified by multiple analytics firms, while Pyongyang’s rare direct denial frames the episode as another front in geopolitical confrontation over cyberspace and crypto. Takeaway - The technical tracing points to widespread cross-chain fund dispersion and partial recoveries, but attribution remains contested in political rhetoric. Investigators and exchanges are focused on freezing and recovering assets and shoring up security after one of the largest known crypto thefts to date. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Solana wallet Solflare has locked down internal systems and frozen new code changes after a wave of high-profile crypto attacks, putting its engineering team into what co-founder Dmitry “Vidor” called “bunker mode.” In a November 2 post, Vidor said the company has shut down access to infrastructure and source code, requires multiple approvals for any change, and halted new deployments. “After the month this industry just had, access to our infra and code is shut down, every change needs multiple approvals, and nothing new gets in,” he wrote, adding bluntly, “It slows us down and I’m fine with that.” The measures are intended to harden who can access and authorize changes to Solflare’s systems. The move follows several recent incidents that have shaken the industry. On October 29, Binance disclosed a major security breach involving roughly $6.3 billion in affected assets; Binance’s preliminary probe pointed to a possibly compromised engineer laptop as an entry point and said attackers accessed infrastructure used to authorize withdrawals. Around the same time, Keystone — a hardware wallet maker — suffered unauthorized access to its website that exposed customer records (Keystone says private keys and recovery phrases were not leaked, but the data exposure raised phishing concerns). Solflare’s immediate operational pain stemmed from a third-party staking provider. On October 27 the provider reported a security incident affecting keys tied to Solflare’s Solana validator. The validator stopped producing rewards while the provider investigated, though Solflare stressed that users’ delegated SOL remained in their individual stake accounts and “Your SOL is safe. No user funds were touched.” The firm emphasized that validator operator keys do not permit transfers from users’ delegated accounts. Blockchain monitoring cited by Unchained showed about 1.56 million SOL delegated to the affected validator as of October 28. Separately, analytics firm Bitquery traced unauthorized transfers from keys associated with several Solana validators (including ones tied to Solflare), estimating roughly $135,000 in assets moved from five validators — while distinguishing operators’ funds from users’ delegated staking balances. To remediate, Solflare spun up a replacement validator and started directing users to migrate their delegated SOL. It initially set a November 1 deadline to qualify for compensation for missed staking rewards, but has since extended that migration deadline to November 30. Solflare says it will cover staking rewards missed between October 26 and November 1 for users who complete the in-app migration. The company rolled out an in-app migration flow and urged users to update the Solflare app and move stakes there; it warned migration instructions will come only through the official app and cautioned against DMs, links, or phishing attempts. Solflare’s response is part of a broader industry trend of emergency lockdowns after attacks: for example, Brazil’s Mercado Bitcoin paused withdrawals after detecting unauthorized activity. For Solflare users the immediate steps are clear — update the wallet app, complete the in-app validator migration by November 30 to resume staking and claim covered missed rewards, and follow only official Solflare channels to avoid scams. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Mike Flaum, CEO of Log Scale Investments, says Bitcoin will reach a fresh all-time high in 2027 — and he’s done away with the idea that the asset still marches to a dependable four‑year rhythm tied to halvings. Flaum laid out his view in an Oct. 30 interview featured by Bitcoin Magazine, where the conversation ranged from Bitcoin’s cycle dynamics to corporate treasury structures and securities backed by companies’ Bitcoin holdings. He explicitly rejected the classic halving‑driven timetable for peaks and troughs, while expressing confidence a new record will arrive before the next halving. That stance lands amid ongoing disagreement across the industry about whether the recovery since the 2026 lows is the start of a new bull market or simply a bounce inside a longer bear market. Several well‑known research teams have updated (or tempered) their cycle frameworks this year. Galaxy Research is a clear example of that evolution. In a June 9 note the firm still saw a recognizable four‑year pattern in price and on‑chain data and sketched a base‑case bottom in the $40k–$46k range. By late October, however, Galaxy’s head of firmwide research Alex Thorn told clients the firm believed the bear market had ended in June and that Bitcoin had moved into an accumulation phase. Key evidence cited included Bitcoin holding its 200‑week moving average and reclaiming its 50‑week moving average for five straight weeks. Galaxy also flagged a downside trigger: a weekly close beneath the then‑50‑week average of about $76,540 that isn’t recovered within a month would weaken that bullish thesis. Fidelity Digital Assets has taken a more cautious line. Its team warns the recent recovery could either mark the start of a sustained advance or be a temporary rally inside a longer downturn. Fidelity’s research notes that prior cycle bottoms — like the major low in November 2022 — didn’t adhere to exact four‑year schedules, so calendar‑based predictions are unreliable. Chris Kuiper, VP of research, emphasizes adoption happens in waves and that long holding periods have historically given better signals than attempts to pick precise market bottoms. Fidelity’s Oct. 28 report did, however, point to improving momentum, recovering profitability and broader participation, even as mining economics, stablecoin flows and on‑chain demand send mixed signals. Grayscale Research head Zach Pandl offers a different lens: instead of halving cadence, he looks at macro drivers such as economic growth and real interest rates. Pandl observed that past Bitcoin bear markets often coincided with weakening growth or rising inflation‑adjusted rates, arguing Bitcoin’s price action is increasingly correlated with the same forces that move other major assets. His view is conditional — if the Federal Reserve avoids further hikes and growth remains intact, the cycle low may already be behind us. Bottom line: Flaum’s 2027 all‑time‑high call throws down a gauntlet to the four‑year halving narrative, but the market’s next moves will likely be decided by a blend of on‑chain technicals, corporate and institutional behavior, and the broader macroeconomic backdrop. Key levels and indicators — such as the 50‑ and 200‑week moving averages and how Bitcoin behaves around them — remain the immediate checkpoints traders and investors will be watching. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Bitcoin traders are watching the midterms and exchange flows closely, with conditions that could set the stage for a post-election rally — if market dynamics play out as some analysts expect. Hyperion Decimus founder and CEO Chris Sullivan highlighted heavy short positioning on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME): roughly 29,220 bitcoin-equivalent short contracts, about $2.2 billion in notional exposure, and nearly $22 billion in short-side taker volume over a 24-hour window. That concentration of bets against bitcoin raises the prospect of a short squeeze — a rapid, self-reinforcing rally that forces short sellers to buy back positions, further driving up prices. Interpreting the data, however, has become trickier after the recent Binance hack. Sullivan noted that large amounts of BTC have been withdrawn from exchanges and moved into cold storage — self-custody holdings kept offline. “So much BTC was pulled off exchanges and into cold storage self-custody,” he said. “This is very bullish but not immediately.” Why that matters: fewer coins sitting on exchanges can tighten available supply, meaning that if demand returns (or shorts are forced to cover), there may be less liquidity to absorb buying pressure. Sullivan expects the combination of heavy short exposure and substantial exchange outflows to be supportive of prices over the coming months, though the immediate impact could be muted while markets process the security shock and shifting on-chain flows. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

India’s financial watchdogs are turning a close eye on a growing corner of the crypto-payments market: offshore prepaid cards that let residents convert crypto into rupees at the point of sale. What’s happening - According to The Economic Times, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the Financial Intelligence Unit–India (FIU-IND) are scrutinizing overseas crypto card programs — including RedotPay — that let Indian users spend crypto domestically in rupee transactions. - Regulators are reportedly probing how these cards interact with India’s payment rails, and whether they sidestep foreign-exchange and domestic payment-system rules. No public ban or formal enforcement action against RedotPay has been announced. How the cards work - Offshore providers issue virtual or physical prepaid cards that are funded with crypto held at foreign custodians. - At checkout, the provider converts the crypto into local currency and routes payment through conventional card networks (Visa or Mastercard), so merchants receive a standard card payment even though the user originally used Bitcoin, stablecoins (USDT, USDC), Ethereum, etc. - Some programs advertise light customer verification and low friction, which regulators say raises questions about customer ID, transaction monitoring and cross-border compliance. Disruptions and reporting - Users began reporting card deactivations and blocked access to provider websites on social media from late October. Some said physical cards had even been used to withdraw rupees at major Indian-bank ATMs before services stopped. - Sources told the ET that card networks may have started restricting transactions involving such offshore crypto cards. Visa, Mastercard and the RBI did not respond to the paper’s requests for comment. Catalyst for scrutiny - Bengaluru-based blockchain research group Digital South Trust shared findings with authorities after obtaining a virtual, Visa-backed RedotPay card in August and completing domestic transactions. Its founder flagged what his group saw as weak identity checks and monitoring on some offshore offerings. Legal and compliance questions - India’s Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) governs foreign-currency dealings, cross-border payments and related reporting. Legal experts quoted in the report warned that crypto-funded offshore cards create “cross-border” exposures that customers and some providers may not fully appreciate. - Lawyers and tax specialists also questioned whether such cards comply with India’s prepaid payment instrument rules and settlement frameworks — and whether providers meet anti-money-laundering (AML) obligations. Regulatory context - FIU-IND sent notices in September to 15 offshore cryptocurrency platforms over alleged AML lapses and the government has stressed that virtual-asset businesses serving Indian customers must meet domestic reporting and compliance obligations regardless of location. - India has already tightened other crypto-related rules, including recommendations on bank exposure and limits on privately issued stablecoins. RedotPay’s position and growth - RedotPay’s materials describe virtual and physical cards that convert crypto to local currencies during processing and support Bitcoin, Ethereum, USDT and USDC. Features listed include merchant payments and ATM withdrawals where available. - The company has been expanding internationally and completed financial and AML reviews in September as part of pre-IPO preparations. It reportedly had around 8.5 million users by July and was seeking a valuation above $5 billion. - Stablecoin card usage is growing: cumulative stablecoin card payments topped $10.9 billion by August 2026, with July 2026 alone seeing more than $1 billion in monthly spending in some datasets cited by RedotPay. What to watch next - Whether payment networks impose formal restrictions on these card products, and whether the RBI or FIU-IND issue guidance or enforcement actions, will shape the future of offshore card access for Indian customers. - For users, key issues are AML and KYC robustness, FEMA compliance, and whether service interruptions will continue — plus the broader question of how regulators will balance innovation with cross-border financial safeguards. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Metaplanet doubled down on a share-buyback program this month, spending ¥25.27 billion (about $160 million) to repurchase 96.45 million common shares as the Japanese Bitcoin-treasury company retools its capital allocation amid pressure on its stock valuation. Key facts - Repurchases: 96,447,400 shares bought between Oct. 14 and Oct. 31 via Tokyo Stock Exchange trades, including off-auction ToSTNeT-3 transactions. - Total spent: ¥25.27 billion (cumulative through Oct. 31). Average price paid: ~¥262 per share. - Scale: The repurchase equals roughly 7.1% of the company’s previously issued shares. After the transactions, treasury stock stood at 96,474,427 shares; outstanding common shares (ex-treasury) were reported at 1,267,808,197 as of Oct. 31. - Authorization: The Oct. 13 board resolution allows repurchases of up to 200 million shares for as much as ¥60 billion through Oct. 13, 2027. Metaplanet has used about 42.1% of that authorization and can still spend roughly ¥34.73 billion under the program. Market reaction and trading Metaplanet’s stock closed at ¥250 on Nov. 2, up 2.46% (a ¥6 gain from the prior close). Intraday range that day was ¥238–¥255 with about 16.53 million shares traded. The closing price remained below the ¥261 level used in the large Oct. 14 off-auction repurchase. Why Metaplanet is buying back stock Management says the buybacks are part of a disciplined effort to maximize Bitcoin holdings per share — a central metric for companies that hold BTC as their treasury asset. When shares trade below the market net asset value (mNAV) implied by their Bitcoin holdings, repurchases can increase the amount of Bitcoin attributable to each remaining share. CEO Simon Gerovich confirmed the purchases and said future capital allocation will weigh the share price, mNAV and market conditions when deciding whether to make further repurchases. Financing moves and dilution risk Metaplanet is simultaneously reshaping its financing to reduce reliance on Bitcoin-backed borrowing. On Oct. 13 the company announced a ¥52 billion zero-coupon convertible bond due Oct. 2031. The plan allocates about ¥23.6 billion to repay existing debt and up to ¥28.3 billion for share repurchases. The bonds carry an initial conversion price of ¥339 per share — well above the Nov. 2 close — meaning conversions would be dilutive only if the stock rises past that level. Tensions between buybacks and potential dilution are clear: on one hand, repurchases shrink the share base and lift BTC-per-share; on the other, future bond conversions could expand the share count and offset some of that benefit. Bitcoin positioning and borrowing Metaplanet aims to keep roughly 85%–90% of its assets in Bitcoin. As of the end of September it held about 44,000 BTC. Its Bitcoin-backed borrowings stood at about 17.7% of Bitcoin net asset value, above its internal 10% guideline. Management says it will favor permanent equity for future BTC purchases while using other financing tools within borrowing limits. The Nov. 2 repurchase filing did not disclose any additional Bitcoin purchases. Takeaway This round of buybacks underscores Metaplanet’s dual strategy: firming up Bitcoin-per-share via repurchases while reworking financing to reduce short-term leverage. Investors should watch both the remaining ¥34.73 billion of buyback capacity and the convertible bond overhang at a ¥339 conversion price — factors that will determine how much of the immediate boost to BTC-per-share is sustained over time. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

BitMine Immersion Technologies is closing in on its goal to control 5% of Ethereum’s circulating supply after adding another 8,573 ETH to its treasury, bringing total holdings to 6,060,506 ETH as ETH’s price inches back toward $2,300. A steady accumulation strategy - In a November 2 update, Chairman Tom Lee confirmed the purchase, part of a disciplined weekly buying program BitMine launched on June 30, 2025. “Over the past week, we acquired 8,573 ETH. BitMine’s track record of consistent buying of crypto is unmatched by any public company in the world. BitMine has bought ETH each and every week since the inception of the ETH Treasury Strategy on June 30, 2025,” Lee said. - The new purchase follows a 10,452 ETH acquisition reported on October 25, when holdings stood at 6,051,933 ETH. At the current total, BitMine’s Ethereum stash represents roughly 4.9% of the estimated 122.2 million circulating ETH; reaching its 5% cap would require about 6.11 million ETH—around 49,500 more tokens. Balance sheet and staking economics - BitMine values its combined crypto holdings, cash, marketable securities and other investments at $14.5 billion. - At an ETH reference price of $2,261 on November 1, the company’s ETH was worth about $13.7 billion. - Other reported assets include 216 BTC, $498 million in cash and marketable securities, and equity stakes: $180 million in Beast Industries and $82 million in Eightco Holdings. Staking is a major revenue engine - BitMine said 5,227,037 ETH—around 86% of its ETH treasury—was staked as of November 1, valued at about $11.8 billion at the reference price. - Using a seven-day annualized staking yield of 3.03%, management estimates annual staking revenue at roughly $358 million; if the company stakes its remaining ETH, projected annual rewards could rise to approximately $415 million. - BitMine operates MAVAN (Made in America Validator Network) alongside external partners, positioning itself as a major institutional Ethereum staking provider and opening validator services to outside investors and custodians. Market context and price action - Ethereum traded near $2,290 on November 2, up modestly for the day but still well below late-September peaks near $2,750 after a pullback in October. - Short-term technicals show improving momentum but lingering bearish signals: RSI around 37.14 (below neutral 50) and a negative MACD, indicating buyers haven’t fully regained control. Immediate technical support is near $2,250, with resistance around $2,320 and a stronger resistance zone near $2,500. On industry resilience and security incidents - Lee also commented on the market’s reaction to the October 29 Binance security incident, which involved about $6.3 billion in affected assets. He contrasted ETH’s roughly 4% drop after that breach with its steeper decline following the February Bybit hack (about an 8% immediate drop and ~20% over the subsequent week). Lee suggested the more muted reaction this time reflects stronger industry resilience, asset-recovery efforts and actions by market participants—an interpretation he says supports a constructive long-term view. What’s next BitMine says it will continue to operate its Ethereum treasury and staking infrastructure while pursuing the 5% ownership target. With weekly purchases ongoing, the firm is now within striking distance of its stated limit—and staking will remain a central driver of recurring revenue as it builds out MAVAN and broader validator exposure. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

BlackRock’s iShares Ethereum Trust (ETHA) saw a wave of redemptions in October, with analytics firms flagging large token movements that underscore rising outflows from Ethereum ETFs. Key figures - Lookonchain (Nov. 2) reports BlackRock-related wallets moved 580,145 ETH (~$1.32 billion) out of addresses labeled as BlackRock Coinbase Prime deposit wallets into Coinbase Prime hot wallets over the past month. Individual transfers ranged from about 3,197 ETH to nearly 29,814 ETH. - Lookonchain’s ETF snapshot lists BlackRock’s ETH holdings at 3,095,551 ETH. Total Ethereum holdings across the tracked ETF products were 5,513,954 ETH — meaning ETHA represents roughly 56.1% of the tracked supply. - On the day-of-snapshot, the analytics firm estimated daily net withdrawals of 44,837 ETH (~$102.12 million) across tracked Ethereum funds; ETHA accounted for 34,383 ETH (≈76.7%) of that daily outflow. Grayscale’s products lost 9,015 ETH, Fidelity 1,418 ETH, and Bitwise 21 ETH. VanEck and other small issuers showed no daily net movement. - Over seven days, BlackRock’s outflows totaled 169,205 ETH — larger than the entire tracked group’s net outflow of 147,585 ETH. Fidelity bucked the trend, attracting 27,067 ETH over the week. Excluding BlackRock, the group actually saw a net inflow of 21,620 ETH, partially offsetting ETHA’s withdrawals. October month totals and cross-source context - Using Farside data, ETHA’s October net redemptions summed to roughly $1.4205 billion (based on rounded daily figures). Farside shows ETHA had no positive sessions in October and three sessions with zero net flow. - Across all Ethereum ETF products in Farside’s table, October outflows totaled about $1.6072 billion; ETHA therefore accounted for approximately 88.4% of that category-wide monthly net outflow. - Between Oct. 26–30 alone, ETHA lost $391.1 million, and its final October session logged $76.6 million in withdrawals. Note that Lookonchain’s $102.12 million “daily” estimate and Farside’s Oct. 30 figures are separate snapshots and aren’t tied to a specific U.S. trading session. Bitcoin flows for comparison - Lookonchain’s Bitcoin table showed daily withdrawals of 7,919 BTC (~$614.26 million) and seven-day withdrawals of 2,292 BTC (~$177.81 million). - Within BlackRock’s Bitcoin product (IBIT), the daily snapshot showed a loss of 3,056 BTC but a seven-day net inflow of 2,038 BTC. Fidelity’s FBTC recorded 2,630 BTC withdrawn for the day and 2,196 BTC over seven days. ARK 21Shares’ ARKB lost 1,694 BTC in both snapshots. Several other issuers had smaller withdrawals or modest inflows. Why this matters - ETHA is a passive trust that aims to track Ether’s price; retail investors cannot redeem shares directly. Redemptions are handled by authorized participants (registered broker-dealers) and can be executed either in-kind (deliver Ether) or in cash (sell Ether and deliver proceeds). For cash redemptions the trust can trade with counterparties or use Coinbase Prime. - In-kind redemptions became an option following SEC orders on July 29, 2025 and an effective registration amendment on July 31, 2025 — changes that can materially affect ETF flows and market mechanics for large institutional redemptions. Caveats - Lookonchain’s wallet images identify transfers between labeled addresses (e.g., Coinbase Prime deposit to hot wallets) but do not reveal the identity, intent, or trading strategies of the underlying investors. Neither Lookonchain nor Farside attributes the outflows to specific causes such as unwinding of basis trades. Bottom line BlackRock’s ETHA was the dominant driver of October’s Ethereum ETF outflows, accounting for the bulk of the category-wide withdrawals. While some issuers (notably Fidelity) saw inflows over recent windows, the scale of ETHA redemptions — and their concentration late in October — highlights how quickly flows can shift within the nascent Ethereum ETF market and why monitoring wallet-level movements matters for liquidity and price dynamics. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Tether has frozen more than 4.5 million USDT tied to the Nov. 2 security incident at Brazilian crypto exchange Mercado Bitcoin, the stablecoin issuer’s CEO Paolo Ardoino said while sharing the exchange’s official statement. The announcement comes as Mercado Bitcoin temporarily suspended deposits and withdrawals while it investigates suspicious fund movements. Key facts - Tether: “Tether froze more than 4.5M USDT related to this security incident,” CEO Paolo Ardoino wrote. The freeze was confirmed as a containment measure; Ardoino did not say the tokens had been returned to Mercado Bitcoin. - Mercado Bitcoin: The exchange said it identified and swiftly contained a security incident affecting one of its systems, confirmed no customer losses and reported no data breach. Deposits and withdrawals were halted as a precaution while teams trace funds and coordinate with authorities. - Addresses published: Mercado Bitcoin released destination addresses tied to the incident across multiple blockchains (EVM-compatible, Bitcoin, Solana, Stellar and Tron) to aid tracking. The EVM address published was 0xe485e7A70b1131216Cb47CA4555c4Bbb2C742478. The company did not assign dollar amounts to each address. - Suspicious outflows: Brazilian outlet BitNotícias, citing security firm Hypernative, reported more than $40 million in suspicious transfers from wallets attributed to Mercado Bitcoin. Those movements reportedly involved newly created destination addresses spanning at least 10 blockchain networks. - Scope and uncertainty: The $40M suspicious outflow estimate and the $4.5M USDT freeze describe different things — one is an estimate of cross-asset transfers flagged as suspicious, the other is the specific amount of USDT blocked by its issuer. Neither side has published a final tally of recoverable funds. Context and ongoing response - Mercado Bitcoin said its teams are continuing asset tracking and coordinating with relevant authorities. It reiterated that customers were not harmed but cautioned that deposits and withdrawals remain suspended until operations can be restored safely. - The exchange’s address disclosure is intended solely for monitoring and investigative purposes, providing investigators and the wider market with references to follow on-chain movements. - This incident arrives after prior public collaboration between Brazilian authorities and Hypernative: Brazil’s central bank had worked with Hypernative on a real-time crypto-threat monitoring and alert-sharing system that listed Mercado Bitcoin and other domestic exchanges as planned participants. Tether’s precedent - Tether has used freezes to block funds linked to suspected illicit activity before. In April it said it supported US authorities in freezing $344 million USDT across two addresses, and the company says it has cooperated with more than 340 law enforcement agencies in 65 countries. Bottom line Investigations remain active. Mercado Bitcoin is tracing assets and coordinating with authorities while keeping customers informed through official channels. The freeze by Tether is an immediate containment step, but the full picture of losses or recoveries — and whether frozen funds will be returned to the exchange or customers — has not yet been resolved. Expect further updates from both Mercado Bitcoin and law enforcement as tracing continues. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news

Sui and Brazil’s largest crypto exchange, Mercado Bitcoin, laid out a multi-step partnership on Oct. 29 that could broaden on‑ and off‑ramp options and introduce tokenized real‑world assets to Sui — but much of the plan is a roadmap, not a finished product. What was announced - Mercado Bitcoin will integrate SUI, USDC and USDsui on Sui, allowing purchases, sales and transfers on the Sui network. - USDsui is slated to be accepted as collateral in Mercado Bitcoin’s lending product. - The firms plan to bring Mercado Bitcoin’s tokenized real‑world assets (RWAs) to Sui’s ecosystem. - They are exploring a potential integration with Hashi, Sui’s Bitcoin orchestration layer — an exploratory connection, not a shipped Bitcoin lending feature. Why this is more than a simple listing The Oct. 29 release reads less like a single product launch and more like a layered expansion plan. Some pieces are already defined — token support and basic operations — while others (Hashi, tokenized RWAs, full lending workflows) are ambitions that require further engineering, legal work and commercial testing. The announcement sets scope and intent, but it doesn’t provide a verified metric of user adoption for every component. Distribution ≠ settlement ≠ final use Making tokens available inside a familiar exchange can simplify onboarding: it can link local fiat rails, exchange accounts and on‑chain transfers in one place. But that doesn’t erase the separate challenges of settlement and final use: - Distribution reduces friction to reach the blockchain. - Settlement infrastructure governs how assets move and clear once on‑chain. - Final use depends on account checks, conversion costs and counterparty rules. Improving one stage (faster transfers or easier buys) can materially improve user experience without making every downstream step immediate or free. Collateral eligibility is not the same as borrowing capacity USDsui being “eligible collateral” in a lending product tells you the exchange will accept it as security, but not how much you can borrow, at what loan‑to‑value, or under what liquidation rules. Borrowing power depends on lender policy, valuation, and liquidation mechanics. Also note that a stablecoin’s peg and redemption rights are separate from the credit terms of any loan backed by it. Tokenized RWAs require legal plumbing, not just technical tokens Putting a tokenized asset on a blockchain changes recordkeeping and transfer mechanics, but it doesn’t automatically create legal ownership or servicing arrangements. Distribution permissions, legal documentation and custodial/servicing workflows determine whether holders have enforceable claims and how cash flows are delivered. The technical availability of a token and the legal accessibility of the underlying investment can have different boundaries. What matters next - Clear, published borrowing and custody terms for USDsui as collateral. - Legal and servicing documentation for any tokenized RWAs issued to Sui. - Concrete details or a pilot for any Hashi/Bitcoin integration (to avoid conflating exploration with a live Bitcoin lending product). - Observable customer usage and retention — that will determine commercial significance. Bottom line This partnership opens an important route for Sui into Brazil through Mercado Bitcoin’s established customer base and payment rails. The announcement establishes intent and initial integrations, but the commercial impact will hinge on how much of the roadmap is delivered and whether customers actually use the new services repeatedly. Written by the News Desk; edited by Samuel Rae. Read more AI-generated news on: https://app.chaingpt.org/news