Blockonomi

TLDR:
Aviva Investors launched a tokenized share class of its £22 billion Sterling Liquidity Fund on XRPL.
It is the firm’s second tokenized fund, after the USD Liquidity Fund launched in July 2026.
Both tokenized share classes hold over £86 million, including Aviva’s £50 million Sterling investment.
The digital twin model keeps the off-chain fund intact while holdings are represented on-chain.
Aviva Investors has launched a tokenized share class of its Sterling (GBP) Liquidity Fund on the XRP Ledger. The fund is the firm’s largest, with about £22 billion in assets under management, according to the announcement.
The move follows the July launch of a tokenized USD Liquidity Fund. Aviva Investors and Ripple announced the development on October 26, 2026. The firm is now one of the largest providers of tokenized money market funds in Europe.
Aviva Investors Adds Sterling Fund to Tokenized Lineup
Ripple shared the news on X. The post described the launch as an expansion of the firm’s tokenized fund offering.
Big news as Aviva Investors announces the launch of a tokenized share class of the Aviva Investors Sterling (GBP) Liquidity Fund on the XRP Ledger.
The Sterling (GBP) Liquidity Fund is Aviva Investors’ largest fund at around £22 billion in assets under management, and this move…
— Ripple (@Ripple) October 26, 2026
The share class is the second tokenized offering from the firm. It follows the tokenized USD Liquidity Fund, which launched in July 2026.
Meanwhile, the fund is an Ireland-domiciled UCITS money market fund launched in 2002. It targets low-risk returns and daily liquidity through high-grade, short-term UK Sterling debt instruments.
Together, the two tokenized share classes hold more than £86 million (116million) in investments.Aviva invested £50million (66 million) in the new Sterling share class.
Mark Versey, CEO of Aviva Investors, commented on the expansion. He said, “We believe tokenised funds can increase efficiency and ultimately lead to improved client outcomes.”
Versey also said the expansion “shows our clear intent to be a leader in this area.” He called the partnership with Ripple vital to these efforts.
Digital Twin Model and XRP Ledger Infrastructure
The fund uses a digital twin model. This approach adds a digital access layer where holdings can be represented on-chain. The existing off-chain fund structure remains intact.
Investors receive the same investment objective, risk profile, liquidity characteristics, and regulatory protections as the conventional fund. Eligible investors with digital wallets can access the new share class.
The Bank of New York Mellon holds all assets as the fund’s custodian. In addition, the structure is designed to operate within existing regulatory frameworks.
Komainu, a regulated institutional digital asset custodian, again supported the launch. Licuido, a digital infrastructure platform that enables asset managers to tokenize and trade real world assets, also provided support. The firms also backed the earlier launch of the USD share class.
The XRP Ledger lets Aviva Investors issue and manage the share class through fast, secure, low-cost transactions. Since 2012, the network has processed more than 4 billion transactions.
It supports nearly 8 million active wallets and 130+ independent validators. Nigel Khakoo, Senior Vice President of Trading and Markets at Ripple, also commented. He said, “Markets are moving to 24/7 access and settlement is moving to real-time, always-on rails.”
Khakoo described Ripple as the bridge between traditional and digital finance. He added that the XRP Ledger is “bringing the compliance, privacy and security features needed by institutions.”
The post Aviva Investors Launches Tokenized Sterling Liquidity Fund on XRP Ledger appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR
ECB board member Piero Cipollone says the digital euro would reduce Europe’s reliance on non-European payment companies.
A pilot using real transactions by ECB and national central bank staff will start in 2027.
The digital euro could launch as early as 2029 if EU lawmakers approve the regulation this year.
There will be limits on how much people can hold, but no limits on payments. Offline payments will also be possible.
Banks will distribute the digital euro, and the ECB will not open accounts for individuals.
European Central Bank Executive Board member Piero Cipollone says the digital euro could give Europe more control over how its people pay. He made the comments in an interview with Italy’s Milano Finanza, which the ECB published on October 24.
Cipollone said payments are a key part of Europe’s economy. “If the payment system stops working, the economy stops working,” he said.
Why the ECB Wants a Digital Euro
Today, the public can only use central bank money in the form of cash. Cipollone said the digital euro would fill that gap online, where banknotes cannot be used.
He pointed to Italy as an example. Online payments there grew from 6% of all payments in 2019 to 24% in 2024.
Most of those online payments are made by card. Cipollone said two thirds of these card payments run through non-European card schemes.
“In recent years Europe has learned that, for some essential services, we cannot rely only on third parties,” he said. He compared payments to energy and defense but did not name specific companies.
He added that sovereignty does not mean shutting others out. “It means having the power to choose,” he said.
Cipollone also said small shops can pay fees up to four times higher than large businesses. He said legal caps on costs under the digital euro should help lower those fees.
How the Digital Euro Would Work and When It Could Launch
There will be a limit on how much digital euro a person can hold in a wallet. There will be no limit on spending, since larger payments can pull the rest from a linked bank account.
The digital euro will also work offline. Two devices can be tapped together to pay during a power cut or in areas with weak internet.
Cipollone said offline payment details would stay between the buyer and the seller, much like cash. People will be able to use the digital euro through their bank’s app or a standard Eurosystem app.
The ECB will not open accounts for individuals. Banks and other approved firms will distribute the digital euro and manage customer relationships.
The system will run on infrastructure built only by European providers. Cipollone said cash will continue to exist alongside the digital euro.
A pilot using real transactions by ECB and national central bank staff will begin in 2027. So far, 36 market operators, including seven from Italy, are helping with preparations, and the ECB is inviting e-commerce and mobile commerce firms to join.
The ECB Governing Council can only make a final decision after lawmakers in Brussels finish talks on the regulation. If the regulation is approved this year, the digital euro could launch as early as 2029.
“We hope that the regulation will be adopted by the end of the year, enabling the ECB’s Governing Council to issue a formal decision on issuance,” Cipollone said.
The post ECB’s Cipollone Says Digital Euro Pilot Will Start in 2027 appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR
Crypto hardware wallet maker Keystone confirmed that an unauthorized third party accessed customer shipping data, including names, contact details, and addresses.
Keystone said it blocked access, fixed the vulnerability, and is emailing affected customers, but it has not said how many people were hit.
Security researcher Taylor Monahan warned that leaked addresses could expose crypto holders to physical attacks and kidnappings.
CertiK recorded 52 verified wrench attacks in the first half of 2026, up 33% from the same period last year.
Some customers who bought devices over two years ago received breach notices, raising questions about Keystone’s 180-day data deletion policy.
Crypto hardware wallet maker Keystone has disclosed a security breach that exposed customer shipping information. The company apologized to users in a post on X over the weekend.
We owe you an apology.
On October 20, we detected unauthorized access to our official website. After verifying API activity with Shopify, we confirmed on October 23 that a third party obtained customer shipping information. You trusted us with those details, and we're sorry we…
— Keystone Hardware Wallet (@KeystoneWallet) October 24, 2026
Keystone said it detected suspicious activity earlier in the week. On Friday, after reviewing API activity with Shopify, it confirmed that an unauthorized third party had accessed customer data.
The exposed information includes names, contact details, shipping addresses, and order details such as items bought and prices paid.
“We’ve blocked access, fixed the vulnerability, opened an investigation, and are emailing affected customers,” the company said. Keystone did not say how many customers were affected.
“We owe you an apology. You trusted us with those details, and we’re sorry we didn’t keep them safe,” the company wrote.
Researchers Warn of Physical Attack Risks
Keystone warned that the leaked data could be used for targeted phishing attacks. Security researcher Taylor Monahan raised a different concern.
Monahan said the real danger of leaked shipping addresses is physical assault and kidnapping, not phishing. Attackers could use the data to find where wallet owners live.
Once again reminding the hardware wallet retards that the risk that becomes real when you leak people’s SHIPPING INFORMATION is not phishing. It’s fucking PHYSICAL ASSAULTS AND KIDNAPPINGS. https://t.co/TbSaHpE6XJ
— Tay (@tayvano_) October 24, 2026
These crimes are often called “wrench attacks.” They involve using threats or violence to force crypto holders to hand over their assets.
Blockchain security firm CertiK recorded 52 verified wrench attacks worldwide in the first half of 2026. That is up 33% from 39 in the same period last year.
AMBCrypto reported 122 crypto-related physical attacks across 31 countries so far in 2026, with France as the main hot spot. Chainalysis estimated losses from such attacks at over $100 million as of August.
The Keystone breach follows other security problems in the sector. These include a Ledger supply chain attack worth over $100 million, a $116 million Coldcard exploit, and a Trezor data breach in August.
Zach Herbert, founder of Foundation wallet, said he “largely” agrees that “hardware wallets are dead.” He said the answer is an ultra-secure, open architecture hardware security platform.
Questions Over Keystone’s Data Retention Policy
The breach has also raised questions about how long Keystone keeps customer data. In a 2023 blog post, the company said it had cut its data retention period to 180 days.
However, some customers said they received breach notices for devices bought more than two years ago. This suggests some older order records may not have been deleted as promised.
An X user called “OG DEGEN” said a scammer posing as law enforcement called them about a fraud case. The user believes the caller got their details from a Keystone order placed in 2024.
“I think their plan was to convince me that my private keys had been exposed and then send me a phishing link to supposedly reset them,” the user wrote.
Another X user, trintaetres, also said they got the email notice despite buying a device over two years ago.
Cointelegraph asked Keystone how data from older purchases was exposed and how many customers were affected. The company had not responded by publication time.
The post Keystone Hardware Wallet Hack Leaks Customer Names and Home Addresses appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR
Canada’s proposed stablecoin rules, published Oct. 24, would let covered holders redeem any amount with no minimum.
Issuers would have to complete redemptions within three business days, with fees capped at 1%.
Issuers could set daily limits if reserve-asset markets face a liquidity shortfall.
Circle currently limits direct USDC redemption to institutions with a Circle Mint account.
A 60-day consultation is underway, and the rules are expected to take effect in fall 2027.
Canada has proposed new rules that would let small stablecoin holders cash out directly with issuers. The plan sets no minimum redemption amount and caps fees at 1%.
The proposal was published on Oct. 24. It adds operating details to the Stablecoin Act, which received royal assent on March 26 but has key parts not yet in force.
What the Proposed Rules Would Require
Under the plan, issuers would normally have to complete a redemption within three business days. The government says this window allows time for reserve securities to settle and for processing.
A small balance would no longer be a valid reason to reject a covered request. Holders could redeem any amount.
The Act requires payment at par, or face value, in the currency the stablecoin tracks. For USDC, that means U.S. dollars, so a Canadian holder wanting Canadian dollars would need a separate conversion arrangement.
The 1% fee is a ceiling, not a set rate. Issuers would need to give at least seven days’ notice on their website before adding or raising fees.
Issuers could set daily redemption limits in one case. That applies when a shortage of liquidity in the markets where reserve assets trade stops them from meeting all requests. The 1% fee cap would still apply during those limits.
Reserves would have to at least equal the value of outstanding stablecoins. Allowed assets include demand deposits, short-term government debt, qualifying money-market funds and certain overnight repurchase agreements.
Reserves would be kept separate from claims by the issuer’s and custodian’s creditors. However, issuers could not claim their tokens are insured bank deposits.
How Circle’s Current Terms Compare
Circle’s USDC terms for holders outside the European Economic Area were updated on Oct. 15. They make direct redemption depend on having a Circle Mint account in good standing.
Circle Mint serves institutions and registered distributors. It excludes individuals using it for personal purposes and requires identity and sanctions checks.
Approved institutions must also link a verified bank account in their own name. Without such an account, a holder cannot send tokens to Circle and ask for a bank payout.
Whether USDC would fall under Canada’s rules is still unclear. The Act covers domestic and foreign issuers whose stablecoins are available to buyers in Canada, based on where a buyer lives or does business.
The Governor of the Bank of Canada could also grant exemptions where provincial or foreign rules are substantially similar. Future registration or exemption decisions will matter for Circle’s case.
Existing issuers that apply within 30 days of the start date could keep issuing until their registration is decided. This relief would not pause their redemption duties.
The consultation will run for 60 days from the Oct. 24 publication date. The government plans for the rules to take effect in fall 2027.
The post Canada Proposes Stablecoin Redemption Rules With 1% Fee Cap appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR
BNB Chain plans a new Layer 1 blockchain that will run alongside BNB Smart Chain without a new token.
BNB will be used for gas fees, staking and governance on the new network through a native bridge.
The network targets 200-millisecond blocks and pre-confirmations in about 20 milliseconds.
A public testnet is planned for the end of 2026, with mainnet targeted for early 2027.
Binance founder CZ responded to the plan with the phrase “Multiple chains, one coins.”
BNB Chain has shared plans for a new high-performance Layer 1 blockchain that will run alongside BNB Smart Chain. The network will not launch a new token and will use BNB instead.
The project is currently called New L1 and does not have an official name yet. Its updated technical documents were published on October 22.
Binance founder Changpeng Zhao, known as CZ, responded to the plan with the phrase “Multiple chains, one coins.” His comment pointed to the decision to keep BNB as the only token.
How New L1 Will Work Alongside BSC
BNB Smart Chain, or BSC, will keep supporting its current decentralized finance apps, trading platforms and other services. The new network will handle transactions that need faster processing.
The two chains will connect through a native bridge that is still being built. Users will be able to move BNB from BSC to the new network, where it will pay for transaction fees.
Staking BNB on the new chain will create govBNB at a one-to-one ratio. These tokens cannot be transferred and give holders voting rights in the network’s governance system.
The network aims to produce a new block every 200 milliseconds. It also targets transaction pre-confirmations in about 20 milliseconds.
A pre-confirmation shows that a transaction is likely to be included, but it can still be reversed. Apps handling transfers that cannot be undone must wait for final settlement.
An upgraded version of the Parlia consensus system aims to lock in transaction order in under one second. The chain separates ordering from execution, so validators can agree on blocks without waiting for every transaction to finish.
A feature called Multi-Lane will reserve processing space for certain types of transactions. These include high-frequency trading, order books and payments.
Existing Solidity smart contracts will work on the new chain. However, some Ethereum features, including certain transaction types and RPC methods, will not be supported.
The design includes built-in account abstraction, which allows sponsored fees and batched transactions. It also offers an optional privacy pool that hides the sender, recipient and amount of a transfer.
Launch Planned for Early 2027
The plan follows growth in tokenized financial products on BNB Chain. An October 23 report found the network processed about $25.6 billion in tokenized stock transactions in the third quarter.
Network revenue rose 54% to $54.2 million during the quarter. The chain recorded 1.51 billion transactions and about 1.8 million tokenized equity holders.
The August 25 Pasteur hard fork also changed how BSC builds blocks. Controlled tests showed throughput rising from 1,237 to 2,324 transactions per second, though live results may differ.
New L1 currently runs on an internal development network with multiple validators. A public testnet is planned for the end of 2026, with a mainnet launch targeted for early 2027.
The bridge is not finished, and the privacy system still needs security audits. The documents warn that the current privacy pool should not be used with real funds.
BNB traded at around $740 at press time, up more than 2% over the past seven days.
The post BNB Chain Plans New Layer 1 Blockchain With No New Token appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR
A Hyperliquid trader says their wallet was flagged as high risk after a friend repaid a loan using funds from HTX.
The trader says they never used HTX and did not know about the exchange’s sanctions problems.
Another user says three of their wallets were restricted in June and they could not claim Kinetiq Season 2 rewards.
The UK sanctioned Huobi Global S.A. on May 26, and officials later said HTX is covered under ownership rules.
Hyperliquid has not publicly explained which transaction or screening rules caused the latest flag.
A Hyperliquid trader says their wallet was flagged as high risk after receiving a loan repayment that came from crypto exchange HTX. The case has raised questions about how sanctions screening affects people who never used a sanctioned platform.
In an October 25 post on X, the trader known as x256.hl said they lent a friend several thousand dollars months ago. The friend later repaid the money from HTX, formerly known as Huobi.
Ok, so now I know what happened.
A few months ago, I lent a friend a few grand. He paid me back from Huobi (HTX), which I didn’t even know at the time. I’ve never used Huobi myself, and he had no idea the exchange had any sanctions issues either.
Now my Hyperliquid wallet is… https://t.co/xKXryCceTt
— x256.hl (@x256xx) October 25, 2026
The trader said they had never used HTX and did not know about its sanctions problems. Their friend reportedly did not know either.
The user also asked whether small transfers from HTX to other Hyperliquid wallets could get those addresses flagged. No automatic ban mechanism of this kind has been confirmed.
Other Hyperliquid Traders Report Similar Restrictions
Another Hyperliquid user, @0xasrequired, replied that they faced similar problems after interacting with HTX. They pointed to an earlier X article describing how three of their wallets were blocked from Hyperliquid’s official frontend in June.
https://t.co/pHvyfJuJID
— as required. (@0xasrequired) June 10, 2026
Two wallets were flagged on June 2 and a third on June 5. The trader said the wallets held 99.5% of their net worth.
Their Hyperliquid history reportedly included more than $210 million in trading volume. They said they also paid over $60,000 in trading fees and $50,000 in builder fees.
The trader could still reach Hyperliquid through other interfaces. However, they said losing the official frontend could stop them from signing terms needed for future airdrop claims.
In the latest exchange, @0xasrequired said they could not claim Kinetiq Season 2 rewards despite ranking in the top 150. The original complainant said they did claim their Kinetiq rewards, even though the HTX-linked transfer happened before the final snapshot.
UK Sanctions on HTX Led to Wider Screening
The restrictions trace back to May 26, when the United Kingdom sanctioned Huobi Global S.A. British authorities accused the company of providing financial services tied to Russia-linked entities, including A7 and Garantex.
HTX argued the sanctions did not apply to its exchange because Huobi Global S.A. was a separate legal entity. UK officials later said they considered HTX covered under ownership rules.
Other platforms soon acted. In June, FixedFloat held Huobi-linked funds for extra checks, while Kraken and OKX warned users about HTX transfers. In August, Binance announced transaction limits involving HTX and 10 other platforms.
Blockchain investigator ZachXBT criticized how ordinary users with HTX-linked wallets were being treated.
In June, @0xasrequired said talks with Blockaid, Chainalysis and TRM showed these firms supply data and risk scores, while each platform decides which wallets to restrict. The trader claimed Hyperliquid named Chainalysis as its screening provider, though this has not been independently confirmed.
The trader said their wallets passed checks from GoPlus Security and Blockaid but were still restricted on Hyperliquid. They also described separate restrictions on GRVT and OpenSea.
In another case, Hyperliquid user Maxime said their wallet was wrongly flagged after receiving a $0.02 transfer tied to a suspicious address. Their frontend access was later restored.
In the June case, @0xasrequired said they opened a Discord support ticket and got a first reply from Hyperliquid co-founder iliensinc, but no final resolution. As of the latest complaint, Hyperliquid has not publicly explained which transaction or screening rules triggered the new flag.
The post Hyperliquid Traders Report Wallet Flags After HTX Transfers appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR
Blockchain investigators linked about 9,408 SOL, worth around $954,000, to 49 suspected victim wallets.
BloomTrading said it will fully reimburse nine affected wallets through new addresses chosen by their owners.
The largest single loss was 1,636 SOL, valued at about $166,000 at the time.
The company is investigating whether a third-party service provider was compromised.
BloomTrading has not shared a payment schedule or explained the gap between nine and 49 affected wallets.
BloomTrading, a cryptocurrency trading bot used by Solana traders, has promised to repay users after nearly $1 million in SOL was drained from wallets linked to its platform.
In an October 26 statement, the company said it would fully compensate nine affected wallets. It plans to send replacement funds to new addresses picked by the wallet owners.
The announcement came after traders reported unauthorized withdrawals from wallets connected to the automated trading service.
There won't be any need for a relief fund. Bloom will fully reimburse all funds lost by the 9 affected wallets, directly to new, secure wallets designated by their respective owners.
We're still actively investigating the root cause, including whether a third-party provider may…
— Bloom (@BloomTrading) October 26, 2026
Investigators Track Nearly $1 Million in Missing Solana
Blockchain monitoring account Onchain Lens identified about 9,408 SOL sent from 49 suspected victims. The funds were worth roughly $954,000.
The largest single loss was 1,636 SOL, valued at about $166,000 at the time. The estimate only covers transfers to one suspected receiving address, so total losses could be higher.
One trader, Domy, said three wallets had been drained of about 800 SOL. Domy shared the affected addresses and asked for help contacting crypto exchanges to trace the funds.
I found out who drained me for 80k
It was @BloomTrading
Someone please HELP me get in contact with all exchanges https://t.co/0AJ4xoJRlw pic.twitter.com/FedfRvGN9m
— Domy (@domyxbt) October 26, 2026
In a separate post, Domy reported another unexpected transfer worth about $64,000. The trader also shared a Solscan transaction record.
Another trader, Pikalosi, described losses hitting members of the Solana trading community. Pikalosi asked others not to blame victims for their trading strategies.
Several complaints involved wallets whose private keys had been imported into the trading bot. Investigators have not confirmed whether those keys were exposed.
A private key lets its holder approve transactions. If someone else obtains it, disconnecting the wallet from an app will not stop them from moving the remaining funds.
Some users said their USDC balances stayed untouched while their SOL disappeared. This pattern has not been confirmed across all affected wallets.
BloomTrading Promises to Cover Losses
BloomTrading turned down suggestions that users set up a community relief fund. The company said it would cover the losses itself.
“We’re still actively investigating the root cause,” BloomTrading said. The company noted its review would examine whether a third-party service provider was compromised.
The company has not shared a payment schedule, the total amount it expects to refund, or how it will verify claims. Its count of nine affected wallets also differs from the 49 suspected victims found by blockchain monitoring.
Reports say some trading services were paused during the investigation. Which features were affected, and whether they have been restored, has not been independently confirmed.
The incident follows an Avici wallet exploit in September. In that case, unauthorized transactions reportedly caused more than $1 million in losses among Solana users.
Users whose keys may have been exposed are advised to move remaining assets to wallets with entirely new keys. Revoking app permissions alone cannot fix a compromised private key.
BloomTrading has not yet identified a confirmed vulnerability or blamed an outside attacker. The company said its priorities are paying affected users, finding the cause, and preventing another incident.
The post BloomTrading Pledges Refunds After $954K Solana Wallet Drain appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR
Foundation says attackers sent fake emails from its official domains after compromising Cloudflare API keys.
The company revoked the keys and took down the malicious domain linked in the emails.
CEO Zach Herbert said attackers likely accessed the customer support inbox through a flaw in a self-hosted app.
Foundation says Passport hardware and the funds stored on it remain safe.
More details are expected on October 27, with a formal incident report to follow.
Bitcoin hardware wallet maker Foundation has warned customers about fake emails sent from its official domains. The company said attackers gained access after compromising one or more of its Cloudflare API keys.
Foundation shared the warning in a security announcement on October 26. It said Passport devices and the funds stored on them remain secure.
ANNOUNCEMENT: SPAM EMAILS HAVE BEEN SENT THAT APPEAR TO HAVE COME FROM OFFICIAL FOUNDATION DOMAINS.
We have traced this back to one or more compromised API keys on Cloudflare, and have already revoked all API keys.
The malicious domain in the spam email has been taken down.…
— FOUNDATION (@FoundationHQ) October 26, 2026
Fake Emails Sent From Official Domains
Customers first spotted the problem when they received suspicious messages. The emails appeared to come from Foundation’s real email systems.
Most phishing scams use lookalike addresses. In this case, the attackers reportedly used access to systems tied to the company’s actual domains, which made the messages look genuine.
Foundation said it revoked its Cloudflare API keys and took down the malicious domain listed in the emails. “Funds stored on Passport are safe and Passport hardware is not compromised,” the company said.
The company has not said how many emails were sent or how many customers received them. It also has not said whether anyone followed the instructions in the messages.
CEO Confirms Possible Support Inbox Breach
Co-founder and CEO Zach Herbert said the attackers got into parts of the company’s backend systems. They used a vulnerability in a self-hosted application.
“Attackers were likely able to compromise our customer support inbox,” Herbert said. He added that the team shut down the fake email activity within 10 minutes of user reports and removed the attackers’ access.
The Foundation team is actively working on this. Tag me with any questions and I’ll work to answer as fast as possible. We will share a formal report when we have all details.
Passport devices are safe and secure.
What we know so far: some of our backend infrastructure was… https://t.co/W5paP0HjRq
— Zach Herbert (@zherbert) October 26, 2026
Some of the fake messages included customer phone numbers or mailing addresses. Foundation believes this data may have come from its support inbox, older leaked crypto customer databases, or recent orders made through its Shopify store.
The company has not confirmed which source is behind the personal details. It has also not confirmed a full breach of its customer database.
“I’m very sorry,” Herbert wrote. He promised more details and a formal report once the review is complete.
Passport is built to keep Bitcoin private keys away from devices connected to the internet. A breach of a company’s email systems does not, on its own, mean the hardware or stored keys were affected.
However, users can still lose funds if they share their recovery phrases on fake websites or apps. Foundation has not confirmed that any recovery phrases were stolen in this incident.
Other wallet makers have faced similar problems. In September, Trezor and BitBox warned about phishing emails tied to a Brevo flaw that affected 138 customer accounts. On October 24, Keystone said customer names, addresses, and purchase details were exposed through unauthorized website access.
Those incidents involved different systems and have no known link to the Foundation attack.
Customers who get suspicious messages should not click links, enter recovery phrases, or connect wallets to unknown apps. Anyone who has shared a recovery phrase should treat that wallet as compromised and move funds to a new wallet.
Foundation said it will keep answering customer questions during the investigation. The company plans to share more details on October 27, with a full incident report to follow.
The post Foundation Warns Passport Bitcoin Wallet Users After Cloudflare API Key Breach appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR
Fhenix launched its CoFHE encryption coprocessor on the Ethereum and Arbitrum mainnets on Oct. 21, 2026.
The tool lets smart contracts process encrypted data without exposing balances, positions or trading strategies.
A new dual-mode token design lets holders switch between public and private balances in one transaction.
Fluton and Alpha Engine launched as the first design partners, and Consensys Diligence audited the system.
Three more apps are set to launch in Q4 2026, and two institutional partnerships are expected soon.
Fhenix has launched its confidential computing technology on the Ethereum and Arbitrum mainnets. The tool lets smart contracts process encrypted data without exposing the information underneath.
The company announced the launch on Oct. 21, 2026. It also released CoFHE, its fully homomorphic encryption (FHE) coprocessor, into production.
The system is built to keep balances, positions and trading strategies private while decentralized apps carry out their operations.
Public blockchains make transactions and contract activity visible to anyone. That has made them harder to use for financial services that rely on private information.
Fhenix is presenting the technology as a base layer for confidential decentralized finance and tokenization. The company points to a potential $1.5 trillion tokenization market that it says is held back by privacy limits.
How CoFHE Works
CoFHE handles heavy encrypted computations offchain. It then sends the results back to smart contracts on Ethereum and Arbitrum.
Fhenix says the system’s throughput adjusts to demand. This means apps are not limited to a fixed processing rate.
Developers can add privacy features using a Solidity import and encrypted data types. These are designed to work much like normal variables, so builders can keep their usual workflows.
The launch also includes a dual-mode token design. Holders can switch balances between public and confidential modes in a single transaction, without wrapping or bridging the asset.
Because the token stays on its original blockchain, Fhenix says it remains compatible with existing wallets, exchanges and DeFi protocols.
“When I started Fhenix three years ago, I couldn’t have imagined how far it would take us,” said founder Guy Zyskind. “CoFHE is now live on Ethereum and Arbitrum mainnet, with competitive performance and a UX that’s simple for any builder who wants privacy in their dApp.”
Zyskind also said Fhenix is working with Tandem on a confidential stablecoin. The company did not share further details or a release timeline.
Design Partners and Security Review
Two design partners launched alongside the network. Fluton is building a confidentiality engine that uses encrypted intents for activity across blockchains, apps and assets.
Alpha Engine is building a confidential network for onchain finance. Strategists can submit encrypted strategies and compete for liquidity without revealing their methods.
Fhenix said both projects passed technical and security reviews before going live. Consensys Diligence also audited the system ahead of the launch.
Steven Goldfeder, co-founder and CEO of Offchain, said privacy has been a major hurdle for institutions. “Confidentiality is one of the biggest barriers between institutions and public blockchains,” he said.
He added that the Arbitrum launch gives developers a way to have both confidentiality and composability within the ecosystem.
Three more decentralized apps are scheduled to launch on CoFHE during the fourth quarter of 2026. Fhenix also expects to announce two institutional partnerships in the coming weeks.
The team is taking part in the Colosseum hackathon to test demand for confidential apps on Solana.
The post Fhenix CoFHE Goes Live on Ethereum and Arbitrum for Private DeFi appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR
CoinDCX lost about 15.99 million USDT after funds were taken from an old wallet it stopped using in 2025.
The exchange says it will cover the full loss and that customer funds are safe.
A failed automatic “sweeping” service let deposits build up in the old wallet.
Tether blacklisted linked wallets, and about $2.2 million has been frozen.
CoinDCX plans to tighten controls on old systems and remind users to update deposit addresses.
Indian crypto exchange CoinDCX has reported a loss of about 15.99 million USDT after funds were moved out of an old wallet it no longer used. The company said it has absorbed the loss and customers will not bear the cost.
The exchange said its active wallets and trading systems were not affected. Customer funds remain in separate cold wallets, and trading, deposits and withdrawals continued without a pause.
How the CoinDCX Wallet Hack Happened
CoinDCX said it first noticed unusual activity in its systems on October 21. The company said its controls stopped any impact on its active wallets and trading systems.
Update on the on-chain Wallet Activity – 21st October 2026
Our full update on the recent on-chain activity, what happened, and what it means for you.
User funds remain safe, and trading and withdrawals continue as usual.
Read the full update: https://t.co/fSr10QlkJh
— CoinDCX (@CoinDCX) October 25, 2026
The next day, the exchange saw irregular fund movements in blockchain data and in reports from users. A deeper review found that the activity hit an old wallet setup that had unknown weaknesses.
That wallet setup was compromised during a security incident on July 19, 2025. CoinDCX stopped using the infrastructure after that breach.
Even so, some users kept sending deposits to the old addresses instead of the new ones shown in the app. CoinDCX said it continued to process these deposits so users would not lose their money.
The exchange runs two separate processes for these deposits. First, it credits the user’s account as soon as funds arrive. Then a separate service moves, or “sweeps,” the funds into its main secure wallet.
CoinDCX said this sweeping service failed for a period of time. As a result, deposits built up in the old address and were exposed when the activity took place.
The company has not shared full details on how the funds were withdrawn from the wallet. It has also not named who was behind the activity.
Tether Freezes Part of the Lost Funds
Reports on October 24 and 25 said Tether had blacklisted wallets linked to the outflow. Tether, which issues USDT, has the ability to block wallets that hold its token.
Blockchain analytics firm AMLBot said about $2.2 million of the funds was frozen. That amount equals roughly 13.8% of the reported loss.
A freeze stops the funds from moving, but it does not mean they have been returned. CoinDCX would need to confirm any recovery first, and the remaining funds still need to be traced.
CoinDCX said customer crypto balances are unaffected and fully accounted for. The company said it had run for 72 hours with no downtime, no withdrawal limits and no trading disruption.
The exchange admitted it “could have been more proactive” in sharing the news. It said it waited until it had the complete picture before posting an update.
CoinDCX said it will strengthen monitoring and controls around its old systems. It also plans to remind users regularly that old deposit addresses are only kept for a limited time.
In its update published on October 25, the company advised users to check the latest deposit address in the app or website before every deposit. It warned that sending funds to old addresses is highly risky and that exchanges do not usually take responsibility for them.
The post CoinDCX Hit by $15.99M Crypto Hack, Tether Steps In to Freeze Funds appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR
The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority opened consultation CP26/38 on October 23, 2026, proposing updates to its Financial Crime Guide.
Draft guidance lists enhanced due diligence on transfers involving unhosted, or personal, crypto wallets as good practice.
The FCA calls it poor practice when firms use third-party risk scores they cannot explain or evidence.
Rigid rules on how many transaction “hops” a firm traces are criticized when they ignore risk.
The guidance is nonbinding, and feedback is due by December 24, 2026.
Britain’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has proposed new guidance on how firms should check crypto transfers involving personal wallets. The proposals are part of a wider update to its Financial Crime Guide.
The regulator opened consultation CP26/38 on October 23, 2026. It is asking for feedback on the changes until December 24, 2026.
The draft guidance lists extra checks on transfers from unhosted wallets as good practice. It also criticizes firms that rely on risk scores they cannot explain.
What the FCA Proposes for Unhosted Wallets
An unhosted wallet is a personal crypto wallet that is not managed by an exchange or other firm. The owner holds the keys directly.
Draft section FCG 3.2.8 lists enhanced due diligence on transactions involving these wallets as an example of good practice. Enhanced due diligence means more intensive checks than standard reviews.
In practice, this concerns how a UK firm checks crypto that a customer sends in from a personal wallet. The focus is on the receiving firm’s process.
The guidance is nonbinding. The FCA says the Guide contains no rules and does not create new requirements.
The regulator still expects firms to read and consider the Guide when building their controls. Not following it would not, on its own, count as a breach of FCA rules.
Risk Scores and Tracing Rules
The proposals also cover how firms reach decisions about transfers. Draft section FCG 3.2.5 names a specific poor practice.
That practice is using third-party technology without being able to explain or provide evidence for how it reaches its findings or scores. The FCA says firms remain responsible for compliance even when they use outside suppliers.
The draft also criticizes rigid rules on how many transaction “hops,” or transfer steps, a firm examines. The problem the FCA points to is a tracing rule that ignores risk, not the use of a number limit itself.
These proposals sit on top of existing duties. Under the UK Travel Rule, crypto businesses have had to collect, verify and share transfer information since September 1, 2023.
The consultation covers more than crypto. It also proposes changes on fraud, sanctions, proliferation financing, data security, money laundering and terrorist financing.
The crypto changes are meant to reflect a new UK regime starting in October 2027. The FCA says it wants the Guide to keep pace with risks linked to AI, crypto assets and changing sanctions.
The regulator does not expect the updates to greatly raise compliance work or consumer costs. It describes the changes as clarifying existing expectations and established practice.
The consultation applies to all firms the FCA supervises for financial crime. This includes crypto asset businesses registered under the Money Laundering Regulations.
Firms and other interested parties can respond through an online form or by email until December 24, 2026. The FCA will then publish feedback and the final Guide text in a Policy Statement, though it has not given a date.
The post FCA Proposes Personal Wallet Checks in Nonbinding Crypto Guidance appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:
Blockchain sanctions plan drew a direct rebuke from the Bank of Israel, which said cryptocurrencies cannot bypass sanctions and urged leaders to preserve trade ties.
Netanyahu said he had asked advisers to prepare a proposal before the October 27 election, but gave no details about currencies, networks, or an implementation timetable.
Eisenkot and more than 100 economists criticized the proposal, warning that possible sanctions could deepen isolation and hurt investment, employment, and Israel’s economic standing.
Critics said crypto cannot replace bank credit or global capital markets, while traceable blockchain transactions may still be identified or blocked by authorities.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel should prepare a blockchain sanctions plan if international measures restrict its banking system. In a Friday interview, he described cryptocurrency and blockchain as possible tools for an alternative economy if sanctions hit. He confirmed that he had asked advisers to develop a plan, but gave no design or timetable for implementation.
The remarks came two days before Israel’s October 27 election, amid warnings foreign measures could affect Israel’s wider economy. The Bank of Israel formally rejected crypto as a route around international sanctions. It urged leaders to preserve trade ties and prevent further restrictions.
Netanyahu Blockchain Sanctions Plan Draws Institutional Pushback
Netanyahu spoke on Channel 10 on Friday. He said Israel should prepare for possible sanctions on banks and other economic restrictions. Asked whether he meant crypto, he agreed, then described blockchain as another option. He said advisers were already preparing a plan.
The blockchain sanctions plan remains undefined. Netanyahu did not identify the currencies, networks, government agencies, or legal changes under consideration. The Block reported that he gave no timetable or implementation details. It describes contingency planning, not an operating national payment system.
Britain and 11 other Western countries announced measures targeting settlement goods. The measures focus on settlements, though economists warned economic effects could reach Israel proper. Netanyahu cited the possibility of banking restrictions and said alternative payment channels could help the country respond.
The election sharpened political tensions. Netanyahu’s remarks came two days before voters choose a new Knesset on October 27. Opposition leaders have argued that his government’s policies contributed to Israel’s international isolation. The blockchain sanctions plan became another point of disagreement during the campaign.
Crypto Proposals Face Practical Limits Beyond Digital Transfers
The Bank of Israel said cryptocurrencies cannot serve as a route for bypassing sanctions. It urged political leaders to maintain economic ties with major trading partners and focus on preventing restrictions. Its statement rejected the idea that digital assets could protect the national economy from financial pressure.
The blockchain sanctions plan also drew criticism from opposition figure Gadi Eisenkot. On X, Eisenkot called it the “BibiCoin vision” and said it threatened national security.
He also warned it could worsen isolation and deter investment. He asked how Israeli technology firms would receive overseas payments if foreign banks shunned crypto. At Saturday’s anti-government rally in Tel Aviv, attendees also criticized the proposal, extending backlash beyond political leaders.
Over 100 economists and former Bank of Israel officials signed a letter opposing the plan on Sunday, Reuters reported. They warned sanctions could reduce foreign investment, increase unemployment, and weaken Israel’s economic standing. The warning focused on the consequences of financial isolation, beyond payment rails.
Digital assets can move value outside some conventional banking channels, but that does not make sanctions disappear. Blockchain transactions can be traced, and authorities or service providers may identify or block wallets linked to sanctioned entities. A blockchain sanctions plan may move value, but it cannot hide every transaction record.
The blockchain sanctions plan faces practical barriers a transfer alone cannot solve. Crypto cannot replace access to trade finance, bank credit, global capital markets, or foreign companies willing to transact. A business may still need compliant banks, insurers, suppliers, and customers for cross-border deals.
Columnist Nadav Eyal said crypto cannot replace bank credit, capital markets, or firms willing to trade internationally. CryptoJungle founder Ben Samocha also said digital assets were not a suitable sanctions workaround. He pointed to blockchain investigations that can trace funds and restrict their fiat access.
Netanyahu said Saturday he would consider the Bank of Israel’s criticism but would do what he thought best. He has not named the advisers, blockchain, currencies, or implementation schedule for the plan.
The post Bank of Israel Rejects Netanyahu Blockchain Sanctions Plan Bid appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:
RLUSD stablecoin received reported praise during an XRPL Commons hackathon pitch session, but the account came from community member Lost Art rather than an official Mastercard release.
Mastercard is listed as an event partner, and the 36-hour New York hackathon on October 24–25 features more than $40,000 in prizes across four developer tracks.
Ripple and Mastercard announced plans in 2025 to explore RLUSD settlement for Gemini card transactions, subject to approvals; Mastercard later included RLUSD in broader settlement plans.
The reported compliment does not establish a product launch or XRP demand catalyst; published announcements provide no new settlement volumes or market-impact data tied to the event.
Mastercard has reportedly praised Ripple’s RLUSD stablecoin during the XRP Ledger Hackathon in New York, according to an attendee’s post. The comment came during a presentation about partner pitch requirements, not in a company statement. The event runs October 24–25 and lists Mastercard among its ecosystem partners.
Mastercard has announced plans to include RLUSD among regulated settlement options and XRPL among supported blockchain networks. That report adds visibility to Ripple’s token; it does not confirm a new product, rollout, or change to XRP demand. Developers are exploring financial applications on XRPL, but the post alone says little about commercial adoption.
RLUSD Stablecoin Praise Reported at New York Hackathon
Lost Art, an XRPL community member on X, said Mastercard representatives complimented the RLUSD stablecoin while explaining partner pitch requirements. The account shared its report on October 24. It provided no recording, named speaker, or direct company statement. The remark theref ore remains an attendee’s account, not a formal Mastercard endorsement.
Mastercard just complimented Ripple's $RLUSD live during the XRPL Commons Hackathon partner pitch requirements.
— Lost Art (@OCLostArt) October 24, 2026
XRPL Commons describes the New York gathering as a 36-hour build sprint. Developers are building payment applications, lending products, and protocol upgrades. It runs October 24–25, just before Ripple Swell, and the organizers list Mastercard as a partner.
Other listed partners include Ripple, the XRP Ledger Foundation, Ledger, AWS, and QuickNode. More than $40,000 in prizes supports four tracks: agentic finance, lending and borrowing, protocol innovation, and an open category. The agenda creates space to test stablecoin uses, without promising a payment launch.
Mastercard’s work with Ripple predates the event. In November 2025, Ripple announced that Mastercard, WebBank, and Gemini would explore RLUSD stablecoin settlement for fiat card transactions. WebBank issues the Gemini Credit Card. The partners planned RLUSD settlement on XRPL between the bank and Mastercard. Ripple said onboarding and integration planning remained subject to regulatory approvals.
Mastercard Settlement Plans Leave XRP Demand Unclear
In June 2026, Mastercard announced plans to add regulated stablecoin settlement options across its network. The company named the RLUSD stablecoin among supported choices, alongside USDC, SoFiUSD, and Paxos-issued tokens. It also named XRPL as one of the supported networks. Mastercard described the expansion as new options for issuers and acquirers, with a wider rollout subject to regulation.
Mastercard said on-chain settlement would retain existing security, fraud, and dispute safeguards. Those controls would operate beside traditional processes, giving participating issuers and acquirers more timing choices. Naming RLUSD among planned options does not mean every bank, card program, or market can use it today. The company did not say whether RLUSD settlement is live today across partners.
Those announcements provide commercial context for the event, but do not confirm the hackathon remark. Lost Art’s post did not describe a contract, launch date, or settlement volume. Mastercard’s partner listing also does not show that event projects will enter its network.
The agentic finance track focuses on software that can make payments and transact on-chain. XRPL Commons says applications may settle in XRP or the RLUSD stablecoin. Teams can demonstrate ideas at a hackathon, but deployment still requires a product decision and operational controls.
The post Mastercard Reportedly Praises RLUSD Stablecoin at XRPL Event appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:
US computer imports advanced 366% since 2019, while domestic production increased 46%, according to a16z.
Electrical equipment imports rose 69% while US production fell 7%, exposing a gap in the AI supply chain.
Semiconductor imports rose 131% against 76% production growth, as added capacity drove U.S. output gains.
GPU rental rates rose across Ornn Data’s tracked models, including older A100 chips as token demand grew.
US imports have outpaced domestic production across four AI hardware categories since 2019, according to a16z. Computer imports rose 366%, compared with a 46% increase in US production.
Communications equipment imports increased 175%, while domestic output grew 87%. Semiconductor imports climbed 131%, against production growth of 76%. Grid and electrical equipment showed the sharpest divergence: imports rose 69%, while US production fell 7%.
Those figures describe an AI infrastructure expansion that relies increasingly on overseas supply. They also expose uneven domestic responses across the equipment categories supporting that expansion.
The comparison measures changes in dollar values, rather than providing a direct count of machines or components. It therefore shows how import and production values have diverged, without establishing their respective shares of total supply.
Why AI Hardware Imports Outpace US Production
Manufacturers can increase output by adding capacity or using existing facilities more intensively. According to a16z, those two responses have developed differently across the four categories.
Computer manufacturers expanded capacity and increased utilization, meaning they used more of their available production capability. Together, those changes supported higher output.
Communications equipment makers added substantial capacity, but utilization declined. That combination suggests available manufacturing capability grew faster than its use.
Semiconductor manufacturers also expanded capacity, while utilization remained unchanged. Their production increase therefore came from additional capacity, rather than more intensive use of existing facilities.
Electrical equipment followed a different path. Capacity declined despite higher utilization, leaving domestic production below its 2019 level.
That weakness matters because the AI buildout requires electrical infrastructure alongside computing hardware. Switchgear and related equipment support the grid expansion needed to power GPUs.
Imports help meet demand when domestic output cannot keep pace. However, the supplied figures do not establish why manufacturers avoided greater expansion.
A16z suggests construction costs, investment risks, or competition from overseas suppliers could explain that hesitation. These remain possible explanations, rather than confirmed causes.
Since 2019, imports of AI hardware have grown faster than US production in every category
US production vs. imports:
– Computers: +46% vs. +366%
– Comms equipment: +87% vs. +175%
– Semis: +76% vs. +131%
– Grid & electrical equipment: -7% vs. +69%
Charts of the Week:… https://t.co/bu8YxgbAA9 pic.twitter.com/wJN2meTEdu
— a16z (@a16z) October 25, 2026
AI Hardware Demand Raises GPU and Labor Pressures
Meanwhile, the supplied rental data points to continued demand for computing resources.
According to Ornn Data, every tracked GPU model costs more to rent than at the beginning of the year. That includes older A100 chips.
Rental prices stood between 9% and 143% above a benchmark assuming straight-line depreciation over six years. However, a16z notes that older A100s and H100s previously spent more time below that benchmark.
OpenRouter’s figures also show rising token consumption across open and proprietary models. Tokens represent the units of text these AI systems process.
A16z cautions that these datasets provide incomplete views of GPU pricing and token spending.
Labor adds another constraint. Citing ADP, a16z reports that weekly hours per worker increased substantially across sectors supporting the AI buildout.
Job-switchers also commanded a five-percentage-point wage-growth premium over workers staying with their employers.
Together, the figures show growing hardware demand, uneven factory expansion, and heavier workloads. Imports are helping bridge that gap, while electrical equipment remains the clearest domestic production weakness.
The post AI Hardware Imports Surge 366% as US Computer Production Rises 46% appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:
In her CLARITY Act post, Cynthia Lummis said Democrats requested a $50 million annual cap, down from $75 million, plus a $200 million lifetime limit.
Lummis said the caps entered the CLARITY Act, then accused Democrats of voting against rules she said were written to protect retail investors.
The September 15 Senate vote was a 49-50 cloture vote on advancing H.R. 3633, not a separate vote on either Regulation Crypto cap.
The official roll call recorded 49 yeas, 50 nays and one senator not voting; four Republicans and two independents were among the no votes.

Senator Cynthia Lummis said Democrats opposed advancing the CLARITY Act after requested caps were added. Her October 25 X post said Democrats sought a lower annual Regulation Crypto cap. They sought $50 million, down from $75 million. She said Democrats also requested a $200 million lifetime cap.
Lummis said both changes entered the bill, then accused Democrats of rejecting rules they wrote to protect retail investors. The Senate’s September 15 procedural vote on H.R. 3633 failed 49-50. Senators voted on advancing the full measure, not either cap by itself. Her post did not announce any new bill revision that day.
CLARITY Act Sets Limits for Regulation Crypto Fundraising
Under the CLARITY Act, Regulation Crypto provides a fundraising route for certain ancillary asset originators. Its caps limit proceeds raised through that framework, rather than all money a crypto business can raise. The annual ceiling applies to yearly fundraising, while the lifetime cap limits the total raised under the provision.
Democrats asked to cut the annual Regulation Crypto fundraising cap from $75 million to $50 million and add a $200 million lifetime limit. We agreed to both and included them in the Clarity Act.
Democrats voted against the rules they wrote to protect retail investors.
— Senator Cynthia Lummis (@SenLummis) October 25, 2026
An itemized CLARITY Act document from Lummis’s office lists the $50 million annual cap and the $200 million lifetime ceiling. It places both changes among provisions the senator’s office attributes to Democratic requests. The document says ancillary asset originators may raise those amounts in reliance on Regulation Crypto. It does not present the changes as separate bills or stand-alone rules.
Lummis’s September 10 CLARITY Act release said the updated draft reflected more than 114 provisions requested by Democratic colleagues. That release described the broader negotiations but did not list every requested change. A separate office document names the fundraising limits among its list of Democratic-requested revisions. The two records support Lummis’s account that the caps were included in the negotiated text.
Her October 25 post connected the changes with a claim about retail investor protections. It did not specify whether the fundraising caps were the rules she meant in that criticism. The post also did not identify individual lawmakers or explain how they voted on particular provisions. Its account centers on what negotiators requested and what the bill included.
Her office’s document also lists financial statements among the disclosure requirements. It says originators must provide audited statements once gross proceeds exceed $25 million and reviewed statements below that threshold. The reporting rules sit beside the fundraising caps in the office’s list of changes.
The office list includes disclosures before resales and preserves state consumer protection laws. It also preserves the SEC’s authority over fraud and market manipulation. Those provisions frame Lummis’s broader reference to retail protections, separately from the fundraising caps.
CLARITY Act Vote Addressed the Bill, Not Individual Caps
The Senate roll call shows the CLARITY Act vote concerned cloture on a motion to proceed to H.R. 3633. It was not a vote on either cap separately. The roll call recorded 49 yeas, all Republicans, and 50 nays, including four Republicans and two independents. Democrat Chris Coons did not vote; the motion failed the three-fifths threshold.
The Senate required 60 votes to advance the motion. The 49-50 tally left it short and stopped consideration at that step. It did not strike the caps from the draft, nor did senators cast a separate vote on them.
Lummis voted to advance the bill. The roll call records procedural opposition to the full CLARITY Act, not the caps alone. Senators could oppose the motion for reasons involving other sections of the bill. The record does not identify each senator’s motive or show whether each supported the caps.
The House measure covers digital commodity regulation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The Senate’s procedural vote did not send the bill to final passage. The official Senate result remains a failed motion to proceed, with a 49-50 vote.
The post CLARITY Act Vote Stalls After Lummis Says Cap Changes Were Added appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:
Grayscale’s Zcash ETF drew $41.1 million last week, ending three straight weeks of withdrawals that removed $143.4 million from the fund.
ZEC rose 6.98% over seven days while Bitcoin and Ethereum prices declined; Bitcoin ETFs still ended the week with $301.2 million in net inflows.
ZEC rebounded from $1,118 and now faces $1,200 and $1,223 technical levels, while Whale Factor identifies $597 in a view based on a declining channel.
NU7 mainnet activation is listed for November 5 after an October 20 decision on the activation height, while the Federal Reserve meets October 27–28.
Grayscale’s Zcash ETF recorded $41.1 million in inflows last week, its largest weekly intake since mid-September. The Zcash price rose 6.98% over seven days while Bitcoin and Ethereum prices declined. The reversal followed three weeks of withdrawals totaling $143.4 million.
Friday brought $20.5 million in inflows, the week’s strongest single session. The return of fund demand stood out as the broader crypto market weakened. The shift marks a change in weekly flow direction, though one reporting period cannot show whether it will last.
$ZEC turns green amid the broader market downtrend, with Grayscale's Zcash ETF drawing $41.1 million last week, its biggest week of inflows since mid-September. pic.twitter.com/7nVAhkBV5w
— CoinGecko (@coingecko) October 25, 2026
Zcash ETF Inflows Reverse Three Weeks of Withdrawals
Trading began with $10.4 million in outflows on Monday. The Zcash ETF then recorded positive flows across the next four sessions, ending the week at $41.1 million. Friday’s $20.5 million intake represented half of the weekly amount. On a net basis, the latest week recovered about 29% of the $143.4 million removed over the prior three weeks. That leaves $102.3 million of withdrawals unrecovered.
Bitcoin ETFs lost more than $500 million across two sessions. They finished the week with $301.2 million in net inflows after earlier buying. Ethereum ETFs recorded $220.7 million in withdrawals during the week. Zcash ETF inflows show separate weekly activity.
The Zcash ETF inflow series shows daily fund activity, not intent. It cannot show whether buyers sought temporary exposure, portfolio diversification, or a view on Zcash’s privacy features. Zcash supports private transactions, setting ZEC apart from Bitcoin and Ethereum. A single week does not establish that privacy demand drove the move.
Source: SoSoValue
Zcash ETF history provides a recent comparison. A $98.2 million inflow week was followed by three weeks of withdrawals. During that period, ZEC pulled back from a peak near $1,690. The earlier weekly intake was roughly 2.4 times last week’s total.
Zcash ETF Recovery Faces Price Levels and Flow Questions
The ZEC price rebounded after falling to $1,118 last week. The $1,200 area now marks an immediate price test. Some bullish chart analysis requires a close above $1,223 before the short and long moving averages cross around October 28.
The crossover would be a chart signal, not confirmation of a sustained advance. ZEC’s 6.98% weekly gain contrasts with declines in Bitcoin and Ethereum, but one week does not establish a durable trend. The $1,118 low marks ZEC’s most recent recovery point.
$ZEC next thing im watching is the 1D green cross, current eta is in ~5 days and if price can close above the 1223 level
if ZEC god candles above 1414 it will force the cross but atm its a bulls wet dream. imo the battle for the 1200ish levels will be fought over the next week https://t.co/cytWw82vOp pic.twitter.com/FdWIcayMPm
— that1618guy (@that1618guy) October 23, 2026
Whale Factor sees ZEC price action inside a declining channel and identifies $597 as a major historical level. The $597 reference sits well below the recent price range. It belongs to a different technical time frame from the $1,200 and $1,223 tests. The bullish setup depends on closing above $1,223; a view based on the declining channel retains downside risk. Neither level confirms what Zcash ETF buyers will do next.
Zcash’s NU7 upgrade adds another scheduled catalyst. October 20 was the planned date for setting the mainnet activation height. The published timeline lists November 5 for mainnet activation. Zcash Community Forum The proposal reduces block spacing from 75 seconds to 25. It adds the Network Sustainability Mechanism, intended to support network security over time. It may affect infrastructure used by full nodes, indexers and block explorers.
The proposal describes reduced confirmation latency, but the weekly flow data do not connect ZEC buying to the upgrade. The proposal does not add a transaction format. Version 4 transactions become invalid after activation, while versions 5 and 6 remain valid.
The Federal Reserve’s scheduled October 27–28 meeting adds another market event this week. Meeting calendars and information The next ETF flow reports will show whether ZEC inflows continued through the following week.
The post Zcash ETF Inflows Reverse Three Weeks of Outflows as ZEC Rallies appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:
Galaxy Research studied 562 Bitcoin texts and found random letter patterns instead of any hidden messages
The bot used 31 transaction chains, with the longest reaching 86 hops through a Bitcoin change addresses.
The funding trail connects the strange messages to coins that uploaded the US Constitution and documents.
Mining fees consumed 24% of the wallet’s 3.33 million sats, while 76% still remained in its own addresses
Bitcoin’s strange text messages point to an automated publishing experiment, according to Galaxy Research’s analysis of 562 texts. The activity ran for three weeks and reached roughly 40 transactions daily.
Galaxy traced the funding to coins behind a 44,194-byte US Constitution upload on May 29. Its accounting showed 3.33 million satoshis funded the activity, with 24% spent on mining fees. The researchers dubbed the operator “Babel Scribe,” describing a tool under testing rather than someone sending hidden messages.
Bitcoin OP_RETURN Messages Show Random Patterns
Galaxy Research shared its findings on X after examining messages that resembled encrypted sentences.
Across the sample, each letter appeared between 3.6% and 4.2% of the time. English has a different distribution, ranging from 12.7% for “e” to 0.07% for “z.”
That distinction matters because simple substitution ciphers preserve letter frequency patterns, even when they replace individual letters. Galaxy measured an index of coincidence of 0.0385, consistent with random text.
The researchers also tested for repeating encryption keys across intervals up to 40 letters. The messages lacked the statistical spikes that appeared in their comparison using an encrypted Constitution.
Word lengths provided another clue. Lengths from two through ten letters appeared equally often, while English typically favors three or four letters.
Short messages filled 36 bytes, sometimes adding single-letter padding. Only ten words containing at least four letters repeated across the 562 texts.
Together, those patterns supported Galaxy’s assessment that software generated random letters and arranged them to resemble prose.
For three weeks someone has been writing sentences like this into Bitcoin, ~40 times a day:
"Ieqkenszm aalzrnbgtr nxnstd gubighxvfg byvzwrzk df qukz."
Looks like a cipher. It isn't. And the coins behind it belong to the wallet that inscribed the US Constitution in May. pic.twitter.com/IkEK9SxCkB
— Galaxy Research (@glxyresearch) October 25, 2026
Bitcoin OP_RETURN Funding Reveals Automated Testing
The transaction structure reinforced that interpretation. Each transaction contained one input, one fresh change address, and one OP_RETURN output.
OP_RETURN lets a Bitcoin transaction carry data, which explains how these messages appeared on the blockchain. Each subsequent transaction spent change from its predecessor, creating linked sequences the researchers could follow.
Galaxy identified 31 chains, with the longest stretching 86 transactions. Splitter outputs supplied them with either 20,000 or 5,000 satoshis.
Long messages arrived every six hours per chain, while shorter messages followed 90-minute intervals. Daily activity increased from 12 to 24, then roughly 40 transactions.
The funding trail led back to three small exchange withdrawals in May. Related uploads included 99,000 bytes of uppercase gibberish on June 5 and the Declaration of Independence on July 4.
Earlier tests included “Hello, world,” Lorem ipsum, multilingual words, and a JSON file explicitly describing an upload test. Galaxy also identified 34 opaque binary blobs.
For Bitcoin users, the practical issue is transaction activity and fees, rather than an identified payment scheme. The three documents alone cost 512,000 satoshis in mining fees.
Galaxy reported that 76% of the funds remained in the operator’s addresses, with nothing paid to anyone. Its findings point to automated data publishing, without establishing the operator’s identity or a broader purpose.
The post Who’s Filling Bitcoin With Gibberish? Galaxy Traces Bot to US Constitution Upload appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:
Global inflation could reach 4.7% in 2026 as the IMF projects economic growth will slow to 3.1% globally.
The IMF favors temporary, targeted transfers to protect vulnerable households and preserve fiscal buffers
Energy-importing economies outside the technology value chain face their most difficult economic outlook.
Debt-financed corporate tax cuts can support domestic activity but hurt other economies in the short term
The International Monetary Fund projects global inflation will reach 4.7% in 2026, alongside slower economic growth of 3.1%. Its research recommends temporary, targeted transfers to protect vulnerable households during cost-of-living crises. Governments often turn to broad subsidies and tax cuts, the IMF said on X.
However, its findings favor targeted income support that preserves fiscal space, meaning governments’ capacity to respond to future pressures. The outlook puts household protection and shrinking financial buffers at the center of the policy debate.
IMF Inflation Outlook Tests Economic Resilience
Global activity has held up despite disruptions driven by geopolitics, according to the IMF’s economic assessment. A technology upturn, existing buffers, and adaptations have helped economies absorb the damage so far.
The fund projects growth will recover to 3.4% in 2027, while headline inflation eases to 4.1%. Those forecasts point to improving conditions next year, although the IMF warns that adjustment capacity has limits.
Energy-importing economies outside the technology value chain face the toughest outlook. These countries confront energy-related pressures without the same benefits from the technology upturn supporting broader economic activity.
The IMF identifies several threats that could weaken growth further. They include escalating conflicts, renewed trade tensions, fiscal vulnerabilities, and a reassessment of expectations surrounding artificial intelligence.
For investors, those risks make the composition of economic resilience relevant alongside the headline growth forecast. The fund’s assessment suggests that technology strength does not translate into equally favorable conditions across all economies.
Stronger AI investment and productivity gains could improve the outlook. A sustained easing of geopolitical and trade tensions could also support growth, providing alternatives to the downside scenarios.
Cost-of-living crises hit lower-income households hardest. Governments often rely on broad subsidies and tax cuts, but new IMF research finds targeted and temporary transfers best protect the vulnerable while preserving fiscal space.https://t.co/vwXHRxkW4n pic.twitter.com/RfkgKfbfQy
— IMF (@IMFNews) October 25, 2026
IMF Inflation Research Favors Targeted Household Support
The policy challenge extends beyond lowering household bills today. Governments also need enough financial room to respond if disruptions persist or new shocks emerge.
Chapter 2 recommends preserving price signals while directing temporary income support toward the most vulnerable. This approach helps households manage higher costs while allowing prices to reflect underlying economic pressures.
Targeting determines who receives assistance, while temporary measures limit how long that support continues. Together, those features focus relief on vulnerable households while protecting the government’s capacity to manage future demands.
That makes the design of assistance central to both immediate household protection and longer-term fiscal resilience.
The IMF also calls for stronger fiscal frameworks and revenue measures that rebuild policy space. Its corporate tax findings show why financing choices matter beyond national borders.
Chapter 3 finds that debt-financed corporate tax cuts support domestic activity but can hurt other economies initially. Over time, cross-border knowledge transfers can produce positive effects abroad.
However, lower revenues can constrain domestic public investment, particularly in emerging market and developing economies. The IMF’s central message connects both findings: protect vulnerable households now while preserving resources for future economic pressures.
The post IMF Sees Inflation at 4.7% in 2026, Urges Targeted Household Relief appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:
A weekly close above $82K and the 1W 50MA would strengthen the bullish case for Bitcoin, says Ash Crypto.
The Fed is expected to hold rates at 3.75%-4%, but Warsh’s press conference could signal a December hike.
PCE inflation near 3.6% and Thursday’s US Q3 GDP print could swing sentiment for Bitcoin and risk assets.
$11B in Bitcoin options expire Friday, days before the midterms Bitcoin has historically corrected after.
The Federal Reserve announces its rate decision Wednesday, October 28, at 2 p.m. ET. Markets expect rates to hold at 3.75% to 4%. Traders will watch Warsh’s press conference for any hint of a December rate hike.
Bitcoin options worth $11 billion also expire Friday, adding pressure to a crowded calendar. Oil sits at $117 a barrel amid US-Iran tensions, which adds another layer of uncertainty.
Bitcoin Volatility Builds as the Fed, Inflation and GDP Collide
The week is packed. According to The Kobeissi Letter, new home sales arrive Tuesday. September PCE inflation and Q3 2026 GDP follow Thursday.
PCE inflation is projected near 3.6%. Microsoft and Alphabet report earnings Wednesday. Amazon and Intel report Thursday. Roughly 20% of S&P 500 companies also publish results this week, so earnings and macro data will land together.
Key Events This Week:
1. September New Home Sales data – Tuesday
2. October Fed Meeting and Rate Decision – Wednesday
3. Microsoft, $MSFT, and Alphabet, $GOOGL, Report Earnings – Wednesday
4. September PCE Inflation data – Thursday
5. US Q3 2026 GDP Data – Thursday
6.…
— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) October 25, 2026
A hold is the expected outcome, so the real signal sits elsewhere. Warsh’s press conference could show whether policymakers lean toward a December hike. Any such hint would matter for risk assets.
Oil adds pressure. At $117 a barrel, energy costs keep inflation risk in focus while US-Iran tensions persist.
That mix tests whether AI investment can offset inflation and geopolitical risk. Bitcoin sits in the middle of that test.
Crypto analyst Ash Crypto calls it a high-volatility week for the market. The analyst says Bitcoin has shown strength despite pressure across global markets.
Confirmation is still needed. A weekly close above $82,000 and the 1-week 50-period moving average would strengthen the bullish case. That moving average tracks the longer-term trend, so reclaiming it signals buyers are in control.
The PCE and GDP prints on October 29 could swing sentiment either way. Strong GDP growth with cooling inflation could lift Bitcoin and crypto, per Ash Crypto. Hotter inflation could delay rate cuts and pressure risk assets.
CRYPTO IS HEADING INTO A HIGH-VOLATILITY WEEK
Despite the pressure across global markets, Bitcoin has shown strength. But we still need confirmation.
A weekly close above $82K and the 1W 50MA would strengthen the bullish case and signal that bulls are in control.
Here's… pic.twitter.com/CqLGZd9Vup
— Ash Crypto (@AshCrypto) October 25, 2026
Why Bitcoin Volatility Could Spill Into Japan and the Midterms
The Fed is not the only central bank in play. On October 30, Japan reports unemployment data. The Bank of Japan is expected to hold rates steady.
A surprise hike would change that picture. It could strengthen the yen and trigger volatility across global markets. Crypto would likely feel the pressure.
Politics adds another layer. The Kobeissi Letter notes the Iran war continues to escalate. US midterm elections are only days away.
Ash Crypto adds a historical warning. Bitcoin has corrected after every midterm, the analyst says. That pattern is not a forecast, but it raises the stakes for this week’s close.
Options expiry compounds the risk. With $11 billion in Bitcoin options expiring Friday, positioning can shift quickly around the data. Expiry days can also amplify price swings as traders adjust their exposure.
Bitcoin has held up, but confirmation is missing. A weekly close above $82,000 would help bulls, while a hawkish Warsh or hot inflation could challenge that case.
The post Busiest Crypto Week of the Year? Fed, GDP and Bitcoin Options Expiry Hit at Once appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:
Jeff Yan said at DAS Asia 2026 that Hyperliquid should not be seen as a rival to any one exchange.
Yan compared Hyperliquid to the internet and Linux, describing it as neutral public infrastructure.
Hyperliquid’s design relies on a few precise primitives, such as portfolio margin, that compose well.
The community aims to empower existing platforms, not replace them, with technology that serves users.
Jeff Yan, co-founder of Hyperliquid Labs, said Hyperliquid should not be viewed as a competitor to any single exchange. He spoke at DAS Asia 2026 on October 7.
According to Yan, comparisons have moved from DeFi protocols to major crypto exchanges and now to CME and Nasdaq. None of them fits perfectly.
He described the platform as “neutral public infrastructure,” closer to “the internet or Linux,” rather than a trading venue.
Why Hyperliquid Differs From a Traditional Exchange
An exchange works as a venue where people trade the products it lists. Hyperliquid aims to serve a broader purpose. The project seeks to support many kinds of financial activity.
It also wants other builders to create products the core team may never anticipate. Therefore, comparing the two misses the larger idea.
Jeff Yan explained that competing with exchanges would simply mean winning market share in a familiar category.
Hyperliquid’s goal is different. The project is working toward a neutral, shared system. That system could support trading, lending, and new asset markets.
The internet and Linux offer a useful comparison. Neither serves one fixed purpose. Both give others a base to build on. Their value comes partly from their creators and partly from the wider ecosystem.
Jeff Yan also said the community is “not trying to replace existing platforms.” Instead, it hopes to give them technology that helps them serve their users better.
Because of that, Hyperliquid’s long-term bet is not simply to become a major exchange. It is to become a foundation that others build on.
Design Priorities and Measures of Success
Hyperliquid’s design focuses on a small set of precise primitives. These building blocks need to be broadly useful and compose well together. Portfolio margin is one example. It can connect borrowing and lending with trading.
The aim is not to collect features for their own sake. Rather, the goal is to make financial components work together.
For that reason, development of the protocol cannot be treated as finished. Primitives must evolve as builders find new gaps.
Performance work will also continue. Greater usage creates new engineering challenges, which the team views as a good problem. Neutrality remains central to the vision.
A shared, transparent foundation can make new products possible. Institutions would not need to rebuild the underlying system.
This framing also changes how success is measured. Metrics still matter. However, so does whether new things are being built that were not possible before. Users must also choose those products because they work better for their needs.
The quality and variety of builders may serve as the strongest evidence of value. The ambition is large, and the analogy is not a guarantee. Useful applications, capable teams, and sustained adoption still have to follow.
The post Hyperliquid Co-Founder Jeff Yan: Platform Is Closer to Linux Than a Crypto Exchange appeared first on Blockonomi.