The conflicting narratives highlight escalating tensions and misinformation risks, potentially destabilizing regional security and diplomatic relations.

The post Iran claims it damaged USS George Washington with missile strike, Pentagon denies any hit appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Investors pivot to Chinese equity derivatives for AI exposure, highlighting China's growing tech influence and potential regulatory risks.

The post Traders shift focus to Chinese equity derivatives for AI exposure as Korean and Japanese plays get crowded appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The sinking of the Iranian tanker by the US escalates tensions, potentially increasing global oil prices and impacting regional stability.

The post US Central Command confirms striking and sinking Iranian oil tanker M/T Kylo in Gulf of Oman appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Hayes' significant UNI purchase without clear catalysts may signal strategic confidence in Uniswap's long-term governance potential.

The post Arthur Hayes buys 244,406 UNI for $1.73M in quiet OTC deal appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Increased air threats in Ukraine could destabilize regional security, impacting global markets and prompting urgent diplomatic interventions.

The post Escalating air threats in Ukraine risk triggering broader conflict appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Hargreaves Lansdown Reverses Course, Rolls Out Bitcoin Trading 

British financial services firm Hargreaves Lansdown is letting retail investors buy bitcoin — nearly one year after it said the cryptocurrency was “not an asset class.” 

The Bristol, UK-based investment firm’s website said it was offering bitcoin and other crypto exchange-traded notes to investors. ETNs are investment funds which trade on stock exchanges and track the prices of digital assets. 

It comes after the firm, which manages nearly £173 billion (over $233 billion) in assets, last year warned customers about buying bitcoin. 

“While longer-term returns of Bitcoin have been positive, Bitcoin has experienced several periods of extreme losses and is a highly volatile investment — much riskier than stocks or bonds,” the firm said at the time. 

“The HL Investment view is that Bitcoin is not an asset class, and we do not think cryptocurrency has characteristics that mean it should be included in portfolios for growth or income and shouldn’t be relied upon to help clients meet their financial goals.” 

Now, a number of ETNs tracking the price of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are available. The firm warns users that “crypto ETNs are considered high-risk and may be volatile.”

U.S. regulator the Securities and Exchange Commission in 2024 approved bitcoin exchange-traded funds for investors after a decade of saying no to the products. 

The funds had the most successful debut in the history of ETFs as investors previously unable to buy exposure to the asset class rushed in to buy the products. 

Run by top asset managers and banks like BlackRock, Fidelity, and Morgan Stanley, the investment vehicles now collectively manage over $100 billion in assets. 

This post Hargreaves Lansdown Reverses Course, Rolls Out Bitcoin Trading  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Trezor Breach Worse Than Reported: Another 67,000 US Customers Exposed

Hardware wallet manufacturer Trezor has said that a data breach first announced last month is worse than originally reported. 

The Prague, Czech Republic-based company said Friday that an additional 67,000 U.S. customers had their names, emails, phone numbers, shipping addresses and order numbers leaked. The leaked data came from orders made between November 2019 and August 2021, according to Trezor. 

Trezor first announced in August that data from 11,742 customers from the U.S., UK, Sweden, Colombia, Brazil, Italy, and Portugal had been exposed — with names, emails, phone numbers and shipping addresses leaked. 

Another 1,947 customers just had their names, cities and emails exposed in the breach. 

In Friday’s announcement, Trezor said that its third-party fulfillment partner, ShipMonk, had falsely reassured the company about deleting customer data. 

“Throughout our entire relationship with ShipMonk, we repeatedly requested and received written assurance confirming the deletion of the data, in line with our contract, data policy, and past communications,” Trezor wrote. 

“We are very disappointed that, despite receiving this confirmation, the data was not deleted in their systems.”

Neither Trezor nor ShipMonk immediately responded to Bitcoin Magazine’s questions. 

Trezor first announced in August that the data had been leaked because ShipMonk experienced “unauthorized access to their systems containing customer data.” 

The company added that it had directly emailed all customers involved in the breach. Trezor’s parent company, SatoshiLabs, told Bitcoin Magazine last month that it was investigating the incident. 

Trezor is one of the most popular Bitcoin hardware wallet solutions, and also has support for storing other cryptocurrencies. 

Bitcoiners’ personal data has been targeted by cybercriminals in the past: back in 2020, an unauthorized party accessed popular hardware manufacturer Ledger’s e-commerce and marketing database, leaking over 1 million email addresses and the personal contact data of nearly 10,000 customers. 

At the start of this year, customers reported receiving emails from Global-e, Ledger’s payment partner, that a data breach at its cloud systems leaked sensitive customer data. 

This post Trezor Breach Worse Than Reported: Another 67,000 US Customers Exposed first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

El Salvador Isn’t Buying Bitcoin With Public Money, Says IMF 

El Salvador has not used public funds to accumulate bitcoin since the International Monetary Fund’s last review of its loan program, the fund said Thursday. 

In a report Thursday, the body said that the Central American country had instead received bitcoin from private donations, citing documentation from the government. It added that “no further Bitcoin accumulation beyond the documented donations is expected.”

El Salvador made headlines in 2021 when it became the first country in the world to make bitcoin legal tender. Salvadoran president Nayib Bukele in 2022 said the country would buy one bitcoin per day but it was never clear where the money was coming from — or if he was actually buying at all. 

“Documentation has been provided verifying that Bitcoin accumulation since the first review reflects private donations and that no public resources were used,” the IMF release said. 

“Understandings were also reached on steps to modernize the legal, regulatory, and supervisory framework for digital assets and to further strengthen the governance and risk-management arrangements for public-sector crypto-asset holdings. Going forward, no further bitcoin accumulation beyond the documented donations is expected.”

The report added that public participation in the government-sponsored bitcoin wallet has been largely wound down, with majority ownership and operational control handed to a private operator. 

El Salvador in 2021 debuted a state-sponsored wallet called Chivo for its citizens as part of its plan to increase bitcoin adoption in the country. 

“IMF staff thank the Salvadoran authorities for the constructive discussions and excellent collaboration,” the report added. 

The IMF El Salvador entered a $1.4 billion loan agreement at the end of December but the fund asked for the country to scale back certain aspects of its bitcoin strategy. 

Institutions like the World Bank and the IMF have long criticized President Bukele’s Bitcoin law, which also asked businesses to accept the cryptocurrency if they had the technological means to do so. 

President Bukele in 2024 admitted that Salvadorans weren’t using the cryptocurrency to buy things as expected, but always boasted that the government was still stacking sats. 

Since launching a crime crackdown to tackle the country’s notorious crime gangs, murder rates in El Salvador have plunged. The country was once the most dangerous place in the Americas but President Bukele is now trying to turn it into a tech hub. 

Crypto companies like Tether have since relocated to its capital, San Salvador. 

This post El Salvador Isn’t Buying Bitcoin With Public Money, Says IMF  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin Dips Below $80,000 on Strong US Jobs Report

Bitcoin slid Friday after a better-than-expected labor report showed that the U.S. job market accelerated in August. 

The leading cryptocurrency was recently trading for close to $79,764 after dropping as low as $78,706 earlier in the morning in New York. It’s currently down over 1% over a 24-hour period. On Thursday, the coin soared above $82,000. 

The Federal Reserve is typically more likely to raise interest rates when the labor market is strong, because more people employed means more spending, and more spending can push inflation up. 

Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh last week gave his first major speech as head of the U.S. central bank and said he had “more work to do” to fight inflation. Bitcoin has typically done well in a low-interest rate environment. 

Traders currently view a U.S. Federal Reserve interest rate hike at the upcoming September 15–16 policy meeting as roughly a 50% to 60% probability. 

But U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday demanded the Federal Reserve slash interest rates. 

Writing on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump said: “Lower the interest rates because the U.S.A. is a much stronger credit than it was just a short time ago!”

He added: “We should have the LOWEST RATE of any country in the World, like ‘the old days.'”

Bitcoin has decoupled from stocks recently as investors have renewed concerns around dollar debasement. 

The cryptocurrency started surging last month, after the U.S. Treasury Department said it would more than double the size of its government debt repurchases. The coin had its best run in three years and third best August ever.  

The much-talked about debasement trade is back in the spotlight, and bitcoin has been trading in lockstep with gold, according to analysts. The so-called debasement trade is when investors buy an asset as a way to hedge against a currency losing value. 

News dropped last month that U.S. public debt exceeded $40 trillion for the first time too. Excessive debt also undermines confidence in the dollar, making assets like bitcoin and gold attractive. 

This post Bitcoin Dips Below $80,000 on Strong US Jobs Report first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

National Sheriffs’ Association Drops Opposition to Clarity Act

The National Sheriffs’ Association this week dropped its opposition to the crypto Clarity Act, after having previously warned that the proposed bill could help criminals. 

Writing Thursday to Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the association said it was changing its stance to neutral given how complex the issue is. 

A number of lawmakers were hoping to vote on the Clarity Act in August. After a delay, a vote will now go ahead this month. The bill will establish a framework for distinguishing between digital assets that are securities, commodities or payment stablecoins — legislation that the crypto industry has long called for. 

“Given the complexity of the legislation and the number of important details that remain under consideration, the NSA is changing its position on the Clarity Act to neutral,” the letter from NSA President Sheriff Troy Wellman and Executive Director Justin Smith read. 

“At this time, we believe the most appropriate course is to step back and allow the legislative process to proceed to establish a clear, effective, and much needed regulatory framework.”

The NSA had previously warned that the bill could create regulatory and anti-money laundering loopholes by exempting certain crypto developers and infrastructure providers from money transmitter rules.

Despite being passed in the house of representatives last year with strong bipartisan support, the Clarity Act has been in a deadlock for much of 2026. The banking lobby raised concerns over stablecoin yield and some lawmakers have said improvements need to be made surrounding ethics. 

An updated bill of the Clarity Act was introduced in July that addressed some of these concerns — banning government officials and their families from issuing or promoting crypto. 

Pro-crypto senator Cynthia Lummis wrote on Friday that the “bipartisan bill” gives “law enforcement real tools to fight the illicit finance crimes hurting hard working Americans.”

Major financial institutions, lawmakers and companies have said they support the latest draft of the new bill, but some Republicans have accused Democratic lawmakers of deliberately playing politics and holding the bill back. 

This post National Sheriffs’ Association Drops Opposition to Clarity Act first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Hardware wallet maker Trezor says a breach at logistics provider ShipMonk exposed contact and order data for another approximately 67,000 U.S. customers after years-old records remained in the vendor's systems despite written deletion assurances.

The Sept. 4 update expands an incident Trezor initially said affected 13,689 people. The two disclosed groups imply a total of roughly 80,689, although Trezor has not issued a single combined figure or published underlying data showing whether the groups overlap. Its use of “another” indicates that it considers the new records additional to the original cohort.

The newly disclosed records cover U.S. orders from November 2019 through August 2021 and include names, email addresses, phone numbers, shipping addresses and order numbers. The data can connect an identifiable person and physical location with a hardware-wallet purchase, creating risks beyond a conventional email leak.

Old data outlived a 90-day policy

When Trezor first disclosed the breach on Aug. 13, it counted 11,742 customers with full exposure and 1,947 with partial exposure. Trezor's Aug. 13 account said older order data had already been deleted. An Aug. 14 clarification acknowledged that some partially exposed records included older orders.

The Sept. 4 update reverses that understanding. Trezor said it repeatedly requested and received written assurances that ShipMonk had deleted the data, yet records from 2019 to 2021 remained. Trezor's published delivery-data policy says customer details should be deleted from both its own and its fulfillment partner's systems after 90 days, with exceptions for ongoing order issues. The assurance letters and their dates have not been made public.

BleepingComputer reported that a ShipMonk notification attributed the original unauthorized access to a vulnerability in analytics platform Metabase. Metabase said the August zero-day could create a session tied to an administrator account and allow bulk table downloads. Once the provider incident was reassessed, the retained historical data expanded the number of Trezor customers known to be exposed.

The breach did not reach Trezor's wallet systems. The company said its systems, products and services were not compromised and its devices remained secure. The listed exposed fields were contact and order data, not recovery seeds, private keys or wallet funds.

The risk instead sits around the wallet. Trezor warned that the information could support convincing scam emails, fraudulent calls or letters and potential physical targeting. Its Sept. 4 update did not identify a confirmed downstream attack caused by this dataset, so those outcomes remain risks rather than documented consequences.

Trezor said it emailed every newly affected customer directly and that anyone who did not receive its incident notice was not affected. It urged customers never to share a wallet backup or enter it on a website.

For hardware-wallet owners, the episode shows that protecting keys does not erase the purchase trail created by fulfillment. A deletion policy offers little protection if a vendor's compliance is not verified.

The post Users exposed by Trezor breach grows sixfold after supposedly deleted shipping logs are found appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Compound is a crypto lending protocol governed by holders who delegate their COMP tokens, a setup known as a decentralized autonomous organization, or DAO. It works like an online republic, with token holders debating proposals, voting, and letting software carry out the result.

In July 2024, that republic nearly sent a fortune to a small group of voters. Proposal 289 asked Compound to transfer 499,000 COMP, then worth about $24 million, into a yield-bearing vehicle they controlled. Two earlier versions had failed, and the third seemed headed the same way.

Then, during the final 34 minutes, supporting addresses cast 563,591 votes, equal to 82% of all support for the proposal. The last big block landed eight minutes before the deadline, and the measure passed by 682,191 votes to 633,636.

While this was extremely controversial and remains highly contested, there was no issue with the code, as it worked exactly as intended.

But that was the problem: the wallets had gathered enough COMP and delegated their voting power before the period closed, but Compound lacked an emergency authority that could pause the software. Several reasonable rules had combined into a convenient path for a treasury raid.

Compound reached a settlement that canceled the allocation and later added a veto role, placing a brake in the system built around automatic token-holder rule.

That captures the central DAO dilemma, because most defenses against rushed or hostile votes give somebody more control over participation or the final result.

Two 2026 studies from the Max Planck Institute for Software Systems and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam traced a similar problem across 48 large Ethereum DAOs. One examined how registration, staking, and delegation concentrate voting power, while the other mapped attacks that use valid governance rules.

The ballot has a velvet rope

Calling a governance token a vote isn't really correct. Depending on the DAO, a holder may need to register a wallet, lock tokens, delegate them, maintain a minimum balance, or pay for an on-chain transaction before they can actually cast that vote.

Proposals face obstacles of their own, because someone needs enough tokens or delegated support to introduce them in the first place, and the idea may pass through a forum and informal poll before a binding vote on the blockchain or through an off-chain service such as Snapshot.

Once the tally clears the quorum and approval formula, a smart contract, multisignature wallet, or named person carries the result into effect.

While each of these gates solves a real problem, it also favors a particular participant or type of participant.

Proposal thresholds discourage spam and malicious code, but they inadvertently reserve authorship for wealthy holders and established delegates. On-chain voting makes those results enforceable, but transaction fees favor people with enough money and conviction to use it. Free off-chain polls draw a wider crowd, then depend on a smaller group for execution.

The researchers found an even split: 24 DAOs used on-chain voting and 24 used off-chain systems.

Uniswap showed how different electorates can form inside the same organization: more wallets joined its free off-chain polls, while much larger blocks of voting power appeared during the paid on-chain phase that could make a proposal binding.

Turnout is only one small part of this, because a protocol may have thousands of token holders while a few addresses control proposals, votes, and execution. By the time the public tally appears, the rules have already picked the electorate.

The security rules pick the ruling class

DAOs often keep tokens in treasury contracts, and founding teams or investors may hold allocations that have yet to vest, so registration separates circulating tokens from balances that currently carry voting rights.

Among the 48 DAOs, 36 required some form of registration, and only four had registered more than half of their outstanding supply. Across those 36 organizations, the average registered share was 21%, meaning the practical electorate usually covered a small fraction of all tokens.

Much of the missing supply belonged to users whose coins were held by exchanges or deposited into DeFi protocols. Centralized exchanges held more than 10% of outstanding tokens on average across the sample, and DeFi contracts held another 3.5%.

In 14 registration-based DAOs, those intermediary wallets controlled more tokens than the entire registered electorate.

That creates a very strange and rather unique custody problem, because an exchange wallet can represent thousands of customers even though the blockchain sees one address with one giant balance.

Letting the exchange vote turns a custodian into a political heavyweight, while excluding it strips customers of governance rights attached to tokens they paid for. Most DAOs also let one wallet send all its power to a single delegate, which makes splitting votes among the underlying owners difficult.

Staking tackles a different vulnerability by making voting power expensive to build and slow to unwind. A would-be attacker can buy or borrow a large position, approve a favorable proposal, and sell once the vote ends, while a lock keeps that voter financially exposed to the result for longer.

Fifteen DAOs required staking, with a median of 27.4% of tokens locked. Some imposed a one- or two-week withdrawal wait, while Curve, Angle, and Frax offered stronger voting power for locks lasting up to four years. The system rewards patience and turns liquid wealth into a prerequisite for political influence.

Crypto soon produced middlemen for people who wanted influence and the freedom to trade. These services maintain long locks, issue tradable substitutes, and keep the original voting rights. The arrangement concentrated enormous voting blocs inside a few services, according to the researchers’ measurements:

Delegation works the same because most holders have limited appetite for forum arguments about collateral ratios. Handing votes to a professional participant makes sense, and repeated delegation builds durable political blocs.

The ten largest holders controlled more than half of voting power in 39 of the 48 DAOs, while delegated voting was usually more concentrated than direct voting.

Registration protects treasury balances, staking makes a quick attack costlier, and delegation gives passive holders a voice through someone who pays attention. Put them together, and the people with the most capital, time, technical fluency, or control over customer assets tend to run the place.

A legal DAO vote can still be a raid

The second paper defines a governance attack as an actor using the authorized process to win an outcome that harms the wider organization.

Among 28 DAO incidents, researchers classified 16 as attacks that a different mechanism could have prevented. Six involved contract bugs, while ten depended on buying or borrowing enough tokens to influence a vote.

Compound is the best example because the wallets associated with Proposal 289 gathered more than 680,000 COMP over four months.

Researchers traced 563,790 tokens through four centralized exchanges and another 118,089 borrowed through Compound itself, even though those addresses had held only 853 COMP before the buildup and had little history in the protocol's politics.

The late burst took advantage of a community that expected the third proposal to fail. Compound could have extended the vote when a large bloc appeared near the deadline, required longer staking, or allowed a trusted council to pause execution.

Every option would have moved power toward reactive voters, committed holders, locking services, or a small emergency body.

But Compound chose the emergency brake, and in the 2024 configurations researchers reviewed, seven other DAOs shared its exposure to readily available voting power and late vote accumulation: Uniswap, Radicle, Gitcoin, Silo, Ampleforth, Hop, and Cryptex.

Those systems can evolve through governance, so the list records a moment in 2024, while a current security rating would require a fresh review.

Decentralization needs a richer accounting than token distribution alone. A good governance report would show how much supply can vote, how much power the largest delegates control, which intermediaries hold staked tokens, and who can introduce, execute, or veto proposals.

Smart contract audits already ask whether governance code follows its specification, while a constitutional audit would ask where that specification sends authority.

DAOs can spread ownership across thousands of wallets and still funnel practical control toward a few dozen professionals, custodians, and large holders, with software that performs flawlessly all the way through.

The post DAOs are forcing crypto protocols to choose between code and emergency brakes appeared first on CryptoSlate.

A Federal Reserve staff note published Sept. 4 sketches a route for regulated payment stablecoins to enter M1 or the broader M2 money supply. Its accounting framework requires adjustments before gross circulation could enter either measure.

Payment stablecoins are excluded from the US monetary aggregates today. The new note makes future treatment depend on economic use, alongside adjustments for reserve assets already counted elsewhere and the separation of US circulation from global activity. Otherwise, a larger money-supply figure could partly reflect a new wrapper around dollars the system already measured.

The distinction matters for anyone using M1 or M2 to judge dollar liquidity. A statistical increase driven by reclassification says little about newly created purchasing power.

The note is independent staff research, reflects only its authors' views, and is not part of a Federal Reserve policy deliberation. Existing definitions remain unchanged, and the analysis presents conditional possibilities.

How stablecoins could fit, and what could be counted twice

M1 is the narrowest official US money measure. It contains currency and highly liquid balances that households and businesses can use for transactions. M2 includes M1 plus less liquid savings-type assets, including small-denomination time deposits and retail money market funds.

The Fed authors apply that functional split to payment stablecoins. If the coins are used predominantly as a stable store of value or as liquidity for crypto trading, non-M1 M2 may be the better fit. If they become a common medium of exchange for household and business payments, their immediate transferability could support an M1 classification.

The framework remains conditional. The GENIUS Act requires permitted issuers to maintain at least 1:1 identifiable reserves and publish monthly reserve information, and leaves M1 or M2 assignment to a separate statistical decision. The Fed says standardized circulation data and a reporting chain suitable for monetary-statistics compilation would still be required.

The central stock-measurement problem sits on the reserve side. Under GENIUS, permitted reserves can include bank deposits, Treasury instruments, and government money funds. The Fed note says some bank deposits and money-fund net assets are already captured in M1 or M2.

If an issuer receives dollars, places part of them in a bank deposit or money fund, and issues stablecoins against that reserve, counting the tokens at face value could add a new line to the aggregate while part of the backing remains in another counted component. That is the same-dollar problem.

Only reserve assets already represented in M1 or M2 create overlap. The overlap depends on the backing composition and the statistical treatment of each reserve asset. The Fed note says the extent must be assessed before any adjustment is chosen.

USDC shows that a single headline number answers only part of the reserve question. Circle says most of its reserve is held in the Circle Reserve Fund, an SEC-registered government money market fund that can hold cash, short-dated US Treasuries, and overnight US Treasury repurchase agreements. Its July assurance also lists Treasury securities outside the fund, alongside cash held at regulated financial institutions.

Circle's latest active monthly assurance on the transparency page covered July 31. It reported 71.826 billion USDC in circulation and reserve assets with a fair value of $71.904 billion. Those figures document backing at a point in time. A net addition to M1 or M2 requires a separate consolidation calculation.

A defensible net estimate would have to match the reported reserve categories against the exact money-stock components already counted, remove only genuine overlaps, and preserve backing assets outside the aggregates. The current sources leave that increment unquantified.

The data gaps behind a national money measure

Geography is a separate problem from reserve overlap. A dollar stablecoin issued by a US-regulated company can move globally on a public blockchain, while transaction records generally lack enough geographic information to identify the portion that belongs inside a US measure.

The Fed note says GENIUS applies to US-regulated issuers without distinguishing domestic from international circulation. Additional reporting may therefore be needed to isolate US circulation from global activity. An issuer's total outstanding tokens map imperfectly onto US-held money.

Economic use requires a separate dataset. The Fed's functional test asks whether stablecoins behave more like transaction money or savings. Raw blockchain transfer counts are insufficient because a single smart-contract transaction can emit several transfer events.

A Bank for International Settlements working paper published in June analyzed more than 593 million event logs from 141 million Ethereum transactions executed in 2025 involving USDT, USDC, and PayPal USD. Roughly one third of the transactions generated multiple steps or event logs, while nearly 60% of transfer events occurred inside complex transactions.

Those bundles can combine trading, lending, arbitrage, liquidity provision, and settlement. Treating every emitted event as a standalone payment can exaggerate both activity counts and the apparent payment role of stablecoins.

The 60% statistic describes event structure alone. Functional classification under the Fed staff framework requires separate evidence about economic use.

The scale makes these distinctions consequential. CryptoSlate's Sept. 4 market snapshot listed the global stablecoin category at $292.1 billion across 73 assets. Its USDC market page showed about $74.5 billion of market capitalization and 74.51 billion tokens in supply.

Those global market figures say nothing about US-resident ownership or usage. They also differ in date and purpose from Circle's July 31 assurance, so the values should not be treated as interchangeable observations.

For comparison, FRED reported seasonally adjusted US M2 at $23.218 trillion for July 2026, updated Aug. 25. That establishes the scale of the official aggregate while leaving the required stablecoin net-addition adjustment unresolved.

The Fed staff framework therefore points to three different accounting jobs before any classification change: determine how the tokens function, consolidate reserve assets already represented in the aggregates, and isolate the circulation relevant to the United States. Transaction-level analysis informs the first job; reserve and residency data remain essential for the other two.

Stablecoins could eventually make M1 or M2 more complete. Skipping those adjustments would blur already-counted balances with genuinely new dollar liquidity.

The post Fed stablecoin research exposes how the same dollar could count twice in M1 or M2 appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Eligible Solana token-account owners can reclaim excess SOL previously needed to keep their token accounts open after the network's first rent reduction went live Sept. 3. For businesses funding new accounts, the same change lowers the upfront capital required to create them.

The full plan would change how account growth translates into SOL held against storage. If Solana completes its proposed 90% reduction, total persistent account state, including each account's storage overhead, would have to grow tenfold to require the same minimum SOL reserves as before the rollout. Adoption could expand substantially while the minimum SOL needed for this reserve channel falls.

The Solana Foundation's tracker confirms that only the first reduction, approximately 9%, is live on mainnet. The tenfold comparison applies to the conditional final target, while the initial cut already lowers reserve requirements.

Solana rent reduction and the 10× hurdle

Solana's “rent” is a balance held against account storage. It is generally recoverable when an account closes, rather than an ongoing bill paid to validators. Reducing the required balance lets new accounts begin with less SOL and can leave existing accounts holding more than their minimum.

At epoch 1028 on Sept. 3, Solana lowered the reserve parameter from 6,960 to 6,333 lamports per byte. The five-stage plan's final target is 696.

Under SIMD-0437, the rent-reduction specification, that minimum equals the account's data size plus 128 bytes of overhead, multiplied by the current lamports-per-byte parameter. A standard token account has 165 data bytes, making its effective size 293 bytes.

Applying that formula to one million identical standard token accounts gives the following illustration:

These are calculated minimum requirements for a fixed account population, not measured withdrawals. The final row assumes all five reductions activate. Different account sizes would produce different totals.

The million-account example illustrates operating capital, but it cannot establish a network-wide supply effect. Its conditional final reduction of 1,835.352 SOL represents about 0.000314% of the approximately 585.36 million circulating SOL shown in CryptoSlate's Sept. 5 market data. The actual aggregate reserve channel requires a broader account inventory, with account sizes, balances and reclaimability taken into account.

The tenfold threshold follows from the same relationship. At one-tenth the original reserve rate, ten times as many rent-bearing bytes would be needed to keep the aggregate minimum unchanged. It measures the total stock of persistent state, including per-account overhead. User counts, transaction counts and SOL prices are separate measures; the tenfold comparison describes storage requirements.

The live first step sets a smaller hurdle: about 9.9% more rent-bearing state would preserve the original minimum requirement at 6,333 lamports per byte. Both comparisons concern required reserves. Actual account balances can remain above those floors.

For payments, this reserve demand arises mainly when accounts are opened. The Foundation's July account-state study explains that an associated token account normally serves a particular wallet and token mint. Once it exists, later payments in the same token do not require another account-creation deposit. More payments through existing accounts therefore need not produce a proportional increase in storage reserves.

Withdrawal authority decides who gets the capital

The immediate benefit is access to capital already on-chain. The Foundation's Sept. 3 reclamation guide describes an instruction called WithdrawExcessLamports that moves SOL above the current minimum without closing a token account or changing its token balance. The Token-2022 program offers the same instruction.

For a token account, its owner must authorize the withdrawal. For a mint, authorization comes from the mint authority, or from the mint account itself signing if that authority has been revoked. Accounts owned by custom programs need the owning program to provide withdrawal logic and check the relevant authority.

That makes control of the account economically significant. A payments provider that funded a customer's token account cannot assume that paying the original deposit gives it the right to reclaim the excess. The party entitled to authorize the withdrawal may be different from the party that supplied the SOL.

Moving a surplus balance requires an authorized transaction that leaves the minimum intact. It transfers existing SOL between accounts while conserving the total; it does not issue new tokens. The guide provides no aggregate measure of completed withdrawals or subsequent sales.

For future onboarding, the benefit is more direct: whoever funds an account needs less SOL upfront. Providers can potentially support more customer accounts with the same capital, even when customers themselves do not purchase SOL. Whether existing surplus can be redeployed depends on the authority and program arrangements above.

How long those accounts survive will determine the continuing reserve requirement. Gross account creation can give a very different impression from state that remains on-chain.

In his July 20 analysis, Solana Foundation researcher Umberto Natale found that 75.5% of account-creation events in the analyzed cohort closed within the same transaction. The observations were not deduplicated by address: repeated creation and closure could count as separate events.

Those workflows can generate activity while leaving little persistent account storage behind. The finding does not predict how users will respond to September's reduction. The study also cautions that its weak, unstable correlations between SOL prices and account activity are descriptive, rather than a causal estimate of how cheaper rent changes demand.

A useful test of the policy will therefore track persistent account bytes and their associated minimum reserves alongside activity. Counting new accounts alone cannot establish whether the network has absorbed the lower reserve rate.

SOL demand extends beyond account reserves

Other uses of SOL also continue. Under Solana's fee rules, transactions require SOL: half the base fee is burned and half goes to the validator, while the entire priority fee goes to the validator. Fee payments are a separate demand channel from refundable account reserves. More activity could increase fee use, but throughput alone does not establish the amount users pay or the balances they retain.

SOL holders can also delegate stake to validators to help secure the network and become eligible for rewards. Reclaimed capital could be staked or used to fund more accounts. The cited material does not establish either outcome as a result of the cut, so these possibilities provide no quantified offset to lower reserve requirements.

CryptoSlate's recent analysis of activity and fee economics examined a related distinction: network usage and token economics can move differently. Rent reduction adds a specific reason why growth can require less SOL per unit of persistent state.

As of Sept. 5, the second reduction, to 5,080 lamports per byte, is on testnet, with mainnet expected in mid-September. The last three steps are expected with Agave 4.4 in November. Each activation remains subject to review of state growth, and a fallback can restore the original parameter.

The next gates will determine how far the capital saving goes. Persistent state growth and actual reclamation will then show how much of that saving becomes new account capacity, reusable working capital or reduced SOL held against storage.

The post Solana’s plan to cut account deposits by 90% could weaken a reason to hold SOL appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Zcash broke above $1,000 on Sept. 4, pushing the asset value of Grayscale’s recently listed ZCSH ETF past $400 million less than two weeks after its debut.

ZEC registered an intraday high of $1,050.70, up roughly 20% over 24 hours and nearly 100% over the past month.

The move lifted ZCSH’s assets to $414.7 million as of Sept. 3, compared with about $304.6 million when the fund began trading on NYSE Arca on Aug. 25.

ZCSH inherited assets from the Grayscale Zcash Trust, and the sharp appreciation in ZEC accounts for much of the increase.

Still, the fund’s ZEC holdings rose from 387,849 at launch to 428,613 by Sept. 3, while shares outstanding increased to 5.35 million.

The Sept. 4 breakout came as Bitcoin surpassed $82,000 and ETH reclaimed $2,500, but Zcash’s move was considerably larger. Roughly $40 million of ZEC shorts were liquidated in 24 hours, adding fuel to a rally that had already gathered momentum before the latest market-wide advance.

Leverage has expanded with the price. CoinGlass data showed that Zcash futures open interest crossed $2 billion for the first time, while 24-hour futures volume climbed above $6 billion for the first time since mid-August.

The combination suggests traders are committing substantially more capital to ZEC derivatives as the token tests levels it has not sustained in years.

The scale of the repricing is particularly stark over a longer horizon. ZEC was trading around $40 a year ago and has now returned to the top 10 largest cryptos by market cap for the first time since 2018.

That ascent has also brought increasingly aggressive forecasts. Cryptographer Arjun Khemani said characterizing the token's rally solely as a privacy-coin understates the case being made for Zcash.

He pointed to its fixed 21 million supply, Bitcoin-like emissions schedule, decade of distribution, work on quantum recoverability, plans for substantially higher transaction throughput and efforts to formally verify its shielded pool against undetectable inflation bugs.

Khemani said that “privacy is just one property of Zcash,” arguing that the larger bet is whether ZEC can develop into a form of sovereign money.

Grayscale sees AI opening a crack in Bitcoin’s dominance

The price move has revived a broader question around Zcash: whether its latest gains can translate into a lasting challenge to Bitcoin’s dominance of the digital-currency market.

Bitcoin accounts for about 93% of the market capitalization of Grayscale’s Currencies Crypto Sector, a level of dominance that alternatives such as Litecoin have failed to seriously disrupt. Zcash remains worth less than 1% of Bitcoin even after rising roughly 19-fold over the period covered by Grayscale’s latest research.

Grayscale argues Zcash has a better chance than previous challengers because it combines Bitcoin-like monetary properties with features that have become more relevant as the crypto market has matured.

Privacy is central to that thesis.

Bitcoin transactions are permanently recorded on a public ledger. Once an address is linked to an offchain identity, its balances and transaction history can potentially be reconstructed.

Grayscale argues advances in artificial intelligence could make that process faster, cheaper, and more widely accessible by improving address labeling and blockchain activity analysis.

The asset manager sees that technological shift as the beginning of a third major wave of concern over financial privacy, following the computerization of financial records in the 1970s and the growth of the internet in the 1990s.

Zcash approaches the problem differently. Its shielded transactions use zero-knowledge cryptography to conceal sending and receiving addresses and transaction amounts, allowing users to retain Bitcoin-like scarcity without making every transfer permanently visible.

Grayscale argued that distinction could become more valuable as AI makes surveillance of transparent blockchains increasingly sophisticated.

Its case extends beyond privacy. Grayscale describes Zcash as having several “second mover” advantages, including active development against emerging cybersecurity risks and cross-chain connectivity through intent-based technology that could allow wallets or AI agents to move value across networks while using Zcash as a private settlement layer.

Those features underpin the asset manager’s argument that Zcash could capture market share from Bitcoin even without reproducing Bitcoin’s merchant adoption or liquidity.

The same privacy architecture also presents one of Zcash’s largest obstacles. Shielded transactions can complicate sanctions screening, anti-money laundering controls, and efforts to trace illicit funds, creating regulatory and compliance concerns that have historically weighed more heavily on privacy-focused cryptocurrencies than on Bitcoin.

Bitcoin also retains advantages that are difficult to replicate. Its liquidity, infrastructure, brand recognition, and more than 15 years of network growth continue to reinforce its position at the center of the digital-currency market.

That leaves Zcash with a considerable gap to close.

Nevertheless, the move above $1,000 has made Grayscale’s thesis more consequential, as it puts greater weight on whether privacy and technological differentiation can produce durable market-share gains once the momentum behind the current rally cools.

The post Zcash breaks $1,000 as its spot ETF crosses $400 million in assets appeared first on CryptoSlate.

At least four more decade-old wallets moved a combined $15.7 million between Aug. 29 and Sept. 4, with one batch of coins sent to Coinbase in a likely sign of a sale.

Robinhood Chain is an Ethereum layer-2 network built with Arbitrum technology for tokenized assets, crypto apps, and on-chain financial products.

The update fixes a high-severity flaw in Chrome’s V8 engine, but Google has not revealed who is using it or whom they targeted.

Anthropic says Claude spent 11 days turning Fermat's Last Theorem into 13 million lines of code a computer can check itself, no human trust required

Nearly 30 banks backed the rare unsecured facility as TikTok’s parent company spends heavily on AI chips, models, and overseas data centers.

Shiba Inu's futures market is seeing a rapid surge in trading activity after its price suddenly flipped positive, surging by nearly 5% over the last 24 hours.

Zcash rose above the landmark $1000 price point as a sharp rally forced short traders out of leveraged positions.

Solana is strengthening its position in the rapidly expanding real-world asset (RWA) sector, attracting $348 million in fresh capital.

Recent buying pressure has reinforced a major on-chain support floor for Dogecoin, where almost 35 billion DOGE were previously traded.

AI agents continue to use XRP and RLUSD to pay for services directly onchain, with transactions on the verge of 4 million.

TLDR:

• Bitcoin’s 90-day correlation with gold reached +0.50, more than doubling from early 2026 levels.
• Bitcoin’s Nasdaq 100 correlation fell to about 0.30, marking its lowest level in one year.
• The correlation surge accelerated after Treasury debt buybacks doubled to at least $4 billion.
• Gold and Bitcoin are drawing attention as scarce assets amid currency and fiscal concerns.

Bitcoin and gold are moving closer together as investors shift toward scarce assets amid growing fiscal and currency concerns. The 90-day correlation between Bitcoin and gold has reached +0.50, more than doubling since the start of 2026.

At the same time, Bitcoin’s correlation with the Nasdaq 100 has fallen to about 0.30, marking a one-year low. The divergence signals a sharp change in how BTC has traded alongside traditional markets this year.

Bitcoin Gold Correlation Reaches +0.50

The Kobeissi Letter reported that Bitcoin’s 90-day correlation with gold now stands at +0.50. The figure nearly matches the record reached during the 2020 pandemic.

The current reading has more than doubled from the start of 2026. After the 2022 bear market recovery, Bitcoin’s 90-day correlation with gold reached only +0.30.

Bitwise and Bloomberg data through August 31 also put the Bitcoin gold correlation at +0.50. The data shows the relationship has strengthened considerably in recent months.

The shift accelerated after the US Treasury announced changes to its long-dated debt buyback operations. On August 19, the Treasury said it would double buybacks from $2 billion to at least $4 billion per operation.

Bitcoin Correlation With Nasdaq Falls to One-Year Low

Bitcoin’s relationship with the Nasdaq 100 has moved in the opposite direction. The 90-day correlation has declined to roughly 0.30, according to the Kobeissi Letter.

That marks Bitcoin’s lowest correlation with the Nasdaq 100 in one year. The divergence puts greater focus on BTC’s relationship with gold and other scarce assets.

Investors increasingly view both Bitcoin and gold as potential hedges against currency debasement. US debt has reached about $40 trillion, adding to concerns surrounding long-term fiscal pressures.

Gold has also attracted central-bank demand amid geopolitical uncertainty. The Netherlands, for example, moved 86 tonnes of gold to London, reflecting continued activity around the traditional reserve asset.

Crypto Tice separately argued that gold’s recent pause could precede greater attention toward Bitcoin. Its analysis points to previous periods when profits from gold shifted toward BTC after gold reached new highs.

Gold currently trades near $4,430 per ounce, while Bitcoin hovers around $81,000. The two assets now show a much closer 90-day price relationship than earlier this year.

The post Bitcoin Gold Correlation Climbs to 0.50 as Nasdaq Link Hits Yearly Low appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• SEC ISS action seeks court enforcement after the firm declined to fully satisfy a July subpoena.
• The SEC says missing ISS records have hindered its securities-law examination and oversight work.
• ISS faces scrutiny over proxy influence as regulators pursue documents tied to federal securities laws.
• Comments from Balchunas and Sigel broaden attention toward concentration among major proxy advisers.

Institutional Shareholder Services faces an SEC enforcement action over its refusal to provide documents requested by the regulator. The Securities and Exchange Commission filed the action on September 4, 2026, in federal court.

The case seeks to compel ISS to comply with an administrative subpoena issued in July. The dispute puts renewed regulatory attention on the proxy advisory firm’s operations.

SEC ISS Action Targets ISS Subpoena Compliance

The SEC filed its application in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The agency seeks an order requiring Institutional Shareholder Services to produce outstanding records.

According to the SEC filing, agency examination staff initially made routine information requests to ISS. The firm declined to fully comply with those requests, according to the regulator.

The SEC later issued an administrative subpoena on July 21, 2026. The agency says ISS has continued refusing to provide all requested materials.

The subpoena seeks documents connected to an investigation into ISS’s compliance with federal securities laws. The SEC said the missing records have slowed its examination and enforcement work.

ISS operates as an investment adviser registered with the SEC. The regulator described itself as the firm’s primary regulator in the court filing.

The SEC said the requested records relate directly to its statutory oversight responsibilities. The agency also linked the investigation to its investor protection duties.

ISS Proxy Recommendations Draw Regulatory Attention

ISS has faced broader scrutiny over its influence on corporate shareholder votes. Eric Balchunas recently reported the SEC action and pointed to the firm’s market position.

Balchunas described ISS as controlling about half of the proxy voting outsourcing market. He also referenced recent criticism surrounding the firm’s approach to environmental, social, and governance issues.

Matthew Sigel separately discussed the wider scrutiny facing proxy advisory firms. He pointed to Glass Lewis recommendations involving gender-diversity targets for corporate boards.

Sigel also described a policy at VanEck requiring portfolio managers to explain overrides of Glass Lewis recommendations. His comments placed ISS and Glass Lewis within the same broader debate.

ISS and Glass Lewis remain prominent names in proxy advisory services. Their recommendations can influence how shareholders approach corporate voting decisions.

Elon Musk previously criticized the influence of proxy advisers and passive fund structures. Balchunas referenced those earlier comments while discussing the latest SEC action.

The current case centers on subpoena compliance rather than the merits of any specific proxy recommendation. The SEC now seeks judicial enforcement of its outstanding information request.

The post SEC ISS Subpoena Action Puts Proxy Advisor Under Regulatory Scrutiny appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• RedSonic Vault lost 9.25 ETH after an attacker exploited a dual-asset pricing flaw entirely.
• A permissionless registerErc20 function let the attacker add a second, conflicting stETH share class.
• The attacker flash-loaned 1,139 WETH from Balancer and needed zero starting capital of their own.
• ExVulSec traced the full exploit, including the Curve swap and the final loan repayment step.

A flash loan attacker drained 9.25 ETH from Ethereum’s RedSonic Vault in a single transaction. Blockchain security firm ExVulSec identified the exploit and published a full technical breakdown. 

The attacker manipulated a permissionless asset-registration function to double count the same underlying collateral. On-chain records show the entire operation executed inside one self-contained transaction.

How the RedSonic Vault Exploit Unfolded

The attacker flash-loaned 1,139 WETH from Balancer to fund the entire operation. No upfront capital of their own was required.

RedSonic’s vault prices its rsvETH shares through a function called getTotalAssetBalance. For the Lido position, that function reads the vault’s raw stETH balance directly.

That design choice became the exploit’s foundation. Share prices tied directly to a raw balance can shift if that balance changes unexpectedly. No corresponding shares need to be minted or burned.

The vault’s registerErc20 function carried no access restrictions, according to ExVulSec. Anyone could register a brand new asset class inside the vault.

The attacker registered stETH as a second asset, creating a class called rsvstETH. Both share types then drew from the exact same underlying stETH balance.

The exploit contract self-destructed once execution finished. Security researchers note that self-destructing contracts often complicate later on-chain tracing efforts.

Flash loans let borrowers access large sums without posting collateral, provided the loan gets repaid within the same transaction. Attackers commonly use this mechanism to fund exploits that would otherwise demand substantial capital.

RedSonic Vault Exploit Exposes a Dual-Asset Flaw

The attacker deposited 1,130 ETH first, acquiring close to 99% of all outstanding rsvETH shares. That position set up the rest of the exploit.

Next, the attacker deposited 9.34 stETH directly into the vault. That single deposit inflated the stETH balance without minting any new rsvETH shares.

Because rsvETH pricing reads the raw stETH balance, the extra deposit pushed the share price higher artificially. The attacker’s existing rsvETH holdings gained value instantly as a result, without any new rsvETH being issued.

The attacker then redeemed rsvETH for 1,139.5 ETH, according to ExVulSec’s transaction analysis. That single redemption produced the full 9.25 ETH profit.

The same attacker also redeemed the rsvstETH shares for stETH separately. The identical underlying collateral effectively paid out twice from one shared, pooled vault balance.

ExVulSec reported that the recovered stETH was swapped for ETH on Curve. The attacker repaid the Balancer flash loan within that same transaction.

Etherscan data lists the attacker’s wallet as 0x70f2333d21Ed7E7D105F6578227A9A747687982C. The RedSonic Vault contract itself sits at 0x4315990d9eeaffdfafd49958b4851f203fa1126f.

The attack transaction carries the hash 0xe3cba90e865c6cba950ebce36a52607f51f1fd33cd9fb920c78803f19b57791a. It remains publicly viewable on Etherscan for anyone verifying the exploit’s details.

The post RedSonic Vault Exploit Drains 9.25 ETH in Ethereum Flash Loan Attack appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• The XRP price prediction places $3.66 as the decisive monthly resistance that buyers must break before the projected path toward $60 becomes active.
• XRP dropped to $1.41 after strong employment data and long liquidations, although elevated spot volume suggests traders remain active.
• United States spot XRP ETFs attracted $110.49 million during the week ending August 28, lifting cumulative inflows beyond $1.66 billion.
• RLUSD growth and planned XRPL lending features could expand network activity while XRP tests support near $1.30 and resistance around $1.70.

XRP trades near $1.41 after losing 2.83% over 24 hours, following stronger United States employment data and heavy long liquidations. The latest XRP price prediction centers on $3.66, a resistance level that has capped the token for years. Analyst Ali Martinez says a monthly close above that barrier would confirm an ascending triangle breakout. 

His chart places the long-term technical target near $60. The projection is conditional, while nearer levels still determine whether buyers can regain control. Rising spot activity, exchange outflows, ETF demand, and growth across Ripple’s ecosystem provide a backdrop for the contested technical setup.

XRP Price Prediction Depends on a Close Above $3.66

The latest decline followed a United States jobs report showing 162,000 new positions. That figure exceeded market expectations, while unemployment held at 4.1%. The release pressured risk assets by strengthening expectations for tighter monetary policy.

XRP briefly fell toward $1.33 during the sell-off. Liquidations reached about $14.82 million, with long positions representing 95.8% of the total. Forced closures added selling pressure before the token recovered toward $1.41.

Trading activity nevertheless stayed elevated during August. Binance processed about $7.28 billion in XRP spot volume, while Upbit recorded roughly $4.68 billion. Around 500 million tokens also left Binance during the month. Lower exchange balances can reflect transfers into self-custody, although they do not guarantee immediate price gains.

Martinez’s XRP price prediction draws on an ascending triangle visible on the monthly chart. XRP has produced higher lows while repeatedly meeting resistance near its previous record zone. A monthly close above $3.66 would provide stronger confirmation than a brief intraday move.

The projected path does not send XRP directly to $60. Martinez’s chart identifies possible stages near $9.49 and $15.60, followed by a potential pullback. Higher extensions appear around $31.87 and $60 if the long-term structure continues.

Nearer resistance remains more relevant for current traders. XRP must first reclaim $1.70, then clear potential targets around $1.90, $2.13, $2.80, and $3.40. Failure to hold the $1.30 area could expose the broader $1.10 to $1.38 support zone.

XRP Price Prediction Gains Support From ETF Demand

Fundamental developments provide a second part of the XRP price prediction. United States spot XRP ETFs attracted $110.49 million during the week ending August 28. Total net inflows surpassed $1.66 billion, showing continued institutional demand despite short-term price weakness.

Ripple USD has also expanded across the ecosystem. RLUSD supply rose 51% during the past 30 days to a record $2.4 billion. About $1.1 billion of those assets now sit on the XRP Ledger, alongside growth in holders and transaction volume.

Meanwhile, XRPL developers are testing a Lending Protocol and Single Asset Vaults. The upgrades could bring more lending, yield products, and institutional activity onto the network. Greater usage may support demand, but adoption will depend on liquidity, security, and participation.

Regulation provides another potential catalyst. A United States Senate cloture vote on the CLARITY Act is scheduled for September 15, 2026. The procedural vote requires 60 votes and would determine whether the bill advances.

Short-term chart readings remain divided. One bearish view treats the latest rebound as a three-wave corrective move rather than a confirmed trend reversal. Under that interpretation, XRP has not established a durable bottom within the $1.10 to $1.38 region.

The daily chart offers a firmer bullish signal. XRP trades above its 200-day exponential moving average and has held support near $1.3093. A bullish flag also points to $1.6975, the August high, as the first major test. Only sustained closes above nearby resistance would strengthen the larger breakout case and bring Martinez’s $3.66 trigger into focus.

The post XRP Price Prediction Targets $60 From Decade Long Chart Pattern appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Shiba Inu exchange outflows surged 121.26%, although faster inflow growth reduced the bullish impact of the withdrawal increase.
• SHIB exchange inflows climbed 182.3% to about 1.68 billion tokens, leaving significantly more liquidity available on trading platforms.
• Shiba Inu price remains focused on the $0.00000500 support area after rebounding nearly 6% from its recent August weakness.
• Shytoshi Kusama changed his X location to “close” and bio to “Polish,” but no confirmed announcement explains those updates.

Shiba Inu exchange outflows jumped sharply during the latest measured period, but heavier inflows limited the bullish impact for SHIB. CryptoQuant data showed the seven-day average outflow rising 121.26% to roughly 579 million tokens. However, exchange inflows increased much faster, climbing 182.3% to about 1.68 billion SHIB. 

That imbalance left a positive net flow of 86.53 billion SHIB across monitored platforms. Rising reserves can keep more tokens available for sale if demand weakens. SHIB still traded 1.14% higher over 24 hours and remained almost 6% higher for the week. The rebound followed volatile trading after stronger August U.S. employment data.

Shiba Inu Exchange Outflows Rise as Inflows Accelerate

Shiba Inu exchange outflows often attract attention because withdrawals can reduce immediately tradable supply. Traders usually view sustained withdrawals as constructive when tokens move into private wallets. That pattern can signal lower near-term selling pressure and stronger holder conviction.

This time, however, the broader flow picture remained less supportive. SHIB exchange inflows climbed far faster than withdrawals during the same measured window. The seven-day average inflow reached about 1.68 billion tokens, compared with roughly 579 million leaving exchanges.

The difference matters because stronger deposits can raise the amount of SHIB available near current market prices. A positive exchange net flow means more tokens entered platforms than left them. That can create nearby supply even when headline outflow growth appears strong.

Cryptoquant data showed a positive net flow of 86.53 billion SHIB across monitored exchanges. Higher reserves do not guarantee immediate selling, since users may deposit tokens for several reasons. Still, the balance leaves traders watching whether buyers can absorb available liquidity without losing support.

Shiba Inu exchange outflows therefore offer only a partial bullish signal. The faster rise in SHIB exchange inflows weakens the case for a supply squeeze. Traders may need a sustained reversal in net flows before reading withdrawals as a stronger accumulation signal.

Shiba Inu Exchange Outflows Keep Price Support in Focus

Price action remains equally important while exchange activity stays mixed. SHIB recently recovered from an August thirty-day low near $0.00000488. The token gained almost 6% during the week and rose 1.14% over the latest 24 hours.

The recovery keeps $0.00000500 as an important support area for short-term traders. Holding that level could help buyers preserve the recent rebound. A break below it may expose lower price zones if exchange liquidity remains elevated.

Momentum still appears fragile because stronger inflows can place more inventory near the market. Buyers must absorb that supply to keep the rebound intact. Without stronger demand, rising reserves could limit upside even while withdrawals continue increasing.

Community attention has also shifted toward Shytoshi Kusama after subtle changes to his X profile. The Shiba Inu lead ambassador changed his listed location to “close” from an earlier project-related description. His bio also changed to the single word “Polish.”

Prominent community members noticed the edits, but Kusama has not explained their meaning. The changes may point to project development, though no confirmed announcement has followed. Any direct link to a launch would remain speculative without additional communication.

Kusama previously discussed an AI-powered relationship platform during a February 2026 livestream. The project aimed to help couples identify behavioral patterns, friction points, and possible compatibility risks. His earlier profile language referenced final beta work and bug checks.

Shiba Inu exchange outflows will remain one useful indicator, but traders are also watching inflows and price structure. The next directional move may depend on whether exchange deposits slow and buyers defend $0.00000500. Kusama’s profile activity adds community interest, but on-chain liquidity remains the more measurable market signal.

For now, reserve growth keeps immediate selling risk firmly visible across major exchanges. A deposit slowdown could improve that market balance.

The post Shiba Inu Exchange Outflows Jump 121% as Selling Pressure Grows appeared first on Blockonomi.

A Bank for International Settlements (BIS) working paper tests the XRP Ledger (XRPL) as a proof-of-concept for verifying official statistics on-chain, recording cryptographic fingerprints of public datasets that publish in three to five seconds and verify in one to two.

The Working Paper No 1374 essentially asks how statistical agencies can give users an independent way to check the origin and integrity of published data without changing their existing dissemination systems.

International organizations (the BIS among them) rely on the SDMX standard to exchange official statistics, and the prototype binds each SDMX dataset to its source by hashing it and writing a single summary value to the ledger.

Though only the fingerprints reach the chain, never the underlying numbers, so confidential data stays off-ledger, and the method extends to formats such as XBRL. The BIS has tested public blockchains before, including Project Mariana, which trialed wholesale central bank digital currency settlement on a public chain with the central banks of France, Singapore, and Switzerland.

The system normalizes each file with Canonical XML 1.1, hashes it with SHA3-512 at the whole-file and per-series level, and collapses those hashes into one Merkle root written to the Memos field of an XRPL Payment transaction. Each file also carries a W3C Verifiable Credential in its header, signed by the publisher’s identity keys.

Cost and Simplicity

The memo approach needs no smart contracts, so the authors avoided gas costs and contract risk, and XRPL’s base fee of 10 drops, or 0.00001 XRP, put anchoring close to free. Batching compounds that.

A single ledger entry can cover thousands of datasets, dropping the on-chain cost to a fraction of a cent each. The paper also cites the ledger’s fast consensus finality and the published technical analysis of its consensus protocol.

XRPL has taken on other institutional workloads this year. CryptoPotato reported on a pilot that linked the ledger to interbank rails with JPMorgan, Mastercard and Ondo, which settled tokenized Treasury bills in under five seconds, and Ripple has published an institutional roadmap adding compliance credentials and permissioned trading. The BIS tests ran on XRPL’s DevNet, a test network.

It notes that DevNet shares the mainnet’s transaction format and close cadence, so the latency figures carry over, and mainnet fees stay in the sub-cent range.

A Few Firm Limits

The paper also describes the build as an experimental proof-of-concept, stating a production service would need hardware-backed signing, pinned validator nodes and formal load testing.

Though keep in mind the ledger certifies only what was published, by whom and when, so the paper reaches no adoption decision and gives no endorsement of XRP, and the authors attribute the views to themselves, not to the BIS or its member central banks.

The post BIS Tests XRP Ledger to Anchor Official Statistics On-Chain in Proof-of-Concept Paper appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The largest meme coin by market cap has soared on Saturday evening to $0.094, hitting a two-week high. The move is rather unexpected given the typically calm nature of the weekends.

However, there were certain signs about a potential rally, even though DOGE has slipped from its local high to $0.09 as of press time.

CryptoPotato outlined yesterday the three major signals that flashed for DOGE, including the TD Sequential. Analysts quickly determined that the OG meme coin is primed for another leg up.

However, that didn’t transpire at first, as the asset was rejected at $0.088 and slipped back down to $0.084 as the entire market bled following the strong US jobs report, which was considered bearish for risk-on assets.

Nevertheless, DOGE exploded on Saturday evening, gaining 12% from its low yesterday to the two-week high at $0.094. Popular analyst CW noted that the meme coin has reached the first major sell wall on its path forward, which is too solid to be broken now. If it falls, though, the next such wall sits all the way up at $0.14.

Fellow analyst Alex Marzell believes DOGE did “exactly what it needed to,” as it rebounded from the Friday lows to reclaim a key resistance.

$DOGE did exactly what it needed to.

Friday’s jobs print dumped it back to the $0.083 base, six flat 4H candles held it, and today one 4H candle ripped $0.0876 to $0.0952 straight back through $0.088.

Old resistance is the new line. Hold $0.088 and I think $0.095 goes next and… pic.twitter.com/y7hW91yCek

— Alex Marzell (@MarzellCrypto) September 5, 2026

Max Crypto also weighed in on DOGE’s impressive move and even suggested that its breakouts have been the “best indicator” for the start of an Altseason.

The post Dogecoin (DOGE) Suddenly Pumps by Double Digits as Analysts Declare the Start of Altseason appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Standard Chartered extended its deliverable Bitcoin (BTC) and Ether (ETH) spot trading to institutional clients in the United Arab Emirates on September 3, becoming the first Global Systemically Important Bank (G-SIB) to offer the service in the country.

The offering runs through Standard Chartered DIFC, the bank’s arm in the Dubai International Financial Center (DIFC), which said it is the only global bank currently providing institutional digital asset spot trading in the region.

Built on the UK Launch

The launch adds trade execution to a custody service the bank already runs in the UAE. The trades are deliverable, so clients take possession of the underlying Bitcoin and Ether at settlement, and they can settle through a custodian of their choice, including Standard Chartered’s own digital asset custody solution that went live in September 2024.

Trades run through the bank’s electronic channels and sit inside its existing platforms, letting clients access the two assets through the same FX interfaces they already use. Standard Chartered DIFC is regulated by the Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA).

“The UAE has developed a clear digital assets regulatory framework that supports institutional participation and innovation,” said Rola Abu Manneh, Chief Executive Officer for the UAE, Middle East and Pakistan at Standard Chartered. She said pairing execution with custody, governance, and the bank’s global connectivity gives clients a more integrated way to participate in digital asset markets.

Standard Chartered first introduced institutional Bitcoin and Ether spot trading through its UK branch in July 2025, the first G-SIB to offer deliverable spot crypto trading to institutional clients.

“DIFC provides an established platform for international financial institutions to deploy global capabilities across markets,” said Christopher Parsons, Senior Executive Officer at Standard Chartered DIFC. He said the arrangement combines the bank’s global markets network with a regulated base for serving clients across the region.

A Wider UAE Digital Asset Push

The trading service sits inside a broader digital asset strategy that spans custody, trading and tokenization through Standard Chartered’s Corporate and Investment Bank, with its ventures ecosystem reaching into Zodia Markets and Libeara.

The bank already lets institutional clients mint and redeem USDC directly through its DIFC platform, a service it built with Circle. SC Ventures, its innovation arm, has backed a $100 million digital asset joint venture in the UAE with Japan’s SBI Holdings that targets market infrastructure, compliance tools, DeFi and tokenization.

The post Standard Chartered Extends Institutional Bitcoin and Ether Spot Trading to the UAE appeared first on CryptoPotato.

CryptoQuant data shows that bitcoin investors started realizing major profits after the explosive August rally, disposing of roughly 110,000 BTC in just a few weeks.

Such highly concentrated profit-taking developments have historically been followed by substantial price correction for the underlying asset, the analysts warned. Moreover, several demand indicators have weakened, which could add to the selling pressure.

110K BTC Profit Taken

The major run that began on August 19 at prices of under $65,000 drove the leading cryptocurrency to almost $80,000 in just two days. According to CQ’s latest weekly report, holders realized net profits of 23,000 BTC on that day alone (August 21), which became the largest single-day profit realization this year.

The asset indeed dipped in the following days as it felt almost inevitable after such a gigantic jump, but went on the offensive once again in the following week or so. It rocketed past $82,000 on Friday before it was rejected following the US jobs report, and now sits below $80,000.

The report described the major profit-taking as a classic characteristic of a bullish cooldown, but warned that if they continue at such a rapid pace, the asset’s price could be primed for another correction. Historical occurrences have shown that BTC tends to dump hard after a major rally if investors are not convinced about its potential.

“It is a hallmark of a bullish cooldown: bullish because it happens into strength, cautionary because concentrated realization can cap near-term upside,” reads the report.

Cooling Demand

CryptoQuant outlined another reason why BTC could be primed for a more profound correction, even though it already slipped from $82,400 to $79,600. Its apparent spot demand briefly expanded by 43,000 units, marking its fastest growth pace of the year. However, that metric has lost its momentum and is now back in contraction.

US investors’ demand has weakened as well. The most used metric for this, the Coinbase Premium, measuring the price difference between the asset on the leading US exchange and other trading platforms, has returned to slightly negative territory at -0.05.

The analysts said similar periods of soft US spot demand have capped the cryptocurrency’s rallies three other times this year alone.

Nevertheless, the short-term picture does not necessarily mean that BTC’s run is over and that it will return to a bearish phase. The Bull Score currently stands at 70, which is above the 60 threshold historically associated with sustainable bull markets.

” This keeps the broader picture constructive: Bitcoin remains in the early phase of a new bull market even as short-term momentum cools. The “official” bull market begins once price closes above its 365-day moving average,” they added, outlining that this key MA is located at around $83,000 – the level that stopped BTC in May.

The post Bitcoin Holders Just Cashed Out 110,000 BTC in Profits: Is a Bigger Price Drop Coming? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin remains locked in a post-breakout consolidation phase, but the latest rejection from the upper end of the structure shows that buyers are still struggling to generate sustained momentum above $80K. The broader trend remains constructive, although the current range leaves BTC vulnerable to further liquidity-driven swings before its next directional move.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

Bitcoin’s daily structure remains significantly stronger than it was before the August breakout. The asset is holding well above the former $72K-$74.5K resistance zone and both moving averages, preserving the broader bullish shift despite the recent loss of momentum.

However, BTC has repeatedly encountered selling pressure inside the $80.5K-$82.5K resistance zone. The latest attempt briefly pushed toward $82K before being rejected, sending the price back below $80K. This inability to establish acceptance above the resistance area suggests that supply remains active at higher prices.

At the same time, the asset continues to trade within a gradually ascending channel. Its lower boundary currently sits around the $76K-$77K region, making this the most important nearby structural support. As long as BTC remains above this area, the ongoing price action can still be interpreted as consolidation following the sharp rally rather than a confirmed bearish reversal.

A decisive breakout above the $80.5K-$82.5K zone would strengthen the continuation scenario. Conversely, losing the channel support around $76K-$77K could trigger a more substantial correction, with the former $72K-$74.5K breakout zone becoming the next major area of interest.

BTC/USDT 4-Hour Chart

The 4-hour chart highlights the market’s current indecision more clearly. BTC rallied from the lower boundary of the ascending structure near $76.5K-$77K and quickly tested the $81K-$82K area, only for sellers to reject the move once again.

Price subsequently dropped toward $79.5K and has entered a tight short-term consolidation. This creates a notable contrast between the rising channel structure and the repeated failures near its upper boundary. Buyers are still defending higher lows, but they have yet to demonstrate enough momentum to convert the $80.5K-$82.5K supply area into support.

The $76.5K-$77.5K region therefore remains crucial. Another test of this zone could determine whether the ascending structure survives. A strong reaction would keep a renewed push toward $81K-$82K in play, whereas a breakdown would indicate that the consolidation is transitioning into a deeper corrective phase.

Sentiment Analysis

The one-week BTC liquidation heatmap shows substantial liquidity on both sides of the current price, which supports the possibility of continued choppy trading and liquidity sweeps.

Above the market, notable liquidation concentrations appear around $81K-$82K and extend toward approximately $84K. These clusters could attract price if buyers regain momentum.

However, the downside liquidity is particularly relevant following the latest rejection. A broad and comparatively dense concentration is visible below the market, especially around the $76K-$78K region. This aligns closely with the lower boundary of the ascending technical structure.

As a result, a downside liquidity sweep toward $76K-$78K remains a plausible near-term scenario before another recovery attempt. Such a move would not automatically invalidate the broader bullish setup, but a sustained breakdown beneath this region would increase the probability of a deeper retracement toward the $72K-$74.5K support zone.

The post Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Good and the Bad for BTC After Latest $82.4K Rejection appeared first on CryptoPotato.