Connect with us

Published

on

Stop pretending technical and human vulnerabilities are separate things

Opinion by: Andrey Sergeenkov, researcher, analyst and writer

Crypto founders love big promises: decentralized finance, banking the unbanked and freedom from intermediaries. Then hacks happen. In some cases, billions vanish overnight. 

On Feb. 21, 2025, the North Korean Lazarus Group stole $1.46 billion from Bybit. They sent phishing emails to staff with cold wallet access. After compromising these accounts, they accessed Bybit’s interface and replaced the multisignature wallet contract with their malicious version. When Bybit attempted a routine transfer, the hackers redirected 499,000 Ether (ETH) to addresses they controlled.

This wasn’t just a human error. This was a design failure. A system that allows human factors to enable a billion-dollar theft isn’t innovative — it’s irresponsible.

People are not protected

In just 10 days, the hackers converted all 499,000 ETH into untraceable funds, using THORChain as their primary channel. The decentralized exchange processed a record $4.66 billion in swaps in a week but implemented no safeguards against suspicious activity.

The crypto industry has created a system that cannot protect users even after they discover a theft. Some services actually profited from this crime, collecting millions in fees while processing the laundering of stolen funds.

Recent: SafeWallet releases Bybit hack post-mortem report

In February 2025, investigators ZachXBT and Tanuki42 revealed that Coinbase users lost over $300 million annually to social engineering attacks. Their report showed $65 million stolen through phishing and other social manipulation techniques in December 2024 and January 2025. According to the investigators, Coinbase failed to address known security vulnerabilities in their API keys and verification systems that make these human-targeted attacks successful. 

ZachXBT directly criticized the exchange for having “useless customer support agents” and failing to properly report theft addresses to blockchain monitoring tools, making stolen funds harder to track. One scammer even admitted to targeting wealthy users, claiming they make at least five figures a week.

These aren’t isolated cases. The US Federal Bureau of Investigation reported that ordinary crypto users lost over $5.6 billion to fraud in 2023, and social engineering drove at least half of these schemes. Americans alone lose approximately $2 billion–$3 billion annually to human vulnerability attacks. With over 600 million crypto users worldwide, conservative estimates put individual losses from social engineering at $6 billion–$15 billion in 2024. 

Barrier to adoption

Security concerns are now recognized as the main barrier to adoption by 37% of crypto users worldwide. Meanwhile, the industry continues to promote high-risk speculative assets like memecoins, where average users typically lose money while insiders profit.

While founders pitch financial freedom, millions of real people lose their savings through vulnerabilities the industry refuses to address. They’re symptoms of a fundamental problem: Crypto builders choose marketing over security.

When disasters happen, and they face pressure about security failures, crypto leaders hide behind blockchain’s “code is law” principle and offer philosophical arguments about self-sovereignty and personal responsibility. The crypto industry loves to blame ordinary users: “Don’t store keys online,” “Check addresses before sending,” “Never open suspicious files.”

Nobody is safe

Even industry leaders themselves fall victim to the same basic attacks. In January 2024, Ripple co-founder Chris Larsen lost 283 million XRP (XRP) due to storing private keys in an online password manager. DeFiance Capital founder Arthur_0x lost $1.6 million in non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and cryptocurrency simply by opening a phishing PDF file. 

These people aren’t naive beginners — they’re creators and experts of the very system that could not protect even them. They know all the security rules, but the human factor is inevitable. If even the system architects lose millions, what chance do ordinary users have?

Knowledge of security rules doesn’t provide complete protection because fever, stress, sleep deprivation or emotional distress severely affect our decision-making abilities. Attackers continuously test different approaches, waiting for moments when users become vulnerable. They evolve their tactics constantly, creating increasingly convincing scenarios, impersonations and urgent situations. 

The unchangeable nature of blockchain transactions demands extraordinary safeguards — not fewer. If users can’t reverse mistakes or thefts, the system must prevent them in the first place. True innovation means building systems that work for real humans, not theoretically perfect users. Banks learned this lesson over centuries. Crypto builders must learn it faster.

Instead, industry leaders seem to have lost touch with reality due to the extreme wealth dumped on them quickly. They’ve bought into their PR narrative, portraying them as geniuses, and started viewing themselves as visionaries.

A call to action

Vitalik Buterin lectures his audience on voting in elections and polishes his manifesto, while Justin Sun spends $6.2 million on a banana for a “unique artistic experience” — all while building an environment that makes dangerous mistakes easy to make. This approach is fundamentally dishonest. You can’t claim to revolutionize finance while providing less security than the systems you’re replacing.

What technical brilliance exists in systems that permit billion-dollar thefts and systematic fraud of ordinary users with such ease? As a core function, true technical excellence would include protecting users from permanent financial loss. A financial system that cannot secure its users’ assets is not technically advanced — it’s fundamentally incomplete.

It’s time to stop writing manifestos and promoting questionable PR stunts designed to attract a broader and more vulnerable audience. Start building genuine protections that match the level of risk your users face. No amount of blockchain innovation matters if ordinary people cannot use these systems without fear of instant, permanent financial loss.

Anything less is just reckless experimentation at users’ expense disguised as a revolution — a scheme that enriches founders and insiders while ordinary people bear all the risks.

If the industry doesn’t solve this problem, regulators will — and you won’t like their solutions. Your philosophical arguments about self-sovereignty won’t matter when licenses are revoked and operations shut down.

This is the choice crypto builders face: Either create truly secure systems that justify your claims about financial innovation or watch as regulators transform your “revolutionary technology” into another heavily regulated financial service. The clock is ticking.

Opinion by: Andrey Sergeenkov, researcher, analyst and writer.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Continue Reading

Politics

Economy will have to be ‘strong enough’ for U-turn on winter fuel, business secretary says

Published

on

By

Economy will have to be 'strong enough' for U-turn on winter fuel, business secretary says

The economy will have to be “strong enough” for the government to U-turn on winter fuel payment cuts, the business secretary has said.

Jonathan Reynolds, talking to Beth Rigby on the Electoral Dysfunction podcast, also said the public would have to “wait for the actual budget” to make an announcement on it.

Sir Keir Starmer said on Wednesday he would ease the cut to the winter fuel payment, which has been removed from more than 10 million pensioners this winter after it became means-tested.

He and his ministers had insisted they would stick to their guns on the policy, even just hours before Sir Keir revealed his change of heart at Prime Minister’s Questions.

But Mr Reynolds revealed there is more at play to be able to change the policy.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Winter fuel payment cuts to be reversed

“The economy has got to be strong enough to give you the capacity to make the kind of decisions people want us to see,” he said.

“We want people to know we’re listening.

“All the prime minister has said is ‘look, he’s listening, he’s aware of it.

“He wants a strong economy to be able to deliver for people.

“You’d have to wait for the actual budget to do that.”

Read more:
Gordon Brown suggests people on top income tax rate should be excluded from winter fuel

What are the options for winter fuel payments?

  • The Institute for Fiscal Studies has looked into the government’s options after Sir Keir Starmer said he is considering changes to the cut to winter fuel payment (WFP).
  • The government could make a complete U-turn on removing the payment from pensioners not claiming pension credit so they all receive it again.
  • There could be a higher eligibility threshold. Households not claiming pension credit could apply directly for the winter fuel payment, reporting their income and other circumstances.
  • Or, all pensioner households could claim it but those above a certain income level could do a self-assessment tax return to pay some of it back as a higher income tax charge. This could be like child benefit, where the repayment is based on the higher income member of the household.
  • Instead of reducing pension credit by £1 for every £1 of income, it could be withdrawn more slowly to entitle more households to it, and therefore WFP.
  • At the moment, WFP is paid to households but if it was paid to individuals the government could means-test each pensioner, rather than their household. This could be based on an individual’s income, which the government already records for tax purposes. Individuals who have a low income could get the payment, even if their spouse is high income. This would mean low income couples getting twice as much, whereas each eligible house currently gets the same.
  • Instead of just those receiving pension credit getting WFP, the government could extend it to pensioners who claim means-tested welfare for housing or council tax support. A total of 430,000 renting households would be eligible at a cost of about £100m a year.
  • Pensioners not on pension credit but receiving disability credits could get WFP, extending eligibility to 1.8m households in England and Scotland at a cost of about £500m a year.
  • Pensioners living in a band A-C property could be automatically entitled to WFP, affected just over half (6.3m).

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has committed to just one major fiscal event a year, meaning just one annual budget in the autumn.

Autumn budgets normally take place in October, with the last one at the end of the month.

If this year’s budget is around the same date it will leave little time for the extra winter fuel payments to be made as they are paid between November and December.

You can listen to the full interview on tomorrow’s Electoral Dysfunction podcast

Continue Reading

Politics

Semiconductor exemptions don’t matter when it comes to tariffs

Published

on

By

Semiconductor exemptions don’t matter when it comes to tariffs

Semiconductor exemptions don’t matter when it comes to tariffs

Opinion by: Ahmad Shadid of O.xyz

Semiconductors scored a rare exemption from US President Donald Trump’s aggressive reciprocal tariffs, but the relief is symbolic at best. Most semiconductors enter the US embedded in servers, GPUs, laptops, and smartphones. 

The finished goods remain heavily tariffed, some with duties reaching up to 49%. The exemption looks good politically but delivers little practical benefit. Nvidia’s DGX systems, crucial for training advanced AI models, do not fall under the exempted HTS codes. Nvidia could pay effective tariffs nearing 40% on these vital components. Such costs threaten to stall critical AI infrastructure projects across the country. 

Semiconductor tariffs may compromise the goal of the CHIPS Act. The act promised tens of billions of dollars in subsidies to support domestic chip manufacturing. Yet advanced lithography machines — key equipment from countries like the Netherlands and Japan — face 20%–24% tariffs. Ironically, tariffs designed to boost American production increase the cost of essential manufacturing equipment.

The effect of new tariffs is already slowing progress in critical supply chains — just as generative AI and large language models are gaining momentum across sectors like finance and defense. Any delays or cost increases now could blunt America’s technological advantage.

Indirect costs undermine exemptions for AI

Modern semiconductor supply chains are global and highly integrated. An exemption on raw silicon means nothing when servers, GPUs and other finished products face steep tariffs. Tariffs indirectly inflate costs, eliminating any competitive advantage from domestic manufacturing.

Indirect tariff costs hit high-end systems disproportionately hard. The effect ripples through AI model training, data center expansions and major infrastructure projects, significantly slowing the industry’s momentum.

Tariff impasse halts investment

So far, it’s clear that the US president’s tariff plan didn’t follow any conventional economic trends or calculated strategy. The uncertain tariff situation stalls investment decisions across the technology sector. Companies need predictable costs to justify large capital expenditures. Ongoing tariff volatility prevents them from committing resources to new data centers and manufacturing lines.

This mirrors the supply chain chaos of 2020. At that time, uncertainty caused massive order cancellations and slowed industry recovery for years. If tariff ambiguity continues, we could see similar waves of cancellations in 2025. This would further compound existing inventory and revenue issues in the semiconductor sector.

Domestic production is not optimal

The border argument for these tariffs is that they’re meant to boost domestic production. They do little, however, to encourage genuine domestic semiconductor production. Despite subsidies under the CHIPS Act, most US semiconductor companies still rely on international foundries for manufacturing. Instead, they face increased equipment and operational costs.

Recent: How trade wars impact stocks and crypto

The idea that tariffs promote domestic production ignores the reality of global semiconductor manufacturing. Costs rise across the board, putting American companies at a disadvantage rather than offering protection.

AI projects face heightened risk

The blockchain and crypto sectors, particularly AI-driven projects, also feel the pinch. Projects depend heavily on GPUs and high-performance servers for mining, validating transactions and running decentralized AI computations. Increased hardware costs directly affect profitability and growth, potentially stalling innovation in blockchain applications. 

AI developments have just started to pick up the pace in the blockchain and Web3 space. The industry saw increased interest from investors and VCs just a year ago. So, they are still on tighter budgets. Elevated costs can, however, lead to stagnation. We might see innovators and developers exiting the market. The ripple effect extends beyond the general technology sector and could threaten future digital economies. 

Moreover, these cost pressures disproportionately affect startups and smaller tech firms. Industry giants can absorb additional expenses, but innovative, smaller players face existential threats. This dynamic risks stifling innovation at the grassroots level, harming the entire tech ecosystem.

What to expect 

Semiconductors have momentarily escaped direct tariffs, but the exemption provides little benefit. Tariffs continue to hit finished products, driving up indirect costs across the industry. Instead of boosting domestic manufacturing, these tariffs create economic paralysis, stall critical infrastructure projects, and threaten America’s lead in AI innovation. Policymakers must acknowledge these realities and adjust their approach before irreversible damage is done to the nation’s technological future.

Opinion by: Ahmad Shadid of O.xyz.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Continue Reading

Politics

US lawmaker introduces anti-corruption bill ahead of Trump’s dinner

Published

on

By

<div>US lawmaker introduces anti-corruption bill ahead of Trump's dinner</div>

<div>US lawmaker introduces anti-corruption bill ahead of Trump's dinner</div>

California Representative Maxine Waters, ranking member of the US House Financial Services Committee, has announced plans to introduce legislation “to block [Donald] Trump’s memecoin and stop his crypto corruption.”

In a May 22 notice, Rep. Waters said the Stop Trading, Retention, and Unfair Market Payoffs (TRUMP) in Crypto Act of 2025 bill would be aimed at blocking the US President, Vice President, members of Congress, and their families from engaging in “crypto crime.” The US lawmaker referred to Trump and his wife, Melania, issuing personal memecoins in January, his family launching a stablecoin, USD1, through the crypto platform World Liberty Financial, and the president attempting to establish a national Bitcoin (BTC) reserve as his sons back a BTC mining venture.

“Donald Trump is preparing to dine with the top donors of his memecoin who’ve made him, and his family, richer,” said Waters, adding:

“Trump’s crypto con is not just a scam to target investors. It’s also a dangerous backdoor for selling influence over American policies to the highest foreign bidder.”

Government, Donald Trump, Corruption, Memecoin
HR 3573, Stop TRUMP in Crypto Act of 2025, introduced by Rep. Maxine Waters. Source: House Financial Services Committee Democrats

Waters’ bill was one of many actions announced to oppose the president’s dinner to reward memecoin holders. Senators Chris Murphy and Elizabeth Warren are expected to attend a press event with representatives for the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, and two Democratic organizations will protest at the Trump National Golf Club outside Washington, DC, where the memecoin dinner will be held.

This is a developing story, and further information will be added as it becomes available.

Continue Reading

Trending