Tag: CRYPTOS FoxBusiness

MEXC chief executive Vugar Usi said in the release that “security and user protection is not a one-time investment. It is a continuous commitment,” adding that the resources behind that protection must “evolve” as the risks facing digital asset platforms change over time. The exchange said it maintains on-chain transparency for the fund by publicly disclosing its wallet addresses, letting users independently verify the reserve’s holdings directly on-chain rather than relying solely on the exchange’s own reporting.

Exchange-run protection or insurance funds of this kind have become a standard feature among large centralized crypto exchanges following a string of high-profile hacks across the industry over the past several years, giving platforms a dedicated pool of assets to draw on to cover user losses without needing to raise emergency capital or halt withdrawals in the immediate aftermath of a security incident. The practice of publishing wallet addresses for such funds, rather than simply stating a balance, has also become an increasingly common way for exchanges to differentiate themselves on transparency grounds after incidents elsewhere in the industry eroded user trust in unverified reserve claims.

MEXC’s steady, incremental buildup of the Guardian Fund toward its stated $500 million target, rather than a single lump-sum allocation, mirrors the pace-based approach several other large exchanges have taken with their own protection funds, adding to the reserve in tranches tied to trading revenue or specific milestones rather than committing the full sum upfront.

This post first appeared in MEXC Adds 1,000 $BTC to Its Guardian Fund

Grayscale included a chart in its Sept. 29 analysis comparing 10 cryptocurrencies’ market capitalizations with bitcoin’s, using 30-day averages through Sept. 28. Market capitalization measures a cryptocurrency’s circulating supply multiplied by its price. The chart shows $XRP above the other nine tokens by relative valuation, while Zcash’s recent rise lifts it above monero (XMR), bitcoin cash, and litecoin. These comparisons measure each token’s market capitalization against bitcoin’s, rather than its share of the entire cryptocurrency market.

$XRP’s Near-6% Valuation Frames Zcash’s Growth Potential

$XRP currently has a market capitalization approaching 6% of bitcoin’s, providing a larger relative valuation than $ZEC in Pandl’s comparison. $ZEC’s value increased from less than 0.1% of $BTC’s a year earlier to approximately 1.5%, using Artemis analytics data through Sept. 28.

Historical valuations underpin the argument that competing digital currencies can command a larger share of the category than $ZEC currently holds. During the 2017-18 market cycle, $XRP, bitcoin cash (BCH), litecoin, and dash (DASH) each reached at least 3% of bitcoin’s market capitalization. Pandl describes the recent increase as substantial but consistent with the sector’s history. He argues that the token has not reached a valuation ceiling.

The price appreciation also carries implications for network security through the rewards available to miners who verify transactions. Grayscale’s Sept. 11 estimates put Zcash mining rewards at approximately twice bitcoin’s per machine under specified assumptions. Those figures concern mining revenue; electricity, equipment, and operating expenses determine actual profit.

Privacy Gives Zcash a Distinct Competitive Role

Demand for confidential transactions forms the central basis of the firm’s outlook for further gains in the digital currency category. The token combines bitcoin-like monetary characteristics with privacy features. Cryptographic techniques used by privacy coins conceal transaction details while enabling networks to verify transfers, distinguishing them from cryptocurrencies whose transaction records are publicly traceable.

Interest in financial confidentiality accompanied stronger prices for these assets earlier this year, well before the latest assessment of relative valuations. Zcash reached $600 in early May, marking an earlier stage of the rally. By Sept. 29, its price stood at roughly $1,500, compared with about $60 a year earlier. The researcher attributed the magnitude of that rise to a low starting valuation and a large addressable market.

The broader privacy category expanded, with $ZEC accounting for approximately 62% of its market value in blockchain data provider Glassnode’s Sept. 7 snapshot. Pandl’s outlook remains conditional on the cryptocurrency’s competitive capabilities: “If Zcash continues to offer the most effective privacy features among competing cryptocurrencies, we think it can capture additional market share.”

Besides, correlation data backs up that resilience. Over the past 90 trading days, daily moves in $BTC and DXY show a correlation of -0.41, according to TradingView data analyzed by CoinDesk. A negative reading means the two tend to move in opposite directions. That is the most negative since February 2023.

However, while the link is real, it is also modest, as the feature image shows. The correlation implies an R-squared of 0.17, meaning DXY accounts for only about 17% of the variation in $BTC‘s daily returns.

The shorter-term reading is noisier. The 30-day correlation is -0.45, but it leans on two days, Aug. 19 and Sept. 3, when $BTC jumped more than 5% as DXY fell. Without them, it drops to -0.19.

Zoom out further and the link looks looser still. Since January 2020, the 90-day correlation has averaged -0.14, and it has turned positive at times, peaking at +0.22 in November 2024.

Bitcoin also shows little notable correlation with U.S. Treasury yields, as CoinDesk discussed recently.

Together with its loose link to the dollar, that supports the case for bitcoin as a portfolio diversifier, an asset that moves largely on its own drivers. Whether that independence lasts is worth watching. Stay alert!

The framework will introduce requirements covering consumer protection, customer asset safeguarding, market integrity and financial resilience.

Firms that want to continue operating in the UK will need to apply by Feb. 28, 2027, with the new regime scheduled to take effect on Oct. 25, 2027.

Existing firms that submit applications during the transition period can continue providing crypto asset services, including taking on new customers, while their applications are under review if the FCA has not reached a decision by the start of the new regime.

The FCA said firms must demonstrate that they meet its standards to receive authorization. The regulator is offering pre-application support and webinars, while firms that do not meet the requirements will be unable to continue offering regulated cryptoasset services in the UK.

In a recent podcast, CZ cited $HYPE’s past token distribution and asset custody structure as a reason for the delay in its Binance spot listing.

According to CZ’s statements, $HYPE’s distribution and custody arrangements may not have met the risk management requirements that Binance was looking for in its listing processes at the time.

However, CZ also noted that conditions may have changed in the current situation. This statement suggests that $HYPE’s previous absence from the Binance spot market may not be explained solely by listing requests or market conditions. Nevertheless, CZ did not publicly share a detailed technical explanation for Binance’s past assessment.

$HYPE Listed on Binance!

Shortly before CZ’s statements, Binance announced that it would list $HYPE with the seed tag “$HYPE/USDT, $HYPE/USDC and $HYPE/TRY” trading pairs on September 24, 2026.

As you may recall, in August, US President Donald Trump stated that US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Paul Atkins was working to bring Hyperliquid to the US market.

*This is not investment advice.

Bitcoin $BTC$83,900.87 traded at $83,164 in the European morning, down 0.57% since midnight UTC while the rest of the crypto market was mixed, with 50 constituents of the CoinDesk 100 higher and 50 lower.

The 24-hour pictures is weaker as bitcoin lost around 1%, falling from a peak of $84,400 during Tuesday’s U.S. session. The CoinDesk DeFi index (DFX) fell 2.3%, the worst performance in the index family, as aave AAVE$160.60 retreated 4.4% after leading Tuesday’s gains with an 11% jump.

Traditional markets were firmer, with S&P 500 futures up 0.27% and the Stoxx 600 up 0.74% in morning trade. That came even after the 30-year Treasury yield crossed 5.6% on Tuesday, its highest since June 2002, and the 10-year reached a fresh 2007 high near 5.3%, according to CNBC. Brent crude traded at $96.43 after falling on Tuesday, well below the $100 level that accompanied Monday’s crypto selloff.

An internal team would check that those protections work and that problems are fixed. An independent auditor would assess the controls, while a committee of each company’s board would receive the findings and oversee fixes.

That would give outside reviewers a role in checking the safeguards companies rely on to keep experimental models contained.

Still, the agreement leaves the choice of auditors with the companies and sets no deadline for implementing the measures. Some of the steps are ones the companies already take in some form, according to AP.

Read More: OpenAI says its new ‘Astra’ AI can build attacks without human help

How AI agents are playing havoc

The accord follows a string of incidents in which experimental AI agents broke into computer systems they were never cleared to access, including OpenAI test agents that reached servers run by Hugging Face, a platform where developers share AI models.

An OpenAI agent also accessed an Australian government Medicare portal on June. 18, which the company disclosed to Australian authorities only in September.

Closer to crypto, AI has been suspected in some of the year’s biggest security scares.

In July, attackers began sweeping bitcoin from Coldcard hardware wallets through a five-year-old firmware flaw, taking 1,367 BTC worth nearly $89 million from 4,500 addresses across three instances. Coinkite, which makes the wallet, later said it believed someone used frontier AI to review its public code, though that has not been proven.

Following shareholder criticism, Metaplanet on Sept. 11 reduced the potential share pool by 41% to 188.2 million, which the company said extinguished over $220 million in potential warrant value. It ended automatic adjustments for equity issued after Sept. 1, 2025, and added staggered exercise restrictions running through 2031. Shares already received through exercises remain locked up until August 2031.

The changes improved fully diluted bitcoin per share by approximately 8.8%, the company said. Exercised and unexercised rights represent approximately 12.5% of total shares, according to directors.

CEO Simon Gerovich, the only director holding the rights, did not participate in the review’s deliberations or resolutions, the directors said.

However, the letter does not address the 64 million shares Gerovich received by exercising rights in August, before the Sept. 11 reset, or concerns about MMXX Ventures. MMXX Ventures is a Metaplanet shareholder whose share sales and Gerovich’s personal economic interest in the entity have also drawn investor questions. Metaplanet has previously said those shares will not be returned because exercises were valid under the terms in force at the time.

Metaplanet shares closed 2% higher on Wednesday at 286 yen.

Read More: Metaplanet CEO breaks silence but shareholders say the hard questions remain unanswered

The ruling follows prison sentences imposed in July 2025 after an FCA prosecution. Bedi received five years and four months, while Mavanga received six years and six months.

How the Fraud Reached Investors

Between February 2017 and June 2019, Bedi and Mavanga cold-called consumers and persuaded them to put money into fake crypto investment opportunities. They operated through companies including CCX Capital and Astaria Group LLP. The FCA’s account of their 2024 convictions describes a professional-looking website used to offer investors high returns.

The pair had already been sentenced for the fraud when the FCA pursued the orders for repayment. Bedi pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud, conspiracy to breach the general prohibition under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, and money laundering offenses. Mavanga pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud, conspiracy to breach that prohibition, and possessing false identification documents with improper intent.

Unexpected approaches and offers of unusually high returns are among the warning signs associated with crypto investment fraud. In this case, the cold calls led investors toward opportunities that did not exist. The scheme ran for more than two years, from February 2017 to June 2019.

What the Orders Mean for Victims

Under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, a confiscation order requires an offender to pay the benefit gained from criminal conduct or the value of available assets, whichever is lower. The FCA said Bedi and Mavanga have three months to pay. Failure to do so could add up to five years to Bedi’s prison term and two years to Mavanga’s.

The FCA said it will return money collected through the orders to affected investors. Its announcement establishes a path to repayment, while the amount victims ultimately receive depends on the funds recovered. Anyone affected by this scheme who has not heard from the regulator can contact the FCA Consumer Helpline.

People seeking the return of stolen funds can also face fraudulent recovery offers from criminals posing as officials. The FCA has separately warned about fake communications claiming to come from the regulator. In this case, the agency says it has contacted identified victims and will distribute funds recovered through its court action.

MIM held outside protocol addresses comes to nearly $22 million. “In other words, the protocol sits on approximately $21 million of bad debt, and MIM’s effective backing is below $0.04 (>95% unbacked),” the proposal says.

Why the Repeg Died

The team had studied raising interest rates across cauldrons to force liquidations, generate buying pressure and push MIM back toward $1. Abracadabra ran that playbook in June, when it hiked rates across all cauldrons, halted Curve bribes and suspended direct incentives after MIM fell about 50% below peg.

The proposal now rejects that approach. Liquidations would bleed value to liquidators through the MIM discount and liquidation fees, producing what it calls a “small, short term (minutes-long) price increase in MIM, that would benefit only the fastest sellers.”

With no way to repeg MIM, the proposal says, the protocol cannot function, because there is no point in borrowing MIM below peg. Work on a neobank product is tied to MIM and therefore adds no value to the project.

LayerZero is retiring its V1 relayer on Dec. 15. That puts roughly $1 million of collateral in the Stargate USDC and Stargate USDT cauldrons at risk, according to the proposal.

Ether and a Merkl Claim

Under the plan, collateral in eligible cauldrons would be emptied using the deployStrategy and setStrategy functions, which the team says should recover about 99.75% of it, then swapped into ether.

A snapshot of MIM balances and cauldron positions would be taken no earlier than Oct. 15. A Merkl contract would then distribute ether pro rata: borrowers receive the value of their collateral minus their MIM debt at $1 per MIM, and MIM holders split what is left, which the proposal puts at about $0.04 per MIM.

Unclaimed funds get swept after six months and redistributed to MIM holders who did claim, up to $1 per MIM, then to borrowers in proportion to their debt. Immutable positions stay untouched and withdrawable onchain. The interface stays up but will not be actively maintained.

The team engaged legal counsel before drafting the plan. Without a recovery path, the proposal says, the protocol “should be unwound and liquidated, or become at risk of facing users enforcing a liquidation via legal actions,” and failing to rescue funds at risk “could constitute legal liability.”

The Vote Closes Wednesday

Voting opened Sept. 29 at 05:24 UTC and closes Sept. 30 at 17:24 UTC. Two addresses have cast ballots: one voted for with about 100 million staked SPELL, the other against with about 523,000.

Turnout stands at 3.4% of the space’s 3 billion quorum. The 11 proposals posted to the space before this one, going back to December 2024, each drew more than 3 billion votes.

The proposal was submitted by an address that is not listed among the Snapshot space’s admins or members. Abracadabra’s X account has not posted since July 6. The abracadabra.money landing page carries a banner for “Abracadabra V2” and describes MIM as “a stablecoin with its value pegged to the USD, aiming to maintain a consistent 1:1 ratio.”

MIM is up 33% over 24 hours and trades roughly 97% below its $1 peg, CoinGecko data show. It is down 49% over seven days. SPELL is up 20% over 30 days.

Three Hacks and a Handover

Abracadabra lost $6.5 million to a rounding bug in cauldron logic in January 2024 and $13 million in a March 2025 attack on GMX-linked vaults on Arbitrum. A third exploit hit deprecated Cauldron V4 contracts on Ethereum in October 2025. The team said at the time that 1.79 million MIM were minted by the attacker and that it “bought back from the Market the entirety of affected MIM, completely reversing the effect of the attack.”

Control of the protocol changed hands in June. A Snapshot vote that closed June 4 transferred operational stewardship, treasury management and development to an entity called Anubis, listing Greg Dewitt on operations and Paul Parker and Glenn Kennedy as directors. The proposal named dao5, founded by Tekin Salimi, as a strategic partner through Alapin Holdings, alongside Nemesis Trading, and said Jack Niewold would serve as project lead. The Rodman Law Group acted as counsel to Anubis. Two addresses voted, both in favor, with a combined 5.5 billion votes.

That June proposal set out to “revitalize Abracadabra as a leading DeFi protocol” and listed expansion of utility and demand for SPELL among its priorities. The current proposal says the situation the team found “was far worse than initially expected, as not all the collateral present represents valid MIM backing.”

DefiLlama puts Abracadabra’s deposits at about $5 million.